TV & Beyond on 2025-06-29 00:45:00

TV & Beyond on 2025-06-29 00:45:00

Djimon Hounsou, who popped up in Guardians of the Galaxy and then played other versions of the villainous Korath the Pursuer in different projects. But the fan-favorite actor actually played Black Panther in a very unique way for Marvel, and viewers might have missed it on the first time around.

Hounsou voiced the Marvel hero in a six-episode “Black Panther” TV series that the company released in 2010 as a part of the Marvel Knights Animation imprint, which means the show rests comfortably outside of the MCU continuity. (This comes with a sigh of relief from some readers who might be worried that they missed something inside of the sprawling mythos that Marvel is poised to keep adding to until the assumed heat death of the universe or otherwise!) BET produced the “Black Panther” TV series, and the effort represented their first animated TV project since “Hey Monie!” all the way back in 2003, so this was new territory for everyone involved.

It’s important to note that “Black Panther” exists as something called a “motion comic” as opposed to other animated Marvel efforts like “X-Men: The Animated Series” or something like that, and this could have been a lot of fans’ first introduction to the T’Challa years before Chadwick Boseman would make the Avenger a household name later in the decade. Each episode of “Black Panther” is 20 minutes long, and there are only six episodes available, but it’s a fun, quick run-through of the current Black Panther mythos that has some fun stuff for longtime Marvel fans. Djimon Hounsou is not alone in “Black Panther” either, as Kerry Washington, Alfre Woodard, Jill Scott, and more are all there in the voice cast as well. The fact that more people don’t talk about this little show is really surprising.

Djimon Hounsou voiced Black Panther in a mostly forgotten Marvel animated series

James Gunn dialed up Djimon Hounsou to play the MCU’s version of Korath the Pursuer in “Guardians of the Galaxy,” which makes sense as the Kree are introduced in that movie as a major player in the cosmic side of the Marvel Universe during that film. In a fun moment for longtime fans, Hounsou actually reprises the role of Korath in “Captain Marvel” as a member of Starforce. Along with Yon-Rogg, Captain Marvel, and their squad, the strike team was tasked with fighting Skrulls in the ongoing war between the Kree and the Skrulls. Throughout the film, Hounsou’s character comes into conflict with Captain Marvel and is defeated.

“Black Panther” is a different ballgame altogether as Hounsou was number one on the call sheet, and the first person to play the massively popular Marvel hero on television, which is going to make one heck of a “Jeopardy!” question one day! (Bonus points for anyone who gets the trivia question of Kerry Washington playing Shuri in “Black Panther” correct at your local geek trivia night as well.) It’s just funny to see an actor who has logged the kind of career that Hounsou has get this chance, and then watching Wakanda fever grip the United States, and then the world, just six years later. He actually would have had the chance to play Black Panther in “Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer” if a couple of things had broken differently, and that’s a wild concept to process.

Still, folks who really want to see “Black Panther” can stream the animated series on BET’s YouTube channel, and that’s getting to be a rarity in this day and age as more things become locked into a given streaming service. The “Black Panther” series is nice shorthand for viewers who might not want to sit through the live-action movie, although we’d highly recommend that, as Chadwick Boseman really is now the face of this character in every major way.

Black Panther has become a major staple in Marvel fandoms and this show was a big step towards that

Multiple Black creators have tried to get Black Panther to the big screen before Ryan Coogler’s watershed moment with T’Challa in 2018, and make no mistake, that phenomenon still hasn’t been equaled to this day. But, one thing that probably hampered a lot of the momentum toward getting Wakanda to the movies was probably awareness of the hero’s importance, well that and interference from former Marvel bigwig Ike Perlmutter, whose obsession with what he thought would sell as a toy product helped dictate far too much of Marvel Studios’ direction in the early days of the franchise.

Once people became aware of how cool T’Challa was as a character, and let’s be real, the fantastic performance of Boseman in that MCU feature, the skies were the limit for the Wakandan characters and their increasingly popular corner of the Marvel movies. Still, seeing a proof of concept can help grease the skids to make this whole thing a reality, and there’s no question that Hounsou’s vocal performance and series helped pave more of the way for a bigger presence down the line. Change doesn’t happen at nearly the pace we’d all like sometimes, and people need to see what’s possible before going and making it a reality in most cases. After all, sometimes a familiar face or voice makes all the difference when you’re on the fence.

TV & Beyond on 2025-06-29 00:30:00

TV & Beyond on 2025-06-29 00:30:00

to Variety. Fans of the series, which follows a group of mostly queer high school students experiencing the dizzy highs and angsty lows of first love, are hyped for more “Heartstopper” — even if the show isn’t actually getting a fourth season.

The romantic drama gained critical praise and a strong following from the moment it premiered on Netflix in 2022, in part due to the built-in fan base of the “Heartstopper” webcomics and graphic novels. With series author Alice Oseman on board the TV adaptation (the writer executive produced the show and penned every episode) and tender lead performances from young stars Joe Locke and Kit Connor, “Heartstopper” seemed to steal the whole world’s heart. Hell, the show even won two GLAAD awards for its wholesome portrayal of blossoming teen love. So why didn’t “Heartstopper” get renewed for a full fourth season? It’s not exactly clear, but we do know that the movie avenue wasn’t the original plan.

The official “Heartstopper” movie announcement was quickly followed by a Tudum interview with Oseman in which they expressed a whole lot of excitement for the film — and a dash of surprise, too. “I totally understand if fans are a little apprehensive,” Oseman admitted in response to a question about the upcoming adjustment. “It’s a big change from what we know. It’s something totally new and unknown, and yes, the runtime will be less than a TV season.” She continued: “Even I needed some time to process and come to terms with the change. But once I began to see the entire vision, I knew it would be something even more beautiful than a regular season could achieve.”

Fear not, there’s a Heartstopper movie on the way

It’s always tough to see through the PR filter of an interview that’s conducted by a company’s in-house press, but it’s obvious from Oseman’s comments that they at some point expected the show to continue on in a serialized format. Instead, Oseman will now write the film, with “Still Alice” filmmaker Wash Westmoreland directing. This isn’t an entirely unprecedented change-up; when they don’t axe them completely, streamers like Netflix have occasionally made a practice of ending fan-favorite shows with an abbreviated batch of episodes or a movie rather than a full-length final season. The streamer employed the tactic with the Wachowski sisters’ ambitious sci-fi project “Sense8,” and has essentially turned “Stranger Things” into a series of increasingly long, expensive movies throughout its five seasons.

While some shows are given feature film endings to create extra must-see-TV hype, in the 21st century, the finale movie has so far more often signified that a show isn’t pulling in the audience numbers execs think it needs to in order to justify its existence. At the same time, the powers-that-be likely still don’t want to sour creative relationships or tick off passionate fandoms by cutting a story short. In the past, cult favorite shows like “Veronica Mars,” “Deadwood,” and “Firefly” have all earned endcap films thanks almost entirely to the fervor of fans. While it’s unclear whether any of these reasons contributed to the “Heartstopper” switch-up, it’s worth noting that Oseman similarly credits the people who have cheered the show on for getting it this far. “The excitement and joy from ‘Heartstopper’ fans is such a huge part of why we are still able to tell this story, years later,” they told Tudum.

The longer, unbroken format might be a shock to the system compared to the previously bite-sized treat of a show, but Oseman and the series’ cast and crew (including Locke and Connor, now with executive producer credits) plan to pull out all the stops. The film’s plot will pull from the sixth volume of Oseman’s comics, which is partially available online, but the author notes that we should expect “some tweaks” and surprises from the original story. “We are feeling very ambitious about what is possible in a movie format,” Oseman says, promising a story of love and growth that’s “memorable, sophisticated, and atmospheric.”

The “Heartstopper” finale film does not yet have a release date, but Variety reports that filming will begin in summer 2025.

TV & Beyond on 2025-06-29 00:20:00

TV & Beyond on 2025-06-29 00:20:00

as some might say), and a big part of that can be credited to Andy Samberg. He and his “Lonely Island” crew, made up of Akiva Schaffer and Jorma Taccone, brought the show into the digital age. They made digital shorts a cornerstone of modern “SNL,” and they’ve cursed the new “Please Don’t Destroy” trio to forever live in their shadow.

While Samberg was most famous for his digital material, he still showed up constantly in live sketches throughout his tenure. My personal favorite is his Larry the Goose, a “Weekend Update” recurring character who doesn’t think the Miracle on the Hudson in 2009 was a miracle at all:

[embedded content]

But despite Samberg being such an important cast member during his seven seasons on the show, in 2012 he officially called it quits. He departed at the end of season 37, a year after his fellow “Lonely Island” members Schaffer and Taccone left the show. “Saturday Night Live” fans may have missed his Mark Wahlberg impressions and his Laser Cats escapades, but ultimately they couldn’t blame him for leaving. Seven seasons is a respectable tenure for any “SNL” cast members. Outside of Kenan Thompson, most cast members don’t stick around that long. 

But Samberg’s departure had less to do with tradition and more to do with his mental health: “For me, it was like I can’t actually endure it anymore,” Samberg explained in a 2024 interview. “Physically and emotionally. I was falling apart in my life. … It’s basically like four days a week you’re not sleeping, for seven years. I just kind of fell apart physically.”

The physical toll of SNL is well-established

Samberg noted that nobody on the show was surprised when he explained why he was leaving. As he explained: “Everyone was like, ‘Oh, same.’ No one was like, ‘What?’ Everyone was like, ‘Oh, yes, this is just what happens.’ Like, you hit a wall. We’re not built to operate that way.”

Bill Hader, who was cast on “SNL” the same year as Samberg and stayed one year after him, has expressed similar sentiments. “When I was on ‘SNL,’ I was a bit of a basket case,” Hader told Variety in 2019. “It could not have been easy on my wife at the time. I was so consumed with work and anxiety. Sometimes I felt like people thought, ‘Oh, he’s just wanting attention or something.’ It was like, ‘No, man, I’m legit. I’m freaking out right now.'”

In the show’s 50th anniversary special this year, Samberg even made a whole music video about how “everyone” at “Saturday Night Live” has anxiety, and how basically every week on the show is a nonstop struggle with IBS for the cast and crew. It seems like the only one on “SNL” who doesn’t have anxiety is Kenan Thompson, who’s comfortably sailing into his 23rd season without breaking a sweat. 

[embedded content]

What has Samberg done in his post-SNL career?

While some “Saturdat Night Live” cast members fade into obscurity when they leave the series, Andy Samberg has stayed relevant. Throughout the late 2010s he was best known for his lead role of Jake Peralta on “Brooklyn Nine-Nine,” a Michael Schur-created sitcom that went on for eight seasons despite spotty ratings. His Peralta performance proved that Samberg could handle dramatic material; season 5’s “The Box” was so memorable because it was so grounded and intense. It’s hard to believe the guy behind “D**k in a Box” could pull off an interrogation scene this riveting.

Admittedly, not all of Samberg’s post-“SNL” projects have been a huge success. His 2016 film “Popstar: Never Stop Never Stopping,” drew mediocre results at the box office despite its positive critical response. Luckily the movie has experienced a bit of a resurgence in recent months, thanks in part to it joining Netflix’s library, and also the growing popularity of “The Lonely Island and Seth Meyers” podcast. People today feel much more nostalgic for “The Lonely Island” than they did in 2016, so they’re more willing to give “Popstar” the chance it always deserved. 

Today, Samberg looks back on his “SNL” time fondly, even if he can’t always remember it that well. It’s a running joke on the “Lonely Island and Seth Meyers” podcast that he forgets so many of the details of the shorts and sketches he made, even if the details are so bizarre you’d think they’d be impossible to forget. So much was going on at “SNL” each week that it was impossible for Samberg to remember everything, let alone stave off the burnout. We wish he could’ve stayed on longer, but the more we learn about the demanding behind-the-scenes “SNL” production schedule, we’re just glad he held out as long as he could. 

TV & Beyond on 2025-06-29 00:00:00

TV & Beyond on 2025-06-29 00:00:00

This dream came true in 1971 with the cult classic “Duel,” a frenetic story about a traveling salesman and a diabolical truck, encapsulating Spielberg’s raw talent as a storyteller. The success of “Duel” put him on the map, but it wasn’t enough to fund the things he wanted to work on. Although Spielberg wanted to gradually move away from making teleplays and television movies, he had no choice but to dabble in this world to garner more credibility (while having limited artistic freedom). A string of half-hearted attempts mark this period, including 1973’s “Savage,” which the director famously did not jive with at all, but circumstances compelled him to get involved anyway.

That said, not all Spielberg-helmed tele-movies were made with such languid disinterest. His second made-for-television movie, “Something Evil,” is a horror story that genuinely appealed to him due to its suffocating, ominous overtones. It was a non-contractual production, making it a rare foray into something Spielberg wanted to stab at. We get to see some interesting directorial qualities here, including the tendency to let palpable tension speak for itself, along with impressive camerawork that underlines the evil lurking in the corners of the haunted house. It is, however, extremely flawed, carrying all the markers of a television movie that was made between several odd jobs at Universal (which Spielberg was juggling all at once). If you squint hard, you’ll find some thematic seeds that bloom beautifully down the line in Tobe Hooper’s “Poltergeist,” which is based on a story written by Spielberg himself.

Now, it is no surprise that “Something Evil” doesn’t hold a candle to Spielberg’s astounding body of work (or even his feature debut, which is more representative of his artistic strengths than this 1972 horror). Is this Spielberg’s worst film? It is hard to say, as “1941” exists (alternatively, it can also be interpreted as a madcap masterpiece!), along with “The BFG,” which feels uncharacteristically contrived and wooden for a Spielbergian children’s fantasy. But we were to ask the good folks at Letterboxd, “Something Evil” is the director’s lowest-rated feature on the website, sporting a measly 2.5 out of 5 despite some positive reviews.

Spielberg’s Something Evil is terribly dated, but impressive on a technical level

If you take a cursory look at what “Something Evil” entails, it becomes immediately clear that this is a standard haunted house flick (and there’s nothing wrong with that). Newly married couple Paul (Darren McGavin) and Marjorie (Sandy Dennis), along with their two children, move into an idyllic ranch in rural Pennsylvania, where the haunting begins as soon as they set foot on the premises. The nature of the haunting is rather bland, replete with supernatural gusts of wind and rapidly deteriorating interpersonal relationships, where the already-fragile Marjorie is pushed to her limits. Demonic possession and satanic imagery made their due appearance, as the occult was all the rage in haunting-centered films at the time, especially after the widespread success of “Rosemary’s Baby.” As Marjorie becomes more preoccupied with a sigil seemingly etched to ward off evil, the true nature of the ranch is unveiled, which seems to be hiding…something evil (sorry).

There’s a clumsiness to the storytelling that Spielberg would end up expertly honing in just a few years, but “Something Evil” is undoubtedly an artistic sandbox where most of its core ideas emerge as unremarkable. It is also pretty dated in its approach to genre tropes, which is to be expected of a television movie that was made with a tight budget, offering Spielberg limited freedom to exercise his vision. Although the film isn’t nearly as tense as it should’ve been, there’s something truly off-kilter about Marjorie’s descent into madness, which Spielberg captures with evocative imagery and impressive camerawork. At one point, we see a writhing mass of red pulp inside a jar, meant to represent a twitching fetus left to its own devices. Such gnarly imagery enlivens a mostly predictable film, thanks to Spielberg’s knack for conveying sentiments of fear through stunning visual mastery (an instinct that culminates beautifully in “Jaws”).

While “Something Evil” isn’t good horror, it is an important piece of filmmaking nonetheless, as it allows us to chart a path straight to Spielberg’s most celebrated films that incorporate horror along with elements of familial drama. There are some really cool discoveries to be made if you look closer, such as his handling of the demonic presence through clever suggestion alone, or the quick Spielberg cameo (!!) in a scene alongside Carl Gottlieb, who co-wrote the screenplay for “Jaws” a few years later. So, if you’re fond of Spielberg’s filmmaking ethos and wish to see some of his earliest ideas in action, “Something Evil” deserves a one-time watch.

TV & Beyond on 2025-06-28 23:45:00

TV & Beyond on 2025-06-28 23:45:00

by | Jun 28, 2025 | TV & Beyond Articles

“F1” is a fun movie. It’s bombastic, exciting, and incredibly well shot when it comes to the highly technical racing sequences. If you’re a fan of Formula 1, or of motorsport in general, you’ll likely find something to love in the film, which is essentially a two and a half hour love letter to the spirit of racing.

It’s also, in many ways, extremely implausible.

Yes, that’s the burden of most sports films — pulling an unlikely fiction out of a world full of drama that’s far more interesting when it’s real. You’re always going to have to contend to some degree with the “Rocky could never go toe-to-toe with Apollo” kinds of soft plot holes, which we all agree to look past in the interest of having a good time. “F1” is littered with those moments, from the advanced age and downright maniacal driving style of Brad Pitt’s Sonny Hayes to the ceaseless cascade of happenstance that allows a lousy F1 team to gain positions over the likes of Red Bull, Mercedes, and Ferrari.

Again, we look past it all. It’s a thrill ride, and that’s all it needs to be. But there’s one particular thing about “F1” that I can’t fully look past — an omission that, as a fan of the sport, feels particularly egregious. I’m talking about qualifying, a key part of every F1 race weekend that’s never shown here and is only mentioned a single time in the whole movie. Here’s why that’s a big problem.

F1 ignores a crucial component of the real sport

Every Formula 1 race begins with practice runs for each team on the track, followed by qualifying, and then the actual race. Qualifying is conducted in three phases, with the slowest times in each being eliminated and relegated to bottom starting positions on the grid, until eventually the final phase determines the order of the top racers and which driver gets “pole position” — the first spot on the grid. It’s a hugely important piece of the race because passing in F1 is incredibly difficult, so your starting position, in many cases, will largely determine where you’re able to finish.

In the movie, Sonny Hayes’ first race for APXGP at Silverstone is treated like his grand return to the sport by the commentators. He even pulls a gambit where he pretends not to know how to start the car at the beginning, in order to get his tires warm while catching up. All of this happens with no acknowledgement of the fact that he would have already done a full day of qualifying the day before. Unfortunately, it makes no sense.

The dismissal of qualifying in the film also creates some logical issues related to the actual APXGP car. Sonny insists that it be redesigned “for combat,” as they’re never going to be able to compete with the bigger teams in terms of pure racing speed. The problem, of course, is that a “combat” car wouldn’t help you at all in qualifying, where racers are only competing with the clock. Any adjustments made to the car along his requests would have likely also made it worse for qualifying, largely undoing any benefit in the actual races.

F1 doesn’t make a lot of sense, but that’s okay

The one time “F1” actually acknowledges qualifying is during the climax race in Abu Dhabi, where a last-second red flag gives APXGP the chance to get fresh tires on their cars — tires the other teams don’t have because they used them in qualifying the day before. It’s a clever bit of narrative trickery to help justify a midfield team getting a genuine shot at Lewis Hamilton, but the selective inclusion of qualifying only makes its absence in the rest of the film more glaring.

All that said, is it a big deal? No, of course not. This is Hollywood, and this is just a fun racing movie. There are tons of incredible documentaries and biopics on the history of motorsport out there if you want real accuracy. Or, you know, you could watch the actual races! “F1” is meant to be a fun romp that shows love to the sport but also brings in a wider audience, hitting all the same narrative beats as “Rocky Balboa” or “The Natural.” And in that pursuit, it’s largely successful, even if a lot of the actual plotting doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.

TV & Beyond on 2025-06-28 23:30:00

TV & Beyond on 2025-06-28 23:30:00

by | Jun 28, 2025 | TV & Beyond Articles

including musical ones). And yet, in all six seasons of the show, there was one person they never got to return — Hilary Swank as Julie Pierce from “The Next Karate Kid.” Speaking with EW, “Cobra Kai” creator Josh Heald talked about bringing Swank back “and not have to commit to 10 episodes.” As he explained, “It was going to feel like it could be a one- or two-episode arc, similar to what we did with Elisabeth Shue, where you can bring Ali back in at a pivotal moment and affect an important relationship.” He referred to it as the “beginnings of a genesis of an idea.”

Julie could still return

“On her end, it was very respectful, but we never got that opportunity to sit down and pour our heart out the way that we typically do when we bring back characters from the legacy,” Heald continued. “She was just in a place where she wasn’t looking to do that. She had babies. I think she was in production on something at the time, and it was a respectful pass on even the idea of a meeting. She didn’t want us to go through the trouble of flying out to her and putting our heart on the sleeve because it just wasn’t something she was ready to do at that moment.”

Indeed, we had already written about the showrunners’ attempts at contacting Hilary Swank, and never getting an answer. It’s particularly unfortunate because “The Next Karate Kid” is much better than its reputation would have you believe. It’s got a different kind of protagonist than Daniel, a thematic continuation to “The Karate Kid Part III” in Julie, who is angsty and frustrated, and offers Miyagi the chance to teach her how to learn balance in a different way than he did Daniel-san. Sure, the movie wasn’t spectacular, but if anyone could find a way to make the character of Julie even better and to redeem her film, it would be Heald, Jon Hurwitz, and Hayden Schlossberg.

Then again, if there is one thing audiences have learned about “Cobra Kai,” it is to never stop believing. As Heald told EW, “For us, it was a little disappointing because we like getting everybody, but at the same time, we didn’t sacrifice any huge story that we had fully developed. It’s more fruit on the vine for if we can revisit this universe going forward.”

Indeed, you never know what could happen. The team is definitely interested in doing more with the franchise and has talked about their ideas for a spin-off series. Perhaps this is the key to the sequel to “Karate Kid: Legends,” bringing in Daniel and Julie as the legacy of Miyagi, teaming up with Jackie Chan.