Today in things Helen Sharman didn't say:

Aliens definitely exist and might even be living among us on Earth right now! says Britain's first astronaut. That's according to this super misleading headline. Go on, click on it. It's barely what the woman said. I'll wait. Back? Yeah, I know you didn't click on it.

Except no she didn't.

She's right! From this altitude
you can barely see how badly
we've fucked everything up.

Anyway, Helen Sharman, the first Briton to go into space, gave an interview to the Guardian in which she described the incomparable beauty of the Earth as seen from space and the drive that made her not just the first British astronaut or ye olde aestroenaughte, as they say in the U.K. (no they don't), but also the first female British astronaut. But sure, let's take her comment on the possibility of extraterrestrial life and the impossibility of proving that aliens are not on earth, and make some click bait out of it.

"Oy! Blimey, that's a load o'cobblers..."

-Dr. Helen Sharman

Here's the five percent of the interview that everyone's making a thing out of:

"Aliens exist, there's no two ways about it. There are so many billions of stars out there in the universe that there must be all sorts of different forms of life. Will they be like you and me, made up of carbon and nitrogen? Maybe no. It's possible they're here right now and we simply can't see them."

-Helen Sharman, not wearing a tinfoil hat

I for one refuse to accept that the species
that produced the emoji movie represents
the pinnacle of evolution in the universe.

Look, I'm not anti-alien, far from it. I mean, I'm with Sharman on this one, of course the universe is full of life and of course there's a non-zero possibility that sentient aliens could possibly be aware of us. And sure, who knows? Maybe they love slumming it on this backwards, rapidly heating, shithole planet. After all, who wouldn't want to watch Rome collapse in on itself? Or plunk oneself down on a freshly arranged deck chair and listen to the band on the Titanic safe in the knowledge you can beam yourself up at the last second?

But again, to be clear, Helen Sharman, first British person in space did not tell a major news outlet that there are invisible aliens living among us. She did however reflect upon her historic trip to the Mir space station back in 1991 and how it forever changed her perspective on life, but sure, let's say she said some nonsense about aliens living among us.

Pictured: That time Helen Sharman made space exploration history.
Not pictured: that time thirty years later when comments she made in an interview
were taken out of context and now she's the "aliens live among us" lady.

Cloning, dark science, secret director's cuts...

Wai-wai-wai-wait, is he saying that there's a better version of the movie out there? Because if that's the case, maybe we were all a little too quick to-huh? Who's saying what about what movie? Why Dominic Monaghan, that's who. Remember him? He was the exposition Hobbit from The Rise of Skywalker.

Pictured: The Exposition Hobbit. Spread it around,
hashtag it, whatever. Let's make this happen people.

 I had to make sure it wasn't some kind
of fever dream. Which, the jury's still out.

Yes, I know I said I was done talking about that movie, but I say a lot of things. And also, I am done with it, but I think what I'm asking is a broader question about director's cuts and deleted scenes as a phenomenon, rather than taking more shots at the mess that was TROS. Anyway, in an interview with The Hollywood Reporter, Monaghan referred to additional material that wasn't used in the cut of the movie that we all sat through. Some of us twice. What? Don't look at me like that.

This still image is more screen
time than Kelly Marie Tran's Rose
Tico clocked in the entire movie.

"Like a lot of Star Wars fans, I'm hoping there will be a director's cut so we'll get to see more and more of the stuff that was filmed. I wasn't there all the time, but even in the short time that I was there, there was so much stuff filmed that didn't make it to the theatrical version...Oh, man there was so much stuff!"

-Dominic Monaghan, who was still in the 

movie way more than Kelly Marie Tran

I just want to be clear here: I don't have anything against Dominic Monaghan. He's fine. But I'm not sure he's quite put his finger on what went wrong with TROS. Like, the problem with it wasn't that there wasn't enough stuff in it. Sure, there were some plot lines that didn't make sense because scenes were cut, but if they were that cuttable, maybe they weren't that necessary in the first place? 

Look, that droid D-0 is cute, I mean, I'm not a monster, but did we need him in
the movie or is he just there to sell toys? And since when has Star Wars been
just about selling action figur-oh...wait, I...yeah I get it now. Never mind.

"Let's take that again, but this time,
less interesting. Just, really bore me."

-Joss Whedon, on set

But I said I wasn't really going to go on about Star Wars. Obviously I lied, but let's move on to the bigger question: how many tries does a movie get? There's been this internet demand for the maybe real, maybe not cut of Justice League made by the film's original director Zach Snyder who left the film after suffering a personal loss. If this cut exists, fans-wait, is it kinda weird that a movie nobody has seen has fans? Anyway fans insist that it's way better than the six-hour (slight exaggeration) Joss Whedon version. Which, it couldn't be worse, right?

But I guess what I want to know is did we-well, those of us who didn't care for TROS-all sit through a two and a half hour jumble of retcons and references to the original trilogy when there was a better version of it in Kathleen Kennedy's desk drawer or something? And if so, which is the real version? And how many tries do we give the movie before just giving up and admitting that nothing will ever meet everyone's expectations?

And perhaps the biggest question of all: Has a Star Wars
movie ever been improved upon with a special edition cut?

Here's to another decade of crippling anxiety!

Pictured: that time David Bennioff and
 D.B. Weiss won an Emmy for GOT.
Not pictured: that time you or I did.

The internet is first and foremost, a technology dedicated to spreading anxiety and fear. We accept that as the price we pay for online shopping and the ability to share with the world how we would have written the ending to Game Of Thrones. Sure, some of the things it's trying to instill a sense of dread in us about are legitimate. Climate change for example. But then there's this thing floating around social media about how everyone should make sure to write the date as "2020" instead of  just "20," because fraud.

Earlier drafts of Infinity War had
Thanos pulling this scam instead of
that nonsense with the guantlet.

The idea is that if put the date on a financial document or a check or something and you leave it as "1/15/20," someone could come along and add a "19" or "21" or something to the end and change that date. Sure, I guess that's possible, but seriously? I mean, this is 2020, and therefore, the future. And of all the things we could be slowly killing ourselves with stress over, is that high on anyone's list? I mean, first of all, are we hand writing the date anymore? 

Maybe a rent check, I suppose. I mean, who can afford a house? But then what kind of nefarious scheme is your landlord plotting that involves altering a check to make it look like you wrote it some other year? But then that presupposes a landlord not collecting rent for all that time and who even does that?

Ok, fine, Benny from Rent, but that was more about plot
 expediency. Actual landlords usually just want their money.

"Please, such petty schemes are beneath
us. Our scams are far more creative.

-The teller at Wells Fargo

According to Ira Rheingold from National Association of Consumer Advocates, a scammer could use this trick to move a date that you started making payments on a loan to an easier year and then demand more money. But that still feels like kind of a stretch. Like, is there only the one piece of documentation? And who are these people you're borrowing money from in the first place? Sure, banks are basically the worst people in the world, but they usually scam bigger, right? Like, with cross-selling and money laundering?

Look, our health care system is run as a for-profit business, we can't go a week without a mass shooting and the President is claiming that he's immune from prosecution for all crimes including murder. What I'm saying is that there are enough real things to worry about, so let us make a pact not to lose our minds over anything less than our crumbling democracy or the rising sea levels. Deal?

In contrast to the Roaring 20's, I predict that we'll look
back on this decade as the Crippling Anxiety 20's. 

It really can't get any worse...right?

As we skulk dejectedly into the new year, it's tradition that we look back at all those we've lost this past year. Well, not literally lost, I mean, someone presumably knows where they are. Buried or cremated probably. Or maybe in a ring. Did you know you could do that? Have your grandpa or whomever's ashes compressed into a fake gem and then set in a ring? Well now you do, and you can't un-know it.

Yeah, it's a dead person you can wear on your finger.

Pictured: who cares?

And I know I just mentioned that the technology exists to turn your dead loved ones into tacky jewelry, but when I say it's time to remember the people who've passed in the last year, I don't mean people you or I know. I mean famous people. People who are so much more exciting and accomplished than us that we follow their lives with an interest that borders on stalking but it's ok because they're famous.

Privacy is for nobodies. We give these people our adoration, so they owe us. What do you mean "that's creepy?" Hey, I'm not the one making corpse rings.

I'm kidding, these people are vultures and celebrity worship is just there
to take our minds off of how meaningless our own lives are in compassion.

What I'm saying is that they could
have been Daryl Dragon and Tennille.
Seems like a real missed opportunity. 

Anyway, on to this year's who's who of who's no longer: fashion lost Gloria Vanderbilt and Karl Lagerfeld. Rich people Lee Iacocca and Ross Perot are dead and before you ask, they left you nothing. Typical, right? Music lost Peter Tork from the Monkies, Andy Anderson from The Cure and Eddie Money from, himself I guess. Also gone are Keith Flint from Prodigy, rapper Nipsey Hussle and Daryl Dragon, the Captain of 70's musical duo The Captain and Tennille...wait, he had a name like Daryl Dragon, but he put on a yacht cap can called himself Captain? Am I...am I missing something here or is this just a seventies thing?

Speaking of cocaine, it was a rough year for TV stars from the 70's. RIP Rip torn and Rip Taylor. Carol Channing and Tim Conway are dead, as are Julia star Dianne Carroll and Mary Tyler Moore Show actors Valarie Harper and Georgina Engel. And to be clear, that cocaine crack was about the seventies in general and not me suggesting that anyone I just mentioned was into coke.

Ok, I'm also not not saying cocaine wasn't involved.

"Spaceships, aliens, Kirk not catching an STD?
No problem. A women writer? Impossible!"

-Sexism

Doris Day is gone and so are Peter Fonda, Robert Forester, Luke Perry and director John Singleton. Nerds everywhere lost Chewbacca actor Peter Mayhew as well as noted replicant Rutger Hauer. Star Trek fans lost Charlie X actor Robert Walker Junior, Deep Space Nine actors Aron Eisenberg and René Auberjonois who played Nog and Odo respectively and writer Dorothy Catherine Fontana who went by D.C. Fontana at the time because audiences who couldn't accept that a women could write a TV show and have a vagina at the same time were easily fooled by initials.

And finally, we all lost U.S. Congressperson Elijah Cummings, Pulitzer Prize wining novelist Toni Morrison and puppeteer Caroll Spinney who for fifty years played both Big Bird and Oscar the Grouch. Which, goddamn, 2020 had better be something.

Look, we lost Big Bird in 2019. I don't even care which one
of you it is, just work it out. We need a win here people.

Last one, and then I'll shut up about this.

So I've seen The Rise of Skywalker for a second time, and I've sat with it for-huh? Yes, I'm going to talk about freaking Star Wars again. This is a nerd blog on the internet, don't act all surprised when I can't shut up about Star Wars. Besides, I'm sure there's plenty of other things you could be doing. Have you ever considered enjoying the outdoors with friends?

I mean, look at these people. Outside in the sun,
waving their arms around. That could be you!

Pictured: grown-ass adults.

Yeah, I thought not. Where was I? Right, TROS. As I mentioned, I've seen it a second time but haven't softened on it like I thought I would. If anything, it's illogical, hole-filled plot, Monster Energy Drink pacing and total lack of stakes of any kind are even more grating on repeat viewing. And look, I'm a Star Wars fan. I'm not showing up on opening night waving a plastic light saber, I mean, I have my dignity, but I like it as a thing.

"We're terrible, I mean, just human
garbage, and yet here we are."

-Republicans

But still, this movie. Just...yikes. And sure, there are plenty of people who liked it, they're wrong, but they're out there. Ok, they're not wrong. It's subjective, I get that, I what I just can't understand is why. I mean it's...it's clearly a mess, a hodgepodge of story elements designed to appease toxic internet trolls. So what's the appeal? Is it that they just really, really wanted to enjoy it no matter what? Or is it like politics? Like how seemingly normal people have regular jobs and friends and yet still vote Republican?

Did I mention that Abrams ripped
off The Goonies? Because he did.
Rip off The Goonies that is.

And why am I still on about it? What do I want to yuck their yum for anyway? Like, if someone can find some small joy in a world of mass shootings and chicken sandwich shortages, who am I to chime in with nitpicks and nay sayings? With snide comments about Kelly Marie Tran's sidelining, or how Carrie Fisher's scenes felt contrived and disrespectful to the actor. And who am I to complain about how ridiculous all that nonsense with the wayfinder and the dagger and Sith hood ornament (no, really) was?

Some dork with a blog that's who. And if I don't point out how the whole movie is a big middle finger to Rian Johnson's much better The Last Jedi, who will? Huh? Literally the entire internet? Oh shit, am I part of the problem?

Well, yes, obviously I am. But not the whole problem, right?
Like, I didn't bring the Emperor back in goddamn Fortnite.

Salty in Singapore

That's the one.

Look, as I mentioned recently, Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker is not my favorite Star Wars movie. It is however-huh? Yes I did. Like a couple days ago. Doesn't matter, the important thing is that while I thought it was a mess, it did feature a same-sex kiss between Commander D'Acy and-what now? Who's that? She's Leia's right hand military person. No, not Laura Dern, look, she's a minor character, sure, but a memorable one and now one half of the series' first and only visible queer couple.

I didn't mention this when I was ranting about the movie, but it was one of the things I liked in it even though it was like a brief background kiss and now that comes years too late. But it's there and a part of Star Wars canon. Except for fans in Singapore where the shot was cut. Because fuck Singapore.

I'm sorry, that was unfair and insensitive and I should walk that
 statement back a bit. Orka and Flix from the animated series,
Star Wars: Resistance are the first queer couple in Star Wars canon. 

Say to about this level of salty. 

Ok, also I should walk back the other thing too. Fuck the backwards homophobic laws of Singapore, and fuck Disney for caving to them. Sorry, I'm a bit salty about this. Actually, no, I'm not sorry I'm salty. Salt me up. I know Star Wars and movies in general are, in the end, just business, but Disney has all the money and all the power in the industry and standing on the right side of this would have made a statement and I'd be writing about how cool they are, but no. Instead we're talking about this nonsense in 20-goddamn-19.

To be clear, wiping out entire planets
is PG-13, but married queer couples
showing affection is R-rated. Cool. 

Apparently, the kiss was the difference between a PG13 and an M18 (basically their R) which I suppose is to be expected in a country where sex between men can result in two years in prison, and sex between women is-well, entirely legal. Yeah, while Commander D'Acy's marriage to Wrobie Tyce (what? Wookieepedia) is illegal under Singaporean law, them kissing is not. But LGBTQ "themes," whatever the hell that means, are against the country's censorship rules. Confused? Of course you are. Because this is bullshit.

Disney however is not confused, they made the conscious choice to acquiesce to Singapore's censors because doing so gets them the lower rating which makes the film more marketable to the target audience. It kind of makes the company's stated dedication to equality ring a little, you know, hollow.

Hey, you don't suppose Disney's
only in it for the money, do you?

Because exposition hobbit says so.

Pictured: Bail Organa, and before
you ask, no. I'm not better than that.

Well, since no one else is expressing their opinions about the new Star Wars movie on the internet, I guess I could. You know, if you really want me to. Oh, and I'm probably going to say some spoilery things. Not becuase I'm one of those sickos that gets off on spoiling movies for people, but becuase it's kind of hard to talk about the movie without talking about, you know, things that happen in it. Anyway, if you haven't seen it yet and want to go in unspoiled, now's the time to bail out.

Still there? Super. So the movie. The movie. This isn't like a movie review blog, but on my scale of awful to great, Rise of Skywalker was a solid "eh." As in, not great, but maybe better than the prequels. Admittedly I went in kind of expecting the worst. Internet news stories about how director J. J. Abrams wanted to course correct after The Last Jedi-which I loved-prepared me to dislike Rise of the Skywalker-which I did.

"Critics loved The Last Jedi, so I thought I'd go a different route."

-J. J. Abrams, evidently

"How is the Emperor still alive...uh,
-hey look, it's the exposition hobbit!"

-The movie

I'll spare you the nitpicks, because total global internet traffic right now is seventy percent TROS (acronym!) discussion, but mostly I'm just kind of disappointed that rather than continue the interesting and new direction TLJ took, TROS was just some nonsense about the Emperor's return from the dead. How he came back after getting thrown down a Death Star pit and then exploding is something the movie just glosses over with a Dominic Monaghan cameo they hope will distract us.

"Ok Billy, in this scene I need you to
chuckle avuncularly. Yes, again."

-J.J. Abrams, evidently

There were some good moments in the film, the cast is great although Kelly Marie Tran's Rose is sidelined in what feels like a cave to the racist basement dwellers who drove her to quit social media. Oh, and scenes about John Boyega's Force-powers were cut for time as were scenes explaining Billy Dee Williams' relationship to Janna. Both omissions were extra weird because we see Finn doing force things without explanation and when Lando tries to connect with Janna at the end it kinda looks like he's hitting on her.

If not for the prequels, how would we
know Darth Vader's feelings about
sand and its ability to get everywhere?

All this and the frantic pacing and weirdly edited scenes with Carrie Fisher make the whole thing feel rushed and half-finished and it's a bummer since this is indeed the last Star Wars for a while. Which-why is that? I mean, this isn't ancient Greek theatre, not everything has to be a trilogy. Why not do an Episode X and pay-off the storylines they left dangling? That said, they should absolutely not make an Episode X. Sure, the sequels and yes, even the prequels had their moments but were any of them actually necessary?

Each new entry seems to undercut the original films. The prequels turned Darth Vader into a whiney child-murderer. The sequels make the Empire's defeat short-lived and TROS straight-up undoes Vader's heroic sacrifice, so why-oh...right, the hundreds of millions of dollars.

"Are ye daft? If anything we should be making
one of these every year. Maybe two!"

-Scrooge Mc Duck, Disney CFO