Our heroes may not have been super successful at stopping Thanos in Avengers: Infinity War, but as we head into Avengers: Endgame, they’ve gained one significiant advantage: Captain Marvel.
That’s our big takeaway from the new Endgame clip unveiled at CinemaCon Wednesday, which picks up basically where the Captain Marvel mid-credits scene left off.
In the new footage, the Avengers — including Black Widow, Captain America, War Machine, and Bruce Banner — are trying to make sense of this stranger, Carol Danvers, who’s just dropped into their lives.
She’s more than ready to go after Thanos and his Infinity Stones, especially after Nebula and Rocket have helped her pinpoint his exact location. But not everyone’s on board.
Captain America explains to her that they usually work as a team, and Bruce points out that they’ve gone up against Thanos before, and lost. “How do we know it will end differently this time?” Bruce asks Carol.
“Because before, you didn’t have me,” she says.
Then Thor weighs in with his judgment. As seen in a previous trailer, he stands in front of her and reaches out for Stormbreaker. Carol doesn’t even flinch as it whizzes by her head and into his hand.
“I like this one,” says Thor.
“Let’s go get this son of a bitch,” says Cap.
We then cut to a ship flying through space, piloted by Rocket. “Okay, who here hasn’t been to space?” he asks.
All the characters from the previous scene are on board, and a few of them raise their hands, including Cap. “You better not throw up on my ship,” says Rocket.
By putting Carol so front and center in this scene, Marvel seems to be counting on her almost as much as the Avengers are. And based on the reception in the room, their bet seems to be paying off — Endgame got enormous cheers.
The clip also serves as a reminder that Marvel’s greatest strength is its knack for creating memorable characters and throwing them together. The team dynamic is what sells this footage, more than whatever convoluted plan they’ve cooked up for getting rid of Thanos.
And, finally, it reveals that part of Marvel’s plan here is to share very few of its plans at all. As entertaining as this extended clip was, it offers very little we haven’t already seen, whether in the Captain Marvel credits or in earlier teasers.
Avengers: Endgame remains a glorious mystery — one we can’t wait to dig into once it hits theaters April 26.
A House committee chairman has formally asked the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to provide six years of President Donald Trump’s personal tax returns in a long-awaited move widely expected to lead to a long court battle with the White House.
The request on Wednesday, in a letter from Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard Neal to IRS Commissioner Charles Rettig, is viewed by Democrats in the House of Representatives as a vital first step towards oversight of Trump’s income taxes and business network, which some lawmakers believe could be rife with conflicts of interest and potential tax law violations.
“It is critical to ensure the accountability of our government and elected officials,” Neal said in a statement.
“To maintain trust in our democracy, the American people must be assured that their government is operating properly, as laws intend.”
IRS and US Treasury officials were not immediately available for comment.
Trump defied decades of precedent as a presidential candidate by refusing to release the tax documents and has continued to keep them under wraps as president, saying his returns were “under audit” by the IRS.
‘Under audit for many years’
Trump’s former personal lawyer Michael Cohen recently testified in Congress that he did not believe the president was being audited but may have used the audit claim to avoid scrutiny that could lead to an audit and IRS tax penalties.
Trump was dismissive of the request but continued to make the audit argument in comments to reporters during a meeting with US military leaders on Wednesday.
“Is that all?” the president asked when told Democrats wanted to see six years of his returns.
“Usually it’s 10, so I guess they’re giving up. I’ve been under audit for many years because the numbers are big and I guess when you have a name, you’re audited. But until such time as I’m not under audit, I would not be inclined to do that.”
Neal based his request on his committee’s oversight jurisdiction of the IRS, specifically its alleged audits of Trump and the extent to which the agency has enforced the tax laws against the president.
Meanwhile, Congressional Republicans oppose Neal’s effort, saying such a move sets a dangerous precedent by turning the confidential tax documents of a US citizen into a political weapon.
“This particular request is an abuse of the tax-writing committees’ statutory authority and violates the intent and safeguards of … the Internal Revenue Code,” Representative Kevin Brady, the committee’s top Republican, said in a statement.
Marine biologists have mapped out how to protect more than a third of the world’s oceans by 2030, a target that scientists say is crucial in order to safeguard wildlife and mitigate the impacts of climate change.
One of the largest studies of its kind, a new report A Blueprint For Ocean Protection explores various scenarios on how to fully protect 30 and 50 percent of global oceans, both widely discussed ambitions for conservation targets.
The report’s publication on Thursday comes as negotiations towards a landmark Global Ocean Treaty are under way at the United Nations.
Academics at the University of York, University of Oxford and Greenpeace broke down the global oceans – which cover almost half the planet – into 25,000 squares of 100 x 100 kilometres, during a year-long collaboration.
They then mapped the distribution of 458 conservation features, including wildlife, habitat and key oceanographic features and generated hundreds of scenarios for a planet-wide network of ocean sanctuaries, free from human activity.
“This report shows how protected areas could be rolled out across international waters to create a net of protection that will help save species from extinction and help them survive in our fast-changing world,” Professor Callum Roberts, a marine biologist at the University of York, said.
Roberts added that government action is urgently needed to address threats to marine wildlife.
“The speed at which the high seas have been depleted of some of their most spectacular and iconic wildlife has taken the world by surprise,” he said. “Extraordinary losses of seabirds, turtles, sharks and marine mammals reveal a broken governance system that governments at the United Nations must fix”.
Political will needed ‘before it’s too late’
Scientists and conservationists hope the UN negotiations could pave the way for the protection of oceans outside of national borders – some 230m square kilometres.
“The negotiations taking place at the UN are crucial because, if they get it right, governments around the world could secure a Global Oceans Treaty by 2020, which has the teeth to realise a network of ocean sanctuaries, off-limits from harmful human activities.
“This would give wildlife and habitats space not only to recover, but to flourish. Our oceans are in crisis, but all we need is the political will to protect them before it’s too late,” Dr Sandra Schoettner from Greenpeace’s Protect the Oceans campaign said.
Five things we can do to combat climate change
Last week, a report by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) reaffirmed that the last four years had been the hottest on record.
UN Secretary-General Antonio Gutterres described the WMO’s findings as “another strong wake-up call” for governments, cities and businesses to take action on climate change.
“It proves what we have been saying; that climate change is moving faster than our efforts to address it,” Gutterres said at UN headquarters in New York.
The world’s oceans are under threat from a myriad of hazards, including pollution, overfishing and climate change, which contributes to rising sea levels and extreme weather.
An estimated 12m tonnes of plastic waste is entering the oceans annually, threatening the habitat of the some 700,000 marine species.
“I’ll always believe governing — and, quite frankly, life, for that matter — is about connecting, about connecting with people,” Vice-President Joe Biden said. “That won’t change. But I will be more mindful and respectful of people’s personal space.” | Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP/Getty Images
The former vice president says he’ll pay closer attention to ‘the boundaries of protecting personal space.’
Aiming to cauterize his political wounds, Joe Biden said in a Twitter video that he’ll be more respectful of people’s personal space in the wake of numerous women accusing him of making them uncomfortable with his physical contact.
But two words were missing from his carefully crafted explanation Wednesday: “I’m sorry.”
Story Continued Below
Instead, Biden framed the context of his interactions as being part of his persona — he’s someone who handshakes and hugs and shoulder-grabs people to show support. He twice mentioned the word “responsibility” — a word whichvoters like to hear from candidates expressing a measure of contrition – and he said he understood times have changed.
“Social norms have begun to change. They’ve shifted,” Biden said. “And the boundaries of protecting personal space have been reset. And I get it. I get it. I hear what they’re saying. I understand it. And I’ll be much more mindful. That’s my responsibility.”
By taking responsibility — and tacitly acknowledging the gravity of the situation with a direct-to-camera video — Biden took a big step toward putting the controversy behind him. Yet by stopping short of offering an apology, he ensured that it would not go away completely.
One of Biden’s accusers said the brief Twitter video was an expertly drafted statement in avoiding responsibility while pretending to accept it.
“I guess I’m so confused. I don’t understand why he won’t directly apologize to the women that he acknowledges he made feel uncomfortable,” said Lucy Flores, a former Nevada assemblywoman and 2014 lieutenant governor candidate who drove the discussion of Biden’s behavior into the national political discourse Friday.
Flores recalled how Biden invaded her personal space five years ago by walking up behind her, pressing his nose into her hair and planting a long slow kiss on the back of her head at a political event. Three other women subsequently came forward to tell similar stories.
Following the release of the former vice president’s video, Flores released her own statement expressing frustration with his response.
‘I’m glad Vice President Joe Biden acknowledges that he made women feel uncomfortable with his unsolicited gestures of encouragement. Given the work he has done on behalf of women, Vice President Biden should be aware of how important it is to take personal responsibility for inappropriate behavior, and yet he hasn’t apologized to the women he made uncomfortable,” she wrote. “Times are changing yes, but not because once appropriate behavior is now inappropriate, but because women feel empowered to call it what it has always been — a violation of our bodily autonomy by powerful men.”
Amy Lappos of Connecticut also accused Biden of grabbing her head and rubbing noses with her during a 2009 fundraiser, a gesture she said made her uncomfortable. Two other women, Caitlyn Caruso and D.J. Hill, have also expressed their discomfort with Biden‘s touching in two separate interactions.
None of those women accused Biden of outright sexual harassment — a distinction frequently cited by Biden’s defenders. But in the era of #MeToo politics, Flores said fellow Democrats needed to talk about Biden’s behavior.
Instead, Flores contended, many Democrats and Biden allies attacked her — first by calling her a liar, then by questioning her motives and then by minimizing her experience and ridiculing it. She said that while President Trump’s transgressions have been far worse than what Biden has been accused of, the reaction by some in her party to the questions about Biden’s behavior will make it more difficult to claim a moral high ground in the 2020 presidential campaign.
“There has been a lot of hypocrisy,” Flores said. “You have women who are summarily dismissing mine and other women’s experiences – it’s not me anymore – but they have absolutely have no problem criticizing people who aren’t beloved in their own party.”
Progressive activist Rebecca Katz thought the video was effective, although she wasn’t convinced about its sincerity.
“Video is smart — Biden in his own words, but in a controlled setting. He struck a balance of being contrite without apologizing,” she said, adding that the “real test will be what he does next time when the setting is not as controlled.”
In his video Wednesday, Biden made sure to echo what his defenders have said for days — that he’s affectionate with men as well as women. And he stressed that he won’t lose his personal touch, though he’ll touch fewer people physically.
“I’ll always believe governing — and, quite frankly, life, for that matter — is about connecting, about connecting with people,” Biden said. “That won’t change. But I will be more mindful and respectful of people’s personal space.”
Amid questions about whether the controversy would affect his prospective presidential bid, Biden foreshadowed a likely announcement “in the coming month.” But in mentioning how times have changed, however, the 76-year-old career politician unwittinglydrew a measure of attention to a perceived weakness in his candidacy — hisadvanced age — since the controversy has revealed a generational divide within the party over the propriety of his behavior.
Still, Biden’s supporters and many establishment Democrats praised the statement for hitting the right notes.
Former Iowa Lt. Gov. Patty Judge, an influential early state Democrat, rejected any notion that the party would cede its superior position on #MeToo issues if Biden were the nominee, saying there was a marked distinction between Biden’s conduct and that of President Donald Trump.
“I don’t think putting your hand on someone’s shoulder or kissing someone’s cheek rises to the level of cheating on your wives — multiple wives — and saying the kinds of things that he’s said about women and continues to objectify women. It’s day and night,” Judge said.
“Donald Trump is not held to the standard that is held to Joe Biden or Al Franken or other Democrats who are held to a higher standard than the president,” she said. “If we’re going to worry about the hand on the shoulder then we have to recognize that we have a president that admits inappropriate activity.”
Judge said she believed the video statement was the right step; Biden needed to acknowledge that the world had changed and that he had to be more aware of his actions.
Tracy Sefl, a former Hillary Clinton adviser, was among those who believed Biden needed to address the controversy. The video, she said, helped move the discussion forward.
“This is the correct response,” Sefl said. “And while some will parse his every word, I’m accepting his statement whole cloth, in the spirit of the Democratic Party and the presidential candidates together continuing to raise the bar on what’s acceptable in today’s world.”
Democrats say they’re unlikely to be satisfied with what they get if Attorney General William Barr follows through on his vow to redact several categories of information from Robert Mueller’s report. | Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
It’s Democrats vs. the Justice Department in a fight that could spill into the courts — and 2020.
Next up in the fight over Robert Mueller’s final report: the redaction wars.
House Democrats want to see everything related to the special counsel’s nearly two-year-old investigation into Russia meddling in the 2016 presidential election. But their open-book demands stand at odds with the Justice Department’s desire to black out sensitive areas throughout Mueller’s 400-page submission.
Story Continued Below
The high-stakes chess match will play out on both political and legal grounds, and so far neither side has yet to show any signs of compromise.
As a result, the battle could spill into the courts, setting up a protracted legal confrontation that inevitably causes waves in the thick of the 2020 White House race. For President Donald Trump, the possibility of freshly unveiled Mueller bombshells dropping while he runs for reelection could be devastating. But Democrats are in a tough position: pursuing their legal challenge at all costs could feed the Trump-approved narrative that they’re overzealous, but giving up risks angering their own Trump-hating base.
“It seems to be shaping up as a classic collision of interests by two coordinate branches of government, each with their own respective legitimate interests that may be in conflict with one another,” said David Laufman, who ran the Justice Department’s counterintelligence unit from 2014 to 2018 and had a key role overseeing the early stages of the FBI’s Russia investigation before Mueller’s appointment.
Here are the battle lines: Attorney General William Barr has pledged to produce Mueller’s report to Congress by mid-April or sooner. But Democrats say they’re unlikely to be satisfied with what they get if the attorney general follows through on his vow to redact several categories of information: classified details, grand jury testimony, material relevant to ongoing investigations and nuggets that could cause “reputational” harm for “peripheral third parties.”
In a preemptive strike, Judiciary Committee Democrats on Wednesday approved a resolution authorizing the use of a subpoena to force the release of the full Mueller report and its underlying evidence.
“Ordinarily, these kinds of disputes are resolved through an accommodation process that sometimes unfolds in cascading agreements, revisions to the agreement and further revisions to the revisions of the agreement,” Laufman said. “It’s early days here, but there’s reason to believe this may not be resolved between the department and the House.”
Congress and the Justice Department have been on a collision course over the Mueller report since Democrats won control of the House last November.
Under DOJ regulations, Mueller at the conclusion of his probe only had to explain in a confidential report to his supervisors why he chose to bring charges against some people but not others. From there, Barr has the discretion over how much of the special counsel’s report to give Congress and ultimately to make public.
While Barr has vowed to be as transparent as possible, he’s adhered to his stance that certain redactions “are required.”
“Everyone will soon be able to read it on their own,” Barr wrote in a letter sent last Friday to lawmakers.
What Congress actually gets — and what the public sees — could go a long way toward determining whether House Democrats launch impeachment proceedings against the president. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other party leaders have said they want to see the report’s contents before making any decision.
Lawmakers and the public got a preview of those findings last month when Barr released a four-page letter summarizing the special counsel’s “principal conclusions.” He said Mueller did not find a criminal conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Moscow to sway the 2016 presidential election, but that the special counsel did not exonerate the president in an obstruction of justice probe. Barr, however, said he would not charge the president with a crime.
Trump has touted the letter as a complete vindication. And while the president initially said he would let Barr decide how much of the report ultimately saw daylight, he has lately railed against Democrats’ calls for a complete unveiling of the document. Trump’s GOP allies in Congress struck a similar tone on Wednesday, rebuking the Democrats’ subpoena authorization vote.
With these tensions swirling, Democrats showed that they are gearing up for a legal fight over the redactions.The Democratic chairs of six powerful committees sent DOJ their own nine-page memo outlining their legal arguments in the event Barr releases a redacted Mueller report.
For starters, the Democrats said they don’t buy the notion that lawmakers can’t handle classified information. They do exactly that on a daily basis, they argued, with secure facilities on Capitol Hill designed for just that purpose.
They also countered the need to withhold materials related to an active investigation. The memo notes that DOJ acceded to GOP demands last year to produce thousands of pages “of highly sensitive” documents “related to this very same investigation — which of course was open and ongoing at the time.”
Separately, the memo goes after the need to redact grand jury information, which is legally protected in many instances.But Democrats argued the special counsel used hundreds of search warrants and voluntary witness interviews to collect evidence that is not subject to the same secrecy rules — and thus should be revealed. They called on Barr to join them in a request that the judge supervising Mueller’s grand jury release the panel’s materials.
Lastly, Democrats argued that DOJ has “no constitutionally recognized privilege” to block the release of information that could cause “reputational” damage to third parties. Here, Democrats singled out the prospect that Mueller collected damning information on Trump’s family and his closest aides, arguing that these findings should not be withheld.
Anticipating the legal fight ahead, Democrats urged Barr to prepare a “detailed log of each redaction and reasons for supporting it.”
Rep. Jerrold Nadler, the Judiciary Committee chairman, argued during Wednesday’s subpoena debate that he’s on firm legal footing in objecting to these redactions. The New York Democrat even held aloft the hefty copies of past independent counsel reports into Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton, which ran hundreds of pages.
Both documents played key roles as Congress weighed impeachment. And, notably, both documents included grand jury testimony.
“We need these materials to fulfill our constitutional obligations,” Nadler said. “Period.”
Speaking with reporters after the vote, Nadler said he wasn’t willing to negotiate with DOJ over redactions. “The committee must see everything, as was done in every prior instance,” he said, adding that some materials may just need to be seen by lawmakers but not released to public.
Republicans on Wednesday came to Barr’s defense, arguing that Mueller was not under the same legal requirements as past independent investigators to tell Congress about impeachable offenses. Indeed, the rules were rewritten to remove that clause following Ken Starr’s Clinton-era probe.
In addition, some GOP lawmakers maintained that Democrats were essentially asking the attorney general to break the laws surrounding grand jury information and classified intelligence.
“He can’t comply. The law precludes him from complying,” said Rep. John Ratcliffe, a former George W. Bush-era U.S. attorney from eastern Texas.
But GOP Rep. James Sensenbrenner, a former Judiciary Committee chairman, said he’d join Democrats in pushing a judge to release grand jury information.
“We ought to do what we need to do first, and that’s go to court and let the judge make the decision,” he said.
Several legal experts monitoring the Mueller report said they expect Barr will follow through on his commitment to release as much as he can about the special counsel’s investigation, including the extent of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s involvement and motivations, as well as how the Trump campaign reacted to Moscow’s well-documented overtures.
“I think there’s going to be an overriding interest in transparency here as to the facts of what campaign officials and other U.S. persons did with respect to the probe,” said Ryan Fayhee, a former DOJ National Security Division prosecutor who handled counter-espionage and counter-intelligence matters.
But Fayhee said he also expects Barr will make some of his most significant redactions after consulting with the intelligence agencies that supplied original intelligence about the Russian hacking and its fallout.
Among the items most likely to be removed are the names of specific sources and the sensitive methods that the U.S. government used to obtain information Mueller used. Also absent will be details about any active Russian election interference campaigns.
“I’m not sure we should be airing those publicly,” said Fayhee, now a partner at Hughes Hubbard & Reed.
David Kris, a former Obama-era assistant attorney general for national security, said he expects Mueller’s team wrote up its findings in a way that make it easy for Barr to deal with redactions — by segregating the most sensitive data in certain sections or appendixes.
“I’d think Mueller was on notice that it’d be a wise choice to write this report so as to facilitate the eventual publication of as much of it as possible,” said Kris, the founder of the intelligence consulting firm Culper Partners.
Others expect Barr will compromise in the hopes of avoiding an embarrassing court loss for Trump that would echo the unanimous 1974 Supreme Court ruling that forced Nixon to hand over documents to Watergate criminal investigators.
“He doesn’t want some U.S. v. Nixon showdown where the court bench slaps the president,” said Asha Rangappa, a former FBI special agent and senior lecturer at Yale’s Jackson Institute for Global Affairs. “That’s not what you want during a campaign year.”
Regardless, many Democrats sense they’re hurtling toward a legal battle.
“I think there’s going to be a great number of redactions,” said Tennessee Rep. Steve Cohen, a Democratic member of the Judiciary Committee. “We’ll have to have a court decide what’s proper and what we should see.”
Someone stole $2.5 million worth of makeup from Jeffree Star’s warehouse.
In a video posted on Tuesday that quickly ascended to the top video on YouTube’s trending videos, Star warned viewers that there would be “no humor, no sarcasm” that’s typical of his content.
“The things that I am about to tell you have been my nightmare that I’ve been living with for a few weeks now,” Star said, after announcing that his unreleased concealer had been leaked over the weekend and discussing the launch of his Blue Blood collection. “You guys probably noticed that I was very silent on social media leading up to the launch.”
He explained that in addition to struggling with his birth mother’s declining health, he was dealing with the “horrific” theft of a massive amount of product from one of his stock and shipping warehouses.
On Mar. 17, the night after Star uploaded the reveal video for his latest collection, over $2.5 million worth of cosmetics were stolen. The thieves pulled it off by cutting a hole in the roof and then using the back door, according to TMZ, which seems to be a trend in makeup heists.
“This is the biggest theft I have ever experienced in my entire career,” he said in his most recent video. “This is the biggest hit as a brand. I’m still shocked about the entire thing.”
Over the weekend, someone posted a photo of an unreleased concealer, presumably stolen during the warehouse heist. Star says he’s been “waiting for this moment,” since it’s been about two weeks since the burglary.
“These people were professional,” Star said, noting that a former employee could have tipped off the thieves. “I fully believe it was an inside job.”
The stolen products include thousands of highlighter palates, thousands of lipliners, and an entire shade of concealer — the beauty guru said he only has a few hundred boxes of C5 left.
The leaked photos that surfaced online, suspiciously, show boxes of unreleased concealer in C5.
Star then said in addition to hiring a private investigative team, he’s working with law enforcement and the FBI to figure out who’s selling the stolen product on the black market. He also said that he’s found bundles of his stolen product on buying and selling apps like Poshmark.
He kept fans updated on Twitter, announcing that a “major player” had been arrested.
I never knew I’d be spending my Monday night with the FBI tracking down black market makeup sellers.
I don’t even know where to begin right now.. The last few weeks have been so mentally exhausting but I’m so grateful for all the law enforcement & FBI agents who have been working on my #Concealer heist A major player who has been selling my stolen product has been arrested.
Surprisingly, this isn’t the first great makeup heist to hit Southern California.
In May 2017, $4.5 million worth of cosmetics were stolen from the Anastasia Beverly Hills warehouse just outside of Los Angeles by also sawing through the roof. The burglars got away with 100,000 boxes of eyeshadow, which were presumably also sold online.
But like Refinery 29 points out, the warehouse burglaries highlight a greater problem in the beauty industry: The black market hurts fans, too.
If you aren’t buying products from an authorized seller, you could be purchasing counterfeits, which aren’t bound by the rigorous testing and strict regulations like the rest of the beauty industry. While Star, and other retailers, get their products from cosmetics labs, counterfeit products have tested positive for human waste and nasty bacteria. And according to the FBI, officials have found disturbing amounts of carcinogens like arsenic, beryllium, and cadmium in seized counterfeit makeup, in addition to “dangerous levels” of bacteria and aluminum.
As Star says in his video, his products are created with specific formulas in a controlled lab environment. By buying his collection off a black market seller, you might end up with a counterfeit and could experience rashes, allergic reactions, and eye infections.
“If you see any stolen makeup, please report it,” Star concluded in his video. “My social media is always open if you want to share anything that you see for us to track down or investigate.”
If the thunderous reaction to Hobbs & Shaw is any indication, the Fast & Furious franchise isn’t slowing down one bit.
Universal Pictures showed off new footage from the spinoff at CinemaCon Wednesday, highlighting the chemistry between stars Jason Statham and Dwayne Johnson; impressive action chops from series newcomers Vanessa Kirby and Idris Elba; the film’s British and Polynesian settings; and a shit ton of explosive, physics-defying set pieces.
These were some of the loudest cheers I’ve heard yet at CinemaCon.
The reception from the crowd was immediate and enthusiastic — these were some of the loudest cheers I’ve heard yet at CinemaCon. And, frankly, it’s earned.
After some rather charming banter between Johnson and Statham about which Hobbs & Shaw star is the sexiest (Elba is the current People‘s Sexiest Man Alive, but Johnson held the title a couple of years ago and is gracious enough to describe Statham as “the second most handsome bald guy in the world”), we went straight into the reel.
The new footage opens with Luke Hobbs (Johnson) and Deckard Shaw (Statham) back in their frenemy-bromance relationship as they prepare to tear through a hallway full of bad guys. They quip, they compete, they beat the crap out of some poor minions, and they come out the other end victorious.
The plot, we learn, revolves around a pissed-off Brixton (Elba) coming after Deckard’s sister Hattie (Kirby), who’s stolen something of his — a virus that could wipe out half the population.
It’s no surprise Elba looks good as a genetically enhanced super-soldier in action (“I’m black Superman!” he roars), but Kirby, best known for The Crown, more than holds her own as a strong and nimble lady capable of kicking her way out of a bad situation.
Fast & Furious superfan Helen Mirren makes a return appearance as the Shaw matriarch, now communicating with her son from behind prison glass.
But perhaps even more entertaining is our first look at Hobbs’ family. Forced out of London by Brixton and his goons, our central trio end up on an unspecified island, crashing in Hobbs’ hometown with his mom — who lets out a delightful, “My baby’s come home!”
Brixton, however, isn’t far behind, and Hobbs enlists his community to help him fight back — with old-school tools like spears, in contrast to the high-tech weaponry of most Fast & Furious movies.
“There’s a moment in this trailer when the energy changes,” Johnson had told us during the presentation.
That comes when Hobbs and his brothers perform the Siva Tau, described by Johnson as “the Samoan version of the Haka,” in anticipation of the battle to come. Per Johnson, it’s the first time that dance has ever been showcased in a blockbuster movie.
Now they’re ready to fight, and fight they do. Hobbs & Shaw serves up all the completely ridiculous action we’ve come to expect from these movies — people crashing through buildings, leaping between cars, soaring through explosions, all of that.
But the most dramatic one comes late in the trailer, when our heroes, driving a semi, throws a chain around an airborne helicopter. Both vehicles struggle for control, Johnson does a more muscle-y version of Captain America trying to hold down a helicopter in Captain America: Civil War, and the whole thing ends with all the vehicles flying off a cliff.
It is enormous, and hilarious, and gleefully unrealistic, and it’s everything we’ve come to love about these movies. Hobbs & Shaw is in theaters August 2.
Algeria’s former president Abdelaziz Bouteflika has apologised to his compatriots in a public farewell letter a day after he stepped down following weeks of mass protests and loss of support from the army.
In the letter released by the APS news agency on Wednesday, the ailing 82-year-old said he was “proud” of his contribution to the country, and urged the Algerian people to “stay united”.
“I ask your forgiveness for any failing towards you,” he wrote, adding: “I am leaving the political scene without sadness or fear, for the future of our country.”
The move came as Algeria’s Constitutional Council said it had accepted Bouteflika’s resignation and informed parliament that his post was officially vacant.
Some 20 Algerian civil society groups said they would refuse a transition of power that kept the same structure in place, calling for protests on Friday for “democratic change”.
“Bouteflika’s resignation … is a first victory … but it is not enough,” they said in a joint statement.
Algeria‘s constitution says that the speaker of the upper house of parliament, currently 77-year-old Abdelkader Bensalah, should now act as interim leader for up to 90 days during which a presidential election must be organised.
A one-time journalist and former ambassador, Bensalah has held senior political positions for the past 25 years but has kept a low profile, rarely giving interviews or appearing at public events.
He has led the country’s upper house for most of Bouteflika’s 20-year rule.
Mass celebrations in Algeria after president resigns (2:08)
Ali Benflis, a former head of the ruling National Liberation Front (FLN) party, said other leading figures should also quit, naming Bensalah, interim Prime Minister Noureddine Bedoui and constitutional council head Tayeb Belai.
“The Algerian people have just closed one of the darkest chapters in the history of our country,” he said in a statement, calling the protest a “peaceful popular revolution”.
Protesters, who celebrated Bouteflika’s departure with songs and flag waving in the capital, Algiers on Tuesday night, also made quickly clear that they would not accept a new president from “le pouvoir”, the popular nickname for the entrenched elite.
“I want my daughter to remember this historic day. Bouteflika’s gone, but it’s far from over,” said 35-year-old Amal, who wore a T-shirt with the slogan “I am against the system”.
She vowed to march again on Friday.
For 44-year-old engineer Hamid Boumaza, Bouteflika’s resignation was “too little, too late”.
“Bouteflika’s departure is no longer enough. We want them all to go. We want full freedom and we will march for as long as necessary.”
Meanwhile, Antonio Guterres, secretary general of the United Nations, praised “the mature and calm nature in which the Algerian people have been expressing their desire for change”.
A UN statement said Guterres “looks forward to a peaceful and democratic transition process that reflects the wishes of the Algerian people”.
The United States said the future of the country “is for the Algerian people to decide”, while Russia called for a transition without foreign “interference”.
Jean-Yves Le Drian, the foreign minister of former colonial power France, said he was confident Algeria’s “democratic transition” could continue “in the same spirit of calm and responsibility” seen in recent weeks.
The first thing I noticed about Good Trouble, Freeform’s spin-off of The Fosters, is that it’s down to get adventurous with its themes, characters, and storytelling format. Elevated by a smorgasbord of diverse talent on and off-screen, it relays poignant stories about equal pay, transgender rights, and Black Lives Matter without missing a beat.
But instead of getting bogged down, it caters to a younger audience by also being downright tantalizing and entertaining. Television has become a strong medium for distinctive millennial and Gen Z stories through recent breakouts like Sex Education, The End of the F***ing World, On My Block, American Vandal.
Good Trouble, which wrapped Season 1 on April 2, manages to carve its space in this genre despite getting buried by the #PeakTV discourse.
It sets a firm foot in the real world as opposed to the nostalgia of high school or college. Maia Mitchell and Cierra Ramirez reprise their role as foster sisters Callie and Mariana, who move to Los Angeles for work. They live in an “intentional communal” building called The Coterie, which is home to people from different backgrounds who share bathrooms and a kitchen and bond as a family.
The showconsistently pushes the boundaries for its characters and what each of them represent.
Image: ERIC MCCANDLESS/Freeform
Through their work — Callie is a progressive clerk to a conservative judge, Mariana is a minority female engineer at a male-dominated tech company — large-scale issues like gun violence, racism, lack of women in STEM fields, gender pay gap are tackled.
Mariana is fighting for better pay and more visibility in a company that has time and again let down its female employees. She also addresses the pay gap between white women and women of color. In a particularly great scene from the ninth episode titled “Less Than,” she leads a rational, productive discussion with her fellow female employees who believe tackling the pay gap issue is more important than the racial issue.
Callie often clashes with her boss because she’s assigned a hot button case for the course of this season: a police officer who fatally shot an unarmed African-American man.
These are nuanced, timely problems plaguing our world right now. Good Trouble looks at them like we — the millennial audience — would.
Through the Coterie residents like building manager Alice, a closeted Asian-American woman, bisexual artist Gael Martinez and his transgender sister Jazmin, plus-size influencer Davia, and Black Lives Matter activist Malika, Good Trouble taps into social issues without letting these buzzwords consume the show entirely.
Good Trouble taps into social issues without letting these buzzwords consume the show entirely.
It’s not aiming only to be political or divisive. In fact, the entire vibe is to tell these extremely crucial stories but with a certain degree of positivity and hope; through a hard but rose-tinted glass. Good Trouble thrives because it achieves the perfect balance between these emotional, strenuous arcs and the lighter, amusing ones. As it dives deeper into the characters’ personal lives, itsets a sexy, charismatic tone to parallel its more serious takes.
Callie’s romantic entanglement with Gael gives way to one of the first major love triangles I’ve seen on TV to prominently feature a bisexual male. Gael grapples with his feelings towards her as well as the man he’s dating. Alice, pining for her ex-girlfriend, tries to own her sexuality while attempting to come out to her parents. Mariana’s slow burn romance with her colleague Raj takes some unexpected yet wise turns.
Suffice it to say, Season 1 doesn’t lack in dramatic yet refreshing plot lines that completely reeled me in.
Another reason Good Trouble stands out is its choice of direction. Every episode is constructedto oscillate between the past and present. Scenes and conversations don’t always take place in a linear timeline, letting the mystery simmer about how the episode will end. Crazy Rich Asians director Jon M. Chu helmed the pilot and set a benchmark for all other directors.
This is the perfect escape from reality without ever really leaving it. Despite a strong stance on critical issues, the show retains the sweetness of its predecessor The Fosters and offers its own modern spin on it. The theme song, Kim Bingham’s “Bel Ami,” will be stuck in your head for a long time.
Most importantly, it knows representation matters to the audience and has no time for token inclusivity storylines. By reflecting the world we live in, Good Trouble has proven to be exactly the type of show we need right now.
Good Trouble Season 1 is now available to stream on Hulu. Season 2 premieres on June 18.
A major player who has been selling my stolen product has been arrested.
Daily Trends Hunter 