Uncategorized

Hi everyone! Today I want to talk about one of my predictions I got right and wrong from last week. So, I predicted that the Cardinals would beat the Jaguars 38-17, but the final score was 31-19 Cardinals over the Jags. A pretty close prediction there! The Cardinals made the game interesting because they were shooting themselves in the foot in the first half after they have scored a touchdown to be up 7-0 on the Jags. The kick return by the Jags after the kicker Matt Prater tried to hit a 68-yard field goal attempt was something that the Cardinals did not want to happen going into half because it allow the Jags to take the lead 13-7 right before half time. But in the second half, the Cardinals played a lot better after the quarterback Kyler Murray threw an interception and he was trying to force the ball down the field in the endzone. The Cardinals came back from being down 19-10. The play of the game that shifted momentum for the Cardinals was that the cornerback Byron Murphy had a pick six and the Cardinals finished the game with another touchdown to go up 31-19 on the Jags. So, the Cardinals are 3-0 for the first time since 2015.

I predicted that the Broncos would beat the Jets easily 38-17, but the final score was 26-0 Broncos over the Jets. I predicted that the Cowboys would beat the Eagles in a close game 33-30, but the final score was 41-21 Cowboys over the Eagles in a blowout. I was not expecting a blowout, but I was right that the Cowboys were going to beat the Eagles. The Eagles’ offense was just not good and so was their defense. The Cowboys offense moved the ball very well and kept running down the clock. I predicted that the Bucs would beat the Rams 24-21, but the final score was 34-24 Rams over the Bucs. The Rams were just a little too much for the Bucs to overcome. I predicted that the Seahawks would beat the Vikings 17-13, but the final score was 30-17 Vikings over the Seahawks. The Vikings were able to keep Russell Wilson off the field for a long time by taking a lot of time off the clock. I predicted that the 49ers would beat the Packers 38-35 in a shootout, but the final score was 30-28 Packers over the 49ers. The kicker Mason Crosby kicked a game-winning field goal. The 49ers should not have let Aaron Rodgers have time to go down the field to win the game because he is really good doing that. The 49ers player should have at least slide down before he got into the endzone because if he did, then Aaron Rodgers would not have time to go win the game. So based on my predictions, I got 3 out of 6 picks right! Now let’s get started on week 4 picks, shall we?! The first game I will predict is the Browns @Vikings game. Both of these teams are coming off with the win last week. I think the Browns are going to win this game over the Vikings 30-20 because they are going to run the ball a lot to Nick Chubb and he has been really good because the offensive linemen are getting him good lanes to run. I just think the Vikings defense is going to have a hard time stopping the run. You can’t win games if you can’t stop the run. The next game I will predict is the Giants @Saints game. The last time these two teams played was in 2015 that the Saints won the game in a shootout 52-49 over the Giants. I do not expect that to happen again tomorrow. I think the Saints have the edge over the Giants 36-17. The next game I will predict is the Chiefs @Eagles game. Both of these teams are coming off with losses last week. Nobody expected the Chiefs to start off the season 1-2. I do believe the Chiefs can bounce back with the win over the Eagles 37-26 because I think they are desperate to win this game and they need to win this game to keep up with their divisional rivalries. The next game I will predict is the Panthers @Cowboys game. Both of these teams are coming off with their wins last week.

The Panthers are unstoppable so far. I think that this will be a great game. I think the Panthers will stay undefeated by beating the Cowboys 31-27 in a close game. The Cowboys might rally late in the fourth quarterback, but it probably won’t be enough. I could be completely wrong, but this is what I believe. The next game I will predict is the Seahawks @49ers game, the divisional rivalries. Both of these teams are coming off with their losses last week. The Seahawks are 1-2 and the 49ers are 2-1. I am going to give the edge to the 49ers over the Seahawks in a close game 32-24. The Seahawks have been blowing some games that they should not be blowing and if they want to win this game, they need to find a way to finish the game if they get the lead on the 49ers. The next game I will predict is another divisional rivalry Cardinals @Rams game. Both of these teams are coming off with their wins last week. These teams are 3-0. Who is going to lose their first game of the season? The Cardinals have to be ready to play these Rams and not shoot themselves in the foot because if they do that again, then they will lose. They cannot allow too many penalties, they cannot get off to a slow start, allow Aaron Donald to make Kyler Murray feel uncomfortable, but he can run away from him, they need to pressure Matthew Stafford because he is going to look for his wide receivers Cooper Kupp and Desean Jackson. Don’t let these guys get 150 plus receiving yards on you, don’t kick too many field goals, score touchdowns, don’t go three and out too much, take a lot of time off the clock if you need to, stop the run and more! This is going to be a huge test for the Cardinals in order to come away with the win. Sean McVay is 8-0 vs the Cardinals. When the Rams have the lead going into the half, the Rams are 40-0!!! That is ridiculous!! It will be hard for the Cardinals to win this game. Well, I hate to do this, but I think the Rams might barely pull it off over the Cardinals 30-27 in a close game. I hope I’m wrong, but it seems to be likely. The Rams just have an edge because they are at home. Hard choice to pick because I needed to be honest.

The next game I will predict is the Steelers @Packers game. The Steelers are coming off with the unacceptable loss to the Bengals and the Packers are coming off with the historic win over the 49ers. I think the Packers will beat the Steelers 33-24. The Steelers might be a little better, but it won’t be enough to beat the Packers. Aaron Rodgers seems to have an edge when he is at home. The next game I will predict is the Ravens @Broncos game. I think the Ravens may give the Broncos their first loss of the season in a close game 35-30. The next game I will predict is the Buccaneers @Patriots on Sunday Night Football. Tom Brady is going to be coming back to stadium which he used to play for, the Patriots. He is going to get a standing ovation from the Patriot fans and may boo them for trading him. I think Tom Brady and the Bucs will pull this one off over the Patriots 37-20. The Bucs defense is still pretty good and the offense is still good as well. The last game I will predict is the Raiders @Chargers game, the divisional rivalry. I think this is going to be a great game to watch. I think the Chargers will come away with the win and give the Raiders their first loss of the season in a close game 30-24.

So, what do you guys think about the week 4 prediction match ups?! I would love to hear lots of comments, thoughts, opinions, concerns, or questions down below!

Stay tuned for prediction updates.

The post Week 3 Prediction Updates and Week 4 Picks! appeared first on The Nerd Element.

Here at Nerdist we love two things: The Rocketeer (it deserved better) and two player tabletop games. We’re all for games for large groups, but sometimes it’s nice to just grab a buddy and dive in. Funko Games’ The Rocketeer: Fate of the Future brings the things we love together with its heroes vs. villains gameplay and gorgeous art inspired by the 1991 Disney film. In the newest How to Play, host Becca Scott walks you through The Rocketeer board game step by step.

You can choose to play heroes or villains. The Rocketeer, a.k.a Cliff Secord, leads the heroes’ party, which includes Cliff’s girlfriend Jenny and airplane mechanic Peevy. The nefarious Hollywood actor Neville Sinclair serves as the ringleader for the villains’ group. That includes the henchman Lothar and gangster Eddie Valentine. Each group’s objective? To secure all of the blueprints for the jet pack and to make moves to acquire points as the game progress.

Nerdist

As you can see in How to Play, this battle for the blueprints (and the future!) plays out over The Rocketeer‘s Los Angeles locations. Designed by Prospero Hall for Funko Games, the art deco imagery is beautiful. Make sure you appreciate the details on each locale and also on all the cards. Each location comes with certain benefits that will help you gain the upper hand. You move around the various spots in each round of turns. And while it’s your turn, you play the cards you want and pick from the cards’ abilities or actions. Maybe you’ll fight and try to knock your opponent out. Or maybe you’ll try to steal the blueprints.

Players have only a limited number of rounds to score as many points as possible. Once the zeppelin reaches Los Angeles (which current events cards dictate), the game is over.

Get your copy of The Rocketeer: Fate of the Future now.

The post Learn How to Play THE ROCKETEER Game and Save the Future appeared first on Nerdist.

Although dreams of an IRL Jurassic Park are still just that, nearly every dinosaur finding still tantalizes with possibility. In a new fantasy fueling discovery, scientists in China say they’ve found evidence of “remnants” of original dinosaur DNA. Which may or not actually be there depending on how future experiments shake out.

ZHENG Qiuyang

Gizmodo reported on the discovery of the evidence, which a team of scientists from the Shandong Tianyu Museum of Nature outlined in a new paper in the journal Communications Biology. In the paper, the scientists describe how they isolated “exquisitely preserved” cartilage cells from a 125-million-year-old dinosaur from Northeast China. One that apparently looked a little like a peacock. The specimen, from the genus of small feathered theropod dinosaurs, Caudipteryx, was approximately the size of the modern day, fanciful bird. And it even had a long, feathered tail.

To look for evidence of dino DNA, the scientists took a piece of fossilized cartilage from the specimen’s right femur and decalcified it. They then used different chemical and microscopy methods to analyze it; in part by staining it with hematoxylin and eosin, chemicals that react with the nucleus and cytoplasm of extant cells. (The stains are immediately below. The Caudipteryx cells are on the left, those of the chicken, on the right.)

ZHENG Qiuyang

When the scientists stained both the Caudipteryx cartilage and that of a chicken, they found the two specimens reacted identically. The scientists even say that one of the dinosaur’s cartilage cells revealed a nucleus with fossilized threads of chromatin. That’s the material that makes up the chromosomes of organisms other than bacteria.

“[W]e are obviously interested in fossilized cell nuclei because this is where most of the DNA should be if DNA was preserved,” Alida Bailleul, corresponding author of the study, said in a press release. The scientists have “very exciting data,” but are “are just starting to understand cellular biochemistry in very old fossils,” she added.

ZHENG Qiuyang

Indeed, as Gizmodo‘s report highlights, many experts believe that these researchers have not actually found evidence of dinosaur DNA. They told the news outlet, for example, that—even under the best circumstances—DNA couldn’t last more than three million years. Let alone more than 100 million. And that the chemicals may have been staining inorganic matter that only looks cellular in nature.

As of now, the most ancient DNA that scientists have been able to sequence was that of a million-year-old woolly mammoth. And the youngest dinosaurs are at least 65 million years old. But if future experiments do confirm this evidence as real, then that really changes things. At least in our fantasies, where reanimated dinosaurs and Ian Malcolms abound.

The post Fossil of Peacock-Like Dinosaur May Have Preserved DNA Remnants appeared first on Nerdist.

It is with a heavy heart that I report I did not love No Time to Die, despite my long and abiding love affair with James Bond. Your own mileage may vary—many critics appear to be in ecstasies over the film. It is worth seeing if you like Bond or big movies, and it is technically well-crafted. But I left the screening feeling emotionally and physically drained, deflated from an experience that began with both promise and excitement.

As I wandered the streets of New York City following No Time to Die’s gargantuan 2 hour 43 minute runtime, I found it difficult to parse my thoughts about the film. There are good movies and there are bad movies, and there are many, many shades of grey in between shaped by personal preferences, experiences, and expectations. I tried to keep my own expectations for Daniel Craig’s final turn as Bond from ballooning; I told myself I would be happy merely to see the movie on the big screen after more than a year of pandemic delays.

Yet happiness is a crucial element missing from No Time to Die, as is, damningly, any real element of fun or even the relief of mindless escapism. It is not a bad movie, yet I emerged numb.

The plot of No Time to Die is both overstuffed and thinly drawn. In a weird bit of prescience for a script written long before the pandemic, at its center is a MacGuffin about a deadly biological force that infects and kills. In this way it has a sort of timeliness, but even that aspect is unintentional. Far more time is spent racing cars across picturesque roads or firing shot after shot at anonymous henchmen than explaining the bioweapon or why the bad guy, Rami Malek’s Lyutsifer Safin, wants to use it.

Malek is criminally underused, and the character is so absurd that he feels like a parody of what a Bond villain should be. Though he speaks in a slow and ponderous whisper, I often found his dialogue incomprehensible, and so Safin remained only a sort of silly background menace. He has an elaborate “poison garden” in his secret island lair, which is kind of cool but also baffling. His ultimate plan and reasons for planning are preposterously unclear.

Bond deserved a far better adversary for his last outing. Everything deserved to be better here. It’s said that Bond is only as good as his villain, and if that’s a metric by which to judge No Time to Die, the whole film is as navel-gazing and unmotivated.

It didn’t have to be this way. The movie starts with astonishing promise, with what The AV Club terms “a misleadingly superb opening suspense sequence.” In those first few minutes, we see hints of what made No Time to Die director Cary Joji Fukunaga’s first season of True Detective so eerily excellent. We learn what connects Malek’s Safin and a younger version of Léa Seydoux’s Madeleine Swann, Bond’s psychiatrist love interest from Spectre. An intriguing and psychologically complex film is suggested by this open that then never materializes.

Fukunaga and his co-screenwriters Neal Purvis, Robert Wade, and Phoebe Waller-Bridge (famously brought in to punch up the script and add a woman’s perspective) cannot be accused of not giving us the Bond goods. Everything we’ve come to expect from a Bond movie is here: audacious car and motorcycle chases, swinging from bridges, international escapades, dry one-liners, spy gadgets, constant explosions, snazzily tailored suits, beautiful women, high stakes, martinis shaken not stirred.

Craig’s grizzled Bond does what he can and he does it well, yet here Bond is lacking the viscerally crushing world-weariness that has marked his run and differentiated his Bond from the Bonds that came before. Both Craig and Bond appear to be going through the motions. When it comes time for him to rejoin the fray after several movies spent explaining how his mind and body are falling apart, he does so with a shrug. No Time to Die is ostensibly about Bond coming out of retirement to stop a bad guy bent on destruction for *checks notes* reasons, and learning the importance of leaving behind a lasting legacy or something, but thematically, the movie is empty.

No Time to Die’s Bond still grimaces and expects betrayal, but like the action sequences, so much seems to be done by rote. It’s as though the talented creative team went through itemized Bond set pieces on a checklist one by one. They are crafted with workmanlike efficiency, but never really dazzle. It’s a Potemkin village of the Bond universe.

A huge part of the problem here is that so much of the plot and the decisions made hinge on Bond’s relationship with Swann, whom we’re meant to see as a great and worthy love worth enduring anything for. And yet the ghost of Eva Green’s spectacular Vesper Lynd still haunts from her time with Bond in Casino Royale more than fifteen years ago. Vesper remains so much a part of Bond’s character composite that he begins this film with a pilgrimage to her tomb.

“I mean, the Eva Green of it all,” said my colleague Chelsea Steiner. “No one can top her.”

By contrast, it’s hard to see why we, the audience, as well as James Bond, should be swooning over the dour Madeleine Swann. It’s not Seydoux’s fault; the character is underwritten and also made to take a “damsel in distress” role here, wearing tottering heels as she runs for her life. Unfortunately, while they are both very pretty to look at, Seydoux and Craig have the combustible chemistry of wet sand when they’re together. This renders the relationship even more unconvincing and unable to serve as the emotional lynchpin the movie demands that it be.

A further twist at around the third-act mark changes everything, and not for the better. For me, it was the worst possible choice the moviemakers could have made, taking what we love about Bond and giving him the most generic of action movie hero motivations. It will surely divide audiences, and I would like to be on the record as thinking the entirety of No Time to Die’s endgame is folly.

Now that I’ve been a resounding Negative Nancy, what did I actually enjoy about the film? Well, the first half is pretty spry, providing some of the edge-of-your-seat excitement as to what will happen next, and flipping a lot of cars.

The cast, as usual, is excellent, including some new players. There’s a particularly strong showing from Craig’s Knives Out costar Ana de Armas as Paloma, an agent Bond meets in Cuba who claims she’s only had three weeks of training but can do more in barely-there ballgown than most of us can imagine in a lifetime of physical activity. De Armas is present as a new “Bond woman” for all of fifteen minutes, but she’s having so much fun, and has such sparkling chemistry with Craig, that we can only dream of a No Time to Die that might have let Paloma move into a lead role.

Also having fun is Jeffrey Wright as returning CIA agent Felix Leiter. Wright is good in everything and looks like he’s enjoying his job, but anyone who hasn’t seen prior Bond movies will miss the emotional resonance of his role. The same goes for a return of Christoph Waltz’s evil Blofeld, whom we meet in a prison so high-security it makes Hannibal Lecter’s confinement seem like a luxury hotel—but then he is left alone with Bond, the plexiglass between them removed. It’s sloppy plotting like this that makes it clear No Time to Die wants to wrap up all of Bond’s loose threads, whether or not they can be tied neatly.

There was much buzz around Lashana Lynch as “the new 007,” an MI-6 agent given Bond’s designation after he fell off the grid. Like de Armas, Lynch is fantastic with what she’s given, crackling beside Craig as she plays the new guard to his old. Perhaps inevitably, she ends up as his back-up, as this is Craig’s swan song, but Lynch is electric enough that we’re ready for her spin-off. Hopefully co-starring Paloma. As her girlfriend. A girl can dream.

Speaking of LGBTQIA+ representation, we do get a blink-and-you-miss-it reference in regards to Ben Whishaw’s Q. There’s a scene where Bond and Moneypenny (the wonderful Naomie Harris, wasted) head to Q’s apartment to seek his assistance. They find MI-6’s quartermaster in the middle of cooking a romantic dinner. The annoyed Q is loath to help them because, as he says, suggesting an imminent date, “He’ll be here in twenty minutes.” This offhand nod to Q’s sexuality is nice to hear, and neither of his coworkers miss a beat, suggesting they’re already well enough aware and that we’re all living in the twenty-first century.

While I was pleased to witness this line, and happy for the fans who have “headcanoned” Q as queer since his first eccentric sweater-wearing appearance in 2012’s Skyfall, it didn’t feel like enough.

For what seems like the seventieth time, queer people are finally acknowledged to exist in the world of a major franchise, but only referentially. It’s all tell, no show. Once more we have a queer character confirmed thus by a throwaway, easily excised line half the audience will miss and the other half may never hear, depending on their market.

To quote our Chelsea Steiner again: “If they just had a cute guy walk in with a bottle of wine like ‘Hi?’ it would have been delightful.” Why is this so hard? I’m also curious as to how the line came about. Was it advocated for by Whishaw, who is openly gay and recently said he’d love to see the next Bond be played by a gay actor? Was it a Waller-Bridge addition, since she was seemingly hired to bring Bond up to date? There are a few scenes of levity and snappy humor that seem like classic Waller-Bridge, but unless an annotated script is released, we may never know where exactly her fingerprints are.

Ultimately, one of the movie’s most unforgivable crimes is not making more use of such a strong ensemble. How do you not let Oscar and Emmy-award winner Rami Malek shine as a villain? How do you not give Harris and Whishaw, who have been at this for a decade, more to do? How do you render Ralph Fiennes’ M bland and forgettable and only capable of making us remember how much we miss Judi Dench?

How do you build to a point that is meant to tug relentlessly on the heartstrings, and yet all I have written in my notebook is, “Hmm,” followed by “Why???” underlined three times, followed again by “Hmm.”

But Kaila, you say, why are you even expecting coherence from a James Bond movie? Don’t you remember when the Quantum of Solace villain wanted to steal Bolivia’s water supply? Who really understands or cares about what is going on with Spectre? Isn’t this ultimately about a man who can swing from bridges and somehow walk away? ‘Tis true, my friends, ’tis true. The problem is that this is the last movie where this particular Bond gets to swing from bridges and look fabulous doing it. I was lying to myself about my lack of expectations. I expected more.

And like Daniel Craig and his Bond, I am tired and worn down by the past. Perhaps experiencing all that I have in between when No Time to Die was meant to bow in April 2020 and now has turned me more bitter and cynical than I should be. Maybe I would have liked this film and been truly moved once. Alas, those days are gone. Now it is time for a nap.

(images: MGM)

Want more stories like this? Become a subscriber and support the site! 

 —The Mary Sue has a strict comment policy that forbids, but is not limited to, personal insults toward anyone, hate speech, and trolling.—