President Biden this weekend signed into law a bill that reauthorizes a controversial spying program under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). Section 702 of FISA, which has now been extended for two more years, allows for warrantless intelligence gathering on foreign targets. While its focus is on the communications of targets located outside the US, that includes any exchanges with people stateside, meaning Americans’ records can get swept up in these collections too.
The Senate vote on reauthorizing Section 702 came down to the wire. It was set to expire on Friday at midnight, but was recently given an extension until April 2025, according to The New York Times, lest it lapse while disagreements over proposed amendments dragged on. Section 702’s extension period was also shortened, cutting it down to two years instead of the previous five. Congress did ultimately miss the deadline on Friday, but it passed with a 60-34 vote, CBS News reported. The White House issued a statement not long after saying the president “will swiftly sign the bill into law.”
Section 702 was first signed into law in 2008 and has been renewed twice already, allowing US intelligence agencies to use data from internet and cell phone providers without a warrant to keep tabs on foreign targets’ communications. It’s faced strong opposition from both sides over its implications for Americans’ privacy. Kia Hamadanchy, senior policy counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), called the passage of the bill “profoundly disappointing” in a statement released over the weekend, going on to say that it “gives the government more ways to secretly surveil us — with little power to hold spy agencies accountable.”
“Senators were aware of the threat this surveillance bill posed to our civil liberties and pushed it through anyway, promising they would attempt to address some of the most heinous expansions in the near future,” Hamadanchy said. “We plan to make sure these promises are kept.”
Update, April 21 2024, 1:21PM ET: This story has been updated to include a statement from the ACLU.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/biden-signs-bill-to-reauthorize-fisa-warrantless-surveillance-program-for-two-more-years-153817277.html?src=rss
The US House of Representatives passed a bill on Saturday that could either see TikTok banned in the country or force its sale. A revised version of the bill, which previously passed the House in March but later stalled in Senate, was roped in with a foreign aid package this time around, likely meaning it will now be treated as a higher priority item. The bill originally gave TikTok’s Chinese parent company, ByteDance, six months to sell the app if it’s passed into law or TikTok would be banned from US app stores. Under the revised version, ByteDance would have up to a year to divest.
The bill passed with a vote of 360-58 in the House, according to AP. It’ll now move on to the Senate, which could vote on it in just a matter of days. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said today that the Senate is working to reach an agreement on when the next vote will be for the foreign aid package that the TikTok bill is attached to, but it is expected to happen this coming Tuesday. President Joe Biden has previously said he would support the bill if Congress passes it.
The bill paints TikTok as a national security threat due to its ties to China. There are roughly 170 million US users on the app, at least according to TikTok, and ByteDance isn't expected to let them go without a fight. In a statement posted on X earlier this week, the TikTok Policy account said such a law would “trample the free speech rights” of these users, “devastate 7 million businesses, and shutter a platform that contributes $24 billion to the U.S. economy, annually.” Critics of the bill have also argued that banning TikTok would do little in the way of actually protecting Americans’ data.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/house-votes-in-favor-of-bill-that-could-ban-tiktok-sending-it-onward-to-senate-185140206.html?src=rss
Another round of price cuts has shaved $2,000 off the starting prices of Tesla’s Model Y, Model X and Model S for buyers in the US, Reuters reports. The company’s North America branch posted on X about the change to the Model Y on Friday night, at the same time announcing that Tesla is ditching its referral program benefits in all markets. According to Tesla, the “current referral program benefits will end after April 30.”
Tesla’s Model Y now starts at $42,990 for the rear-wheel drive base model, $47,990 for the Model Y Long Range or $51,490 for the Model Y Performance. The base Model S has dropped to $72,990 while the Model S Plaid now starts at $87,990. The Model X starts at $77,990 (base) or $92,990 (Plaid). The changes come during a rocky few weeks for the company, which just issued a recall for Cybertrucks over possible issues with the accelerator pedal, reportedly laid off 10 percent of its employees and reported a decline in deliveries for the first quarter.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/tesla-cuts-model-y-x-and-s-prices-in-the-us-and-says-its-ending-the-referral-program-172311662.html?src=rss
In this installment of what we're listening to, Reviews Editor Cherlynn Low dives into new releases from Taylor Swift and Ariana Grande, and explores what music means to us when songs are consumed more like books and journal entries.
Cherlynn Low, Deputy Editor, Reviews
April 19 should have been declared a global holiday. It was, after all, the release day of Taylor Swift’s highly anticipated album, The Tortured Poets Department (TTPD). How could we be expected to work on this most hyped of Fridays, when there were lyrics to overanalyze and melodies to emo-walk to?
Taylor Swift - The Tortured Poets Department
I’ll admit: I hate myself a bit for the eagerness with which I hit play on albums like TTPD and Ariana Grande’s Eternal Sunshine (ES). Both musicians had recently left long-term relationships and got together with new beaus, amid rabid press coverage and relentless speculation on Reddit. I usually prefer to hear from the people involved instead of reading tabloid articles based on what “friends close to” said, and for Swift and Grande, songs are usually as close as we’ll get to primary sources.
I saw these albums as opportunities to get their takes on what went down. Granted, it’s always wise to take their words with generous helpings of salt, the same way therapists tend to remember that their patients’ retelling of stories can be skewed or unreliable.
Both Grande and Swift have made their lives the subject of their music for years, and they often have an air of defensiveness. Titles like “Look What You Made Me Do” and “Yes, and?” make me think of people who blame others or don’t care about the consequences of their actions. Even songs like Swift’s “Anti-Hero” from her last album and Grande’s “Thank U, Next” seem at first glance to be about taking accountability, but really continue the theme of dodging real responsibility.
I’m not sure if music has always been rooted in scrutinizing the artist’s life, but it certainly seems to have become more popular in recent years. The level of interest and analysis around things as simple as word choice or order has probably never been as high, either. It’s also worth considering that these two much-hyped albums were released within two months of each other. Granted, Swift’s new music has only been out for about 40 hours, and there are 31 whole songs spanning a full 65 minutes and 8 seconds, so I will need to listen to it a few more times for it all to sink in.
Grande’s album, which dropped last month, was scrutinized by fans and critics alike. It was released shortly after her divorce from Dalton Gomez and her budding relationship (reportedly) with fellow Wicked cast member Ethan Slater.
When I first played through ES, I was mostly underwhelmed and annoyed. There was, as expected, no accountability for what her actions did to the mother of a newborn and a lot of romanticizing of her latest man. But even on just my second listening, I knew I had a few favorite tracks. Other Engadget staff members agree with me: ES is a solid album with quite a few bangers.
Ariana Grande - Eternal Sunshine
I may not endorse Grande’s behavior — and no one asked me to — but damn, I can’t help liking her music. And it’s probably because I’m hooked on the melodies and production, not the lyrical content.
Swift, on the other hand, seems more of an aspiring wordsmith. Much has been said about her lyricalabilities, and I have no desire to retread those waters. I’ll just say that as an occasional aspiring poet myself, I have to admire the laissez faire approach of rhyming “department” with “apartment.”
I’m more intrigued by what seems to me like the priority of a song’s words over its tune and sound. Like Billboard states, TTPD’s title alone “calls even more attention to her lyricism than usual.”
Swift’s music has always felt like journal entries meant for the public, chock-full of inside references, Easter eggs and thinly veiled digs at former lovers. Her earlier works were therefore highly relatable for scores of teenagers around the world. But as her success ballooned, so has she grown out of touch with the average person, and her songs have consequently become more like glimpses into a life that mere mortals can only dream about. While her pieces continue to feel like blogs or Tumblr posts, Swift controls the narrative by carefully orchestrating not just synths, guitars and lyrics, but also pap walks and delicately timed public appearances.
Unlike Grande, who has mostly avoided appearing with Slater at high-profile events and also hasn’t hidden as many Easter eggs in her songs, Swift has not been afraid to show off and show up for her new partner. She’s not publicity-averse; she seems to anticipate and almost courts it.
With the general strategy around TTPD, like announcing it at the Grammy’s and slow teases of lyrics and cover art, it certainly seems like these days, the billionaire with a private jet problem is more focused on her myth and financial value than the art of songwriting.
Swift surprised everyone at 2AM on April 19 by releasing a whole 15 more songs alongside the initial 16 people were expecting for TTPD. This meant that anyone who pre-ordered the original album would miss out on basically an entire second album worth of tracks and need to spend more. The Swift team also made several versions of the physical album available, like collectors’ editions — all blatant cash grabs designed to maximize revenue.
Grande is guilty of this too, making so many different iterations of “Yes, and?” when that single was released in what seemed like an attempt to place the song at the top of streaming charts. ES also has different versions of cover art for fans to spend their hard-earned money on.
Here’s the thing. Do I care deeply about either of these albums? Nope. Did I eagerly listen to them, hoping to glean insight on their seemingly messy and chaotic relationships? Yes. But despite Swift’s marketing and positioning herself as a poet — and TTPD offering more of a look at her fling with Matty Healy from The 1975 — I realized I just didn’t quite like her album musically. In fact, my favorite Swift songs like “Wildest Dreams” and “Delicate” are beautiful symphonies of atmospheric synths and instrumentation.
Maybe I’m just learning that I care more about music than lyrics. Or maybe I think good songs are a combination of the two and should speak for themselves without having to rely on hype, gossip and marketing tactics. To be fair, that’s true of all art, whether it’s film, photography or poetry. And while the irony of my being sucked into playing TTPD and ES due to the promise of learning about their lives isn’t lost on me, I guess I just wish I could listen to music (and read books and watch movies) without having to worry or be so concerned about the creator’s choices and actions. But in 2024 (and beyond), that seems no longer feasible.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/what-were-listening-to-the-tortured-poets-department-and-eternal-sunshine-150035421.html?src=rss
Apple's calculator for Mac computers serves its purpose just fine, but it's reportedly getting massive updates with macOS 15 that turn it into a note-taking, currency-converting hybrid app. To start with, AppleInsider said the calculator will receive a design overhaul that swaps its number boxes with round buttons. You'll even reportedly be able to resize the calculator. If you make it bigger, the round buttons get stretched and turn pill-shaped, though they go back to their original form if you make the calculator smaller again.
A new history tape that you can access with the click of a button will show you previous calculations, so you no longer have to note them down if you're working with a lot of data and need to see a trend or keep track of what information you've processed so far. You'll be able to see the bar whatever mode the calculator is in, even if it's in scientific or programmer mode and not just in basic. The updated app will apparently come with Notes integration, as well, allowing you to more easily create notes with mathematical notation like you could on competing products like Microsoft's OneNote. Finally, the new calculator will make it easier to work with numbers in different currencies by incorporating the conversion tool into its user interface. You no longer have to access the tool via the drop-down menu every time you want to see how much a certain amount is in another currency.
According to AppleInsider, the company is expected to introduce these and more features for the iOS 18 and macOS 15 at Apple's Worldwide Developers' Conference that's set to take place in June this year.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/apple-will-reportedly-unveil-a-genre-defining-calculator-app-at-wwdc-2024-143021374.html?src=rss
Microsoft Research Asia has unveiled a new experimental AI tool called VASA-1 that can take a still image of a person — or the drawing of one — and an existing audio file to create a lifelike talking face out of them in real time. It has the ability to generate facial expressions and head motions for an existing still image and the appropriate lip movements to match a speech or a song. The researchers uploaded a ton of examples on the project page, and the results look good enough that they could fool people into thinking that they're real.
While the lip and head motions in the examples could still look a bit robotic and out of sync upon closer inspection, it's still clear that the technology could be misused to easily and quickly create deepfake videos of real people. The researchers themselves are aware of that potential and have decided not to release "an online demo, API, product, additional implementation details, or any related offerings" until they're sure that their technology "will be used responsibly and in accordance with proper regulations." They didn't, however, say whether they're planning to implement certain safeguards to prevent bad actors from using them for nefarious purposes, such as to create deepfake porn or misinformation campaigns.
The researchers believe their technology has a ton of benefits despite its potential for misuse. They said it can be used to enhance educational equity, as well as to improve accessibility for those with communication challenges, perhaps by giving them access to an avatar that can communicate for them. It can also provide companionship and therapeutic support for those who need it, they said, insinuating the VASA-1 could be used in programs that offer access to AI characters people can talk to.
According to the paper published with the announcement, VASA-1 was trained on the VoxCeleb2 Dataset, which contains "over 1 million utterances for 6,112 celebrities" that were extracted from YouTube videos. Even though the tool was trained on real faces, it also works on artistic photos like the Mona Lisa, which the researchers amusingly combined with an audio file of Anne Hathaway's viral rendition of Lil Wayne's Paparazzi. It's so delightful, it's worth a watch, even if you're doubting what good a technology like this can do.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/microsofts-ai-tool-can-turn-photos-into-realistic-videos-of-people-talking-and-singing-070052240.html?src=rss
Who hasn’t spent sleepless nights pondering what would happen if we applied Vilfredo Pareto's (the early 20th-century Italian economist) theories to Mario, the Mushroom Kingdom’s Italian high-jump champion and part-time elephant cosplayer? Data scientist Antoine Mayerowitz, PhD, tackled that age-old question, and the resulting work provides an objective way to tell us the best Mario Kart 8 racer combinations. Hint: It sure as hell ain’t Koopa Troopa.
When you break down the build options (including driver stats and various vehicle details) in Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, there are over 700,000 possible combinations. Yikes. But once you eliminate duplicates that differ only in appearance, you can narrow it down to “only” 25,704 possibilities. How do you narrow it down to find the best racer from there? Enter Mr. Pareto.
Pareto’s theories, most notably the Pareto front, help us navigate the complexities of choice. They can pinpoint the solutions with the most balanced strengths and the fewest trade-offs. Pareto’s work is about efficiency and effectiveness. Now we’re talking.
Nintendo
When choosing a Mario Kart racer, you have to consider their stats for speed, acceleration, handling, weight, offroad and mini turbo. That’s a lot to weigh.
Even if you decide that speed and acceleration are the most important, you’re still left with imbalances. For example, it’s tempting to go all in on speed (like Bowser or Wario), but they have weak acceleration. However, if you prioritize acceleration instead (such as Baby Mario or Dry Bones), you may be left with quick surges that plateau at a lousy top speed.
Meanwhile, some racers are always dominated in the most important stats — meaning their balance of speed and acceleration consistently comes out behind. Koopa is one example of that, so don’t pick him if you care about winning. (But you can absolutely choose him because he has cute bug eyes and a snazzy shell.)
Nintendo
Mayerowitz’s Pareto front analysis lets you narrow your possibilities down to the 14 most efficient. And it turns out the game’s top players were onto something: One of the combinations with the most ideal balance of speed, acceleration and mini-turbo is Cat Peach driving the Teddy Buggy, roller tires and cloud glider — one already favored among Mario Kart 8 competitors.
Of course, if that combination isn’t your cup of tea, there are others that allow you to stay within the Pareto front’s optimal range. As Eurogamerpoints out, Donkey Kong, Wario (my old standby, mostly because he makes me laugh) and Princess Peach are often highlighted as drivers, and you can use Mayerowitz’s data fields to find the best matching vehicles. Keep in mind that others have identical stats, so racers like Villager (female), Inkling Girl and Diddy Kong are separated only by appearances.
To find your ideal racer, you can head over to Mayerowitz’s website. There, you can enter your most prized stats and view the combos that give you the best balance (those highlighted in yellow), according to Pareto’s theories.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/finally-someone-used-paretos-economic-theories-to-find-the-best-mario-kart-8-racer-211046789.html?src=rss
Who hasn’t spent sleepless nights pondering what would happen if we applied Vilfredo Pareto's (the early 20th-century Italian economist) theories to Mario, the Mushroom Kingdom’s Italian high-jump champion and part-time elephant cosplayer? Data scientist Antoine Mayerowitz, PhD, tackled that age-old question, and the resulting work provides an objective way to tell us the best Mario Kart 8 racer combinations. Hint: It sure as hell ain’t Koopa Troopa.
When you break down the build options (including driver stats and various vehicle details) in Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, there are over 700,000 possible combinations. Yikes. But once you eliminate duplicates that differ only in appearance, you can narrow it down to “only” 25,704 possibilities. How do you narrow it down to find the best racer from there? Enter Mr. Pareto.
Pareto’s theories, most notably the Pareto front, help us navigate the complexities of choice. They can pinpoint the solutions with the most balanced strengths and the fewest trade-offs. Pareto’s work is about efficiency and effectiveness. Now we’re talking.
Nintendo
When choosing a Mario Kart racer, you have to consider their stats for speed, acceleration, handling, weight, offroad and mini turbo. That’s a lot to weigh.
Even if you decide that speed and acceleration are the most important, you’re still left with imbalances. For example, it’s tempting to go all in on speed (like Bowser or Wario), but they have weak acceleration. However, if you prioritize acceleration instead (such as Baby Mario or Dry Bones), you may be left with quick surges that plateau at a lousy top speed.
Meanwhile, some racers are always dominated in the most important stats — meaning their balance of speed and acceleration consistently comes out behind. Koopa is one example of that, so don’t pick him if you care about winning. (But you can absolutely choose him because he has cute bug eyes and a snazzy shell.)
Nintendo
Mayerowitz’s Pareto front analysis lets you narrow your possibilities down to the 14 most efficient. And it turns out the game’s top players were onto something: One of the combinations with the most ideal balance of speed, acceleration and mini-turbo is Cat Peach driving the Teddy Buggy, roller tires and cloud glider — one already favored among Mario Kart 8 competitors.
Of course, if that combination isn’t your cup of tea, there are others that allow you to stay within the Pareto front’s optimal range. As Eurogamerpoints out, Donkey Kong, Wario (my old standby, mostly because he makes me laugh) and Princess Peach are often highlighted as drivers, and you can use Mayerowitz’s data fields to find the best matching vehicles. Keep in mind that others have identical stats, so racers like Villager (female), Inkling Girl and Diddy Kong are separated only by appearances.
To find your ideal racer, you can head over to Mayerowitz’s website. There, you can enter your most prized stats and view the combos that give you the best balance (those highlighted in yellow), according to Pareto’s theories.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/finally-someone-used-paretos-economic-theories-to-find-the-best-mario-kart-8-racer-211046789.html?src=rss
Rebel Moon: Part 2 - The Scargiver is an empty feast. It's a relentless onslaught of explosions, sci-fi tropes and meaningless exposition that amounts to nothing. And yet somehow it's still better than the first film in Zack Snyder's wannabe sci-fi epic franchise for Netflix, Rebel Moon: Part 1 - A Child of Fire. (What do these titles really mean? Who cares.)
With all of the dull table-setting complete, Snyder is able to let his true talents soar in Rebel Moon: Part 2 by delivering endless battles filled with slow-motion action and heroic poses. It looks cool, I just wish it added up to something. Anything.
Spoilers ahead for Rebel Moon: Part 2.
If you somehow missed the first Rebel Moon film, the basic setup is that it's Star Wars meets The Seven Samurai. Sofia Boutella stars as Kora, a former elite soldier of an evil empire who is hiding out in an all-too idyllic farming village, just planting and harvesting her days away. When a group of military baddies kills the chief of the village and starts threatening a young girl, Kora goes on a murdering spree (in defense!), leaving the community open to a retaliatory attack.
She spends the first movie recruiting potential warriors to defend the village, including a fallen gladiator (Djimoun Hounsou) and a bad-ass swordswoman (Doona Bae). (Their names are Titus and Nemesis, respectively, but those don't really matter because the characters are paper thin.)
Full disclosure: I tried writing a review for the first Rebel Moon and just gave up in disgust. It was a shockingly boring epic, so much so that it took me several days to watch without falling asleep. By the end, I was only left with a feeling of dread, knowing that there was still another two hours of Rebel Moon ahead of me.
It's somewhat empty praise, but at least I didn't fall asleep during The Scargiver. Mostly, that's due to the film actually having a sense of momentum and a lot more action. You can turn off your brain and enjoy the pretty pictures, much like you could for Snyder's Sucker Punch, Justice League and Watchmen adaptation. He's more a stylist than a natural storyteller, but occasionally Snyder's visuals, such as a baffling montage of our heroes harvesting wheat, can be almost poetic.
Netflix
It's just a shame that I didn't care much about the film's characters or any aspect of its story. James Gunn's Guardian's of the Galaxy trilogy made us fall in love with a band of misfits and screwups, with storylines that directly led to their personal and emotional growth. The crew in Rebel Moon, instead, feel like cardboard cutouts from better movies, and the overall plot feels forced (there's even setup for another film by the end).
Hounsou tries to sell the pathos of Titus with his eyes, but he can only do so much. And while Bae's warrior woman exudes cool (and has a very compelling flashback), she's mostly wasted when the action really heats up. Then there's Jimmy, a robot voiced by Anthony Hopkins, who is briefly introduced in the first film and pops up for a few minutes here to kick butt. Why? It doesn't matter. Somehow that character is also important enough to serve as the narrator for both Rebel Moon films (but really it seems Snyder just wanted Hopkins' voice adding gravitas).
Perhaps the only real saving grace for Rebel Moon: Part 2, much like the first film,is Ed Skrein as the villainous Atticus Noble. As a sadistic baddie, he's really nothing new, but Skrein's heightened scenery chomping makes the character interesting to watch. Where Darth Vader exudes a calm sense of dread, Skrein's Noble is entertainingly chaotic, like the Joker crossed with Christoph Waltz's Hans Landa from Inglorious Basterds. He just has a lot of fun being bad — that's something!
Given how popular the first film was (according to Snyder and Netflix, anyway), we'll likely see more Rebel Moon down the line. Snyder previously said he'd like to do a six-hour director's cut of both films, and he recently told Radio Times that he'd like to stretch the Rebel Moon series out to four or six films. Somehow, that just feels like a threat.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/rebel-moon-part-2-review-a-slow-mo-sci-fi-slog-195505911.html?src=rss
Rebel Moon: Part 2 - The Scargiver is an empty feast. It's a relentless onslaught of explosions, sci-fi tropes and meaningless exposition that amounts to nothing. And yet somehow it's still better than the first film in Zack Snyder's wannabe sci-fi epic franchise for Netflix, Rebel Moon: Part 1 - A Child of Fire. (What do these titles really mean? Who cares.)
With all of the dull table-setting complete, Snyder is able to let his true talents soar in Rebel Moon: Part 2 by delivering endless battles filled with slow-motion action and heroic poses. It looks cool, I just wish it added up to something. Anything.
Spoilers ahead for Rebel Moon: Part 2.
If you somehow missed the first Rebel Moon film, the basic setup is that it's Star Wars meets The Seven Samurai. Sofia Boutella stars as Kora, a former elite soldier of an evil empire who is hiding out in an all-too idyllic farming village, just planting and harvesting her days away. When a group of military baddies kills the chief of the village and starts threatening a young girl, Kora goes on a murdering spree (in defense!), leaving the community open to a retaliatory attack.
She spends the first movie recruiting potential warriors to defend the village, including a fallen gladiator (Djimoun Hounsou) and a bad-ass swordswoman (Doona Bae). (Their names are Titus and Nemesis, respectively, but those don't really matter because the characters are paper thin.)
Full disclosure: I tried writing a review for the first Rebel Moon and just gave up in disgust. It was a shockingly boring epic, so much so that it took me several days to watch without falling asleep. By the end, I was only left with a feeling of dread, knowing that there was still another two hours of Rebel Moon ahead of me.
It's somewhat empty praise, but at least I didn't fall asleep during The Scargiver. Mostly, that's due to the film actually having a sense of momentum and a lot more action. You can turn off your brain and enjoy the pretty pictures, much like you could for Snyder's Sucker Punch, Justice League and Watchmen adaptation. He's more a stylist than a natural storyteller, but occasionally Snyder's visuals, such as a baffling montage of our heroes harvesting wheat, can be almost poetic.
Netflix
It's just a shame that I didn't care much about the film's characters or any aspect of its story. James Gunn's Guardian's of the Galaxy trilogy made us fall in love with a band of misfits and screwups, with storylines that directly led to their personal and emotional growth. The crew in Rebel Moon, instead, feel like cardboard cutouts from better movies, and the overall plot feels forced (there's even setup for another film by the end).
Hounsou tries to sell the pathos of Titus with his eyes, but he can only do so much. And while Bae's warrior woman exudes cool (and has a very compelling flashback), she's mostly wasted when the action really heats up. Then there's Jimmy, a robot voiced by Anthony Hopkins, who is briefly introduced in the first film and pops up for a few minutes here to kick butt. Why? It doesn't matter. Somehow that character is also important enough to serve as the narrator for both Rebel Moon films (but really it seems Snyder just wanted Hopkins' voice adding gravitas).
Perhaps the only real saving grace for Rebel Moon: Part 2, much like the first film,is Ed Skrein as the villainous Atticus Noble. As a sadistic baddie, he's really nothing new, but Skrein's heightened scenery chomping makes the character interesting to watch. Where Darth Vader exudes a calm sense of dread, Skrein's Noble is entertainingly chaotic, like the Joker crossed with Christoph Waltz's Hans Landa from Inglorious Basterds. He just has a lot of fun being bad — that's something!
Given how popular the first film was (according to Snyder and Netflix, anyway), we'll likely see more Rebel Moon down the line. Snyder previously said he'd like to do a six-hour director's cut of both films, and he recently told Radio Times that he'd like to stretch the Rebel Moon series out to four or six films. Somehow, that just feels like a threat.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/rebel-moon-part-2-review-a-slow-mo-sci-fi-slog-195505911.html?src=rss