There's a reason I always caution readers to take anything (if not everything) I say with a grain of salt.

Unlike other bloggers, I don't pretend to know everything.  All I do know is based on my own reading and experiences, as well as facts and tips I get passed on to me (occasionally) from others both in the entertainment business and beyond.  And when studio advertising executives try to convince you that they have 'the next big thing' in store for you, don't ever believe it.  Their job -- as a matter of fact -- is to make you accept such a promise (and premise) without a second thought, and I'm just not wired that way, especially when it comes to studio executives.  (Remember: they were the ones that passed on Star Wars so often that George Lucas pretty much had to do anything he could to get 20th Century Fox to give him a chance.)

2014's Ex Machina was a great Science Fiction feature, but -- in my opinion -- it wasn't all that "original."  Alex Garland's deep and personal look at living with Artificial Intelligence is pretty grand and exciting ... but "original"?  Well, it's only original if you haven't seen the treasure trove of films and TV series' episodes that had already explored such an idea ad infinitum.  What Ex Machina did, however, was bring the topic to the attention of the greater entertainment industry AND its critical intelligentsia; and thus a modest-sized blockbuster was born.  (Again, I'm not nitpicking here so much as I'm trying to be brutally honest: I like the film, but I just didn't think it was all that "original" ... so take that, haters!)

Next up for Mr. Garland is Annihilation.  It's based on a novel by Jeff VanderMeer.  The trailer dropped, and I wanted to get it up here on SciFiHistory.Net for those interested in such projects.  Hopefully this one will be (minimally) as interesting as Ex Machina as Garland does do some pretty spiffy work.
​

Well, ain't that a kick in the seat of the pants ...

Awhile back, I'd read something about SciFi novelist Richard Morgan's Altered Carbon receiving the small screen treatment, but I honestly thought I'd read it was heading to the Starz Network.  (I say this only because I'm a Starz subscriber, and I recall being jazzed about the potential.)  However, this latest trailer/tease indicates that the property is going the way of Netflix, and -- sadly -- I don't Netflix.  (I realize that, to some of you Millennials, that probably makes me the AntiChrist.)  Still, I enjoyed the book but found it occasionally a bit muddled if not confusing: I didn't quite always understand Morgan's futureworld, but the premise of'sleeving' from body to body for near-immortality is always appealing.

In any event, the trailer looks spiffy in an almost Blade Runner way.  I figure you kids who patronize the anti-American Netflix will have to keep me up-to-date with the show's developments until it drops on home video (DVD).  Check out the tease below if you're interested.
​

We can be honest with one another can't we?  It's never been easy being a Star Trek fan, and much of that is owed to the ongoing management of the franchise.

Now, I never like to nitpick.  Like many, I take pride in admitting what I enjoy as well as what I don't; but Star Trek -- for me -- has often times been its own worst enemy.  Launching on the Boob Tube largely as 'the little show that could,' it's enduring a half-century of mocking alongside the occasional mainstream praise, and even many of the actors who were granted small screen and/or big screen careers thanks to the property even malign it from time to time.  That and the fact that the suits at Paramount Pictures never quite know what to do with it in order to keep it popular has made for an uphill battle for fans wishing once and for all that society could "come together" out of respect for entertainment.

Still, its bloated stinkers like Star Trek: Insurrection (1998) that I think have largely kept these more modern incarnations of the Roddenberry franchise from finding greater love.  Insurrection is often referred to as "The Next Generation's Star Trek V: The Final Frontier" (another entry that deservedly takes it on the chin for the original cast), and even upon viewing today -- 19 years later -- it doesn't quite hold up alongside even the TV show's lesser episodes.  Although my two cents on greater Trekdom is that each and every incarnation and/or hour has offered me something of substance to think about, I'll still concede that none of TNG's big screen outings meant all that much to me; each of them felt like rehashed episodes given a bigger budget without bigger ideas.

Besides that, I won't nitpick it further.  At the end of the day, it is what it is, and maybe I'll take the time to give it a fuller re-examination when it turns two decades old next year.  We'll all just have to wait and see.

In the meantime, live long and prosper!