Entertainment
How Hollywood's Hatred Of Fans Destroyed The Next Big Sci-Fi Franchise
By Joshua Tyler
| Published
In 2001, Halo was launched, sending shockwaves through the entertainment and technology industries. There hadn’t been anything like it since the debut of Star Wars, a totally fresh, fully formed original property with complex lore, background, technology, big ideas, and even bigger action sequences.
It seemed poised to become a generational hit, an SF juggernaut. Blockbuster movies were planned, tie-in novels were released, and fans camped out days in advance for each new release. Then it fell apart. The promised Halo movie never happened, the games based on it declined in quality, and it was buried under a mountain of cash-grabbing and corporate greed.
Now, what should be the biggest sci-fi in the world is nothing but a fading memory from the past. This is why Halo failed.
Halo Launches And Becomes A Juggernaut
On November 15th, 2001, Microsoft released Halo: Combat Evolved. Developed by Bungie and published by Microsoft Game Studios, the game was first released for the Xbox console. In 2003, Microsoft released versions for Windows and Mac OS.
Since then, Microsoft has released numerous Halo games, books, shorts, and, most recently, a television show. Halo has become a globe-spanning franchise with legions of fans. But now, it’s stalled, and as evidenced by the recent failed attempt at a Halo TV show on Paramount+, after nearly 25 years, Microsoft still has no idea what to do with it.
It didn’t have to be this way. Back in 2005, Microsoft went to work on a Halo movie, a movie that could have delivered everything the space franchise’s fans had been waiting for. Unfortunately, twenty years later, there is no Halo movie.
Microsoft’s Halo Movie Dreams
After the mega-success of the game Halo 2, Microsoft wanted more from the Halo series. They knew they had something big on their hands, and as such, they could make lots of cash from box office sales. Not only that, but they thought a Halo movie would increase sales for their Xbox consoles.
To actualize its Halo movie dream, Microsoft commissioned a full script. They paid acclaimed 28 Days Later screenwriter Alex Garland a whopping $1 million to complete the script, and he delivered.
Microsoft “supervised” the screenplay to protect their brand. Alex Garland finished the first draft in just a few months, and in 2005, the title of the first movie, Halo, was announced.
The software giant approached iconic Hollywood talent agency CAA about its Halo movie ambitions. It was such a big deal and thought to be such a sure moneymaker that they held an auction to find the highest bidder.
The Biggest Movie Pitch In Hollywood History
To up the ante, CAA and Microsoft put together one of the biggest pitch events in the history of Hollywood, something that’s still never been topped. They hired actors, then dressed them in Spartan armor like that worn by Halo’s main character, Master Chief, and sent them to pick up and deliver scripts to major Hollywood studios. Around midday on June 6th, 2005, these fully outfitted, script-bearing Master Chiefs marched through the streets of Hollywood in costume and arrived at the studios in red, blue, and green Spartan armor.
It was Larry Shapiro at CAA who came up with the idea that the messengers dress in Master Chief’s armor. He wanted the Halo deal to make headlines, and this stunt seemed like a sure way to make that happen. He was right. It was a massive spectacle, one that was widely discussed and covered by the then-flourishing independent online entertainment news industry. Everyone was excited, everyone wanted it, and word was that the script they were delivering in such an attention-getting fashion was as good as fans hoped.
Each of the Master Chiefs had a red-bound folder bearing the Creative Artists Agency logo. In the folder were two items: a terms sheet and a copy of the screenplay commissioned by Microsoft. These red-bound folders were delivered to every major Hollywood studio, except for Columbia, which is owned by a direct Microsoft competitor, Sony, the company behind PlayStation.
After the delivery of the scripts, the various Master Chiefs waited for hours outside while Studio Execs read the screenplay. Each studio had 24 hours to read the script. Each script came with a term sheet.
Since Microsoft was unfamiliar with Hollywood’s culture, they wanted to dictate the terms. They planned to protect the Halo franchise by controlling how their game was portrayed. The clock was ticking. Everyone wanted to know if Hollywood would be ready to make an offer.
It was the deal of the century, and everyone expected that the Halo movie would take over Hollywood in the same way the games took over their industry. Every studio responded, but they tried to negotiate the terms. Only Fox responded with a “Yes” on their term sheet without negotiating.
Microsoft Makes Ridiculous Demands Of Hollywood
Microsoft demanded $10 million for 15% of the box office gross sales on Halo. This was in addition to a minimum $75 million budget for the film. They also wanted a fast-tracked production and required creative approval over the Halo movie’s director and cast. The demands were far outside the norm for Hollywood culture, and some of them were, admittedly, ridiculous. For instance, Microsoft requested 60 first-class plane tickets for its employees and guests to attend the Halomovie premiere.
It’s also important to keep in mind here that Microsoft was not putting up ANY of its money into production. All they were willing to risk was the $1 million already paid for Alex Garland to write the Halo script. Additionally, the company was unwilling to assign any of the Halo merchandising rights.
Microsoft’s enormous requirements kept Paramount and others out of the fray. Eventually, Fox and Universal decided to jointly fund the movie. The agreement was that Fox would take foreign box office revenue while Universal took the domestic box office revenue. Unfortunately, Fox and Universal soon realized that Microsoft was an impossible partner. The numbers didn’t work out. The amount of profit left for Fox and Universal after Microsoft skimmed off the best parts wasn’t enough to move forward with the Halo film.
Peter Jackson Starts Work On The Halo Movie
While Hollywood’s execs were worrying about the numbers, they were well aware they had what seemed like a sure-fire hit in their hands.
Alex Garland’s Halo movie script laid out a storyline that was basically the entire plot of the original Halo game. The Master Chief, assisted by an AI called Cortana, would fight the Covenant while attempting to save the human race from being pulverized. The story was a direct adaptation of exactly what happened in Halo: Combat Evolved.
In other words, Alex Garland’s script was exactly what fans wanted. It was also pretty much the exact opposite of what we all got in the terrible Paramount+ TV show years later.
Several filmmakers wanted to be part of the Halo movie project. Peter Jackson, director of the Lord of the Rings movies, came on board as a producer in October 2005. Commercial director Neill Blomkamp (who would later be known for thes sci-fi movie District 9) was to direct the film.
Neill Blomkamp Tries To Remake Halo In His Own Image, Destroys Everything
Before Neill, Guillermo del Toro had also been in negotiations. It was Del Toro that everyone really wanted. Unfortunately, Del Toro passed on the Halo movie opportunity to work on Hellboy 2: The Golden Army. So, Neil got picked instead. Lord of the Rings special effects gurus WETA Workshop were chosen to handle the Halo movie’s effects.
Unfortunately, Neill Blomkamp wasn’t happy with giving fans what they wanted. He began insisting he would do something different. Instead of making a Halo movie where a warrior battles his way across a mysterious alien ring and uncovers its secrets, Neill wanted to make a cyberpunk film.
Blomkamp spent five months at WETA rewriting the Alex Garland screenplay, a screenplay that most thought was already perfect. When he was done, Fox did not like the idea, and they knew Microsoft would hate it even more.
The only people in Blomkamp’s corner were Bungie, the developers of Halo. Despite being almost certain to alienate their fans, Bungie loved the cyberpunk style Blomkamp planned for the film. Their support didn’t matter. Fox was getting sick of battling with Microsoft, and the entire project imploded in a fireball of greed and ego.
The Slow, Final Death Of The Halo Movie
The potential for profit lingered for a few years, occasionally drawing in newly interested parties.For instance, in 2010, DreamWorks briefly considered taking a stab at making the Halo movie. Just as Neill had a different vision for the film, DreamWorks also wanted to explore the Halo novels instead of the games.
Their idea was to sidestep Microsoft and its ties to the game entirely. It was as if creatives refused to take the game seriously and wanted to slap the name on something different. None of the execs involved thought that was a good idea either, so after a few months, they abandoned that idea too.
Microsoft proved difficult to work with, Hollywood’s entrenched interests were uncooperative, and Halo was just too big for anyone to be willing to spend the kind of money on it that the franchise deserved. No one wanted that kind of risk. Halo was dead as a potential movie franchise.
Halo’s Creators Abandon Their Franchise
Amidst all of the mess, Halo’s creators at Bungie seemed to give up on their cash cow. From Halo: Combat Evolved in 2001 through Halo 3 in 2007, the series reflected Bungie’s priorities, not Microsoft’s long-term brand strategy. By 2007, Bungie was openly eager to move on. The studio no longer wanted to be defined by a single franchise, while Microsoft wanted Halo to outlive any one creative team.
A separation agreement formalized this shift. Bungie would finish Halo 3: ODST (2009) and Halo: Reach (2010), effectively closing its own chapter, while Microsoft consolidated full control of the IP.
Given Bungie’s willingness to let Neill Blomkamp ruin their universe with his bizarre cyberpunk plans, some Halo fans might have felt optimistic about the change. But the truth is, the day Microsoft took over fully is the day fan enthusiasm began to wane.
The Halo TV Show No One Wanted
Microsoft’s inept stewardship eventually resulted in a Halo TV show, released in 2022, long after Halo’s peak, and produced by Steven Spielberg’s Amblin Television. If you’ve seen it, you hated it. The TV series used almost nothing from the game and ignored the basic fundamentals of the Halo universe.
For instance, not only did Master Chief take his helmet off, but he also almost never wore it. They even failed to get Cortana right. She ended up as a minor character who was never with Master Chief for more than a minute in the show’s entire run.
The Halo TV series seemed to go out of its way to avoid showing anything good. Characters often talked about cool things happening off camera, but aside from three or four minutes of actual style Halo combat (spread throughout the entire two seasons), nothing Halo-like ever happened. There wasn’t even a ring.
Now, with the failure of the Halo TV series, it’s unlikely anyone will want to invest time and money in a Halo movie. If you’ve seen the TV series, then you know they didn’t invest much money in that either.
Halo’s Future Is Not Bright
The idea of a Halo movie is dead, for now. Maybe in a far-off future not yet seen, fans will finally get the Halo movie they’ve wanted and deserved. But even that feels unlikely. Microsoft itself now seems to have given up on the Halo brand.
In 2025, they announced that Halo would no longer be an Xbox exclusive and instead would be cross-platform. They don’t think it’s enough of a draw to bother with anymore.
Worse, there hasn’t been a new Halo game released in years, and there aren’t any plans for it. Instead, word is that the old games will simply be remade and ported over to new platforms.
It didn’t have to be this way. When those multi colored Spartans marched through Hollywood, they weren’t just selling a script; they were marching toward a once-in-a-generation sci-fi opportunity. This could have been, and should have been, the Millennial Star Wars.
Greed, ego, and a failure to take gamers seriously doomed it all. Now, Halo is on life support, a dying franchise with little to look forward to, and fans with nothing to do but remember the glory days of midnight line release parties and wonder what if.
Entertainment
Cameron Diaz And Christina Applegate's Ultra-Raunchy, R-Rated Comedy Is A Forgotten Classic
By Chris Snellgrove
| Published
Did you know that one of the most celebrated film genres of the ‘80s and ‘90s has quietly died? The genre in question is the R-rated comedy, one typified by vintage classics such as Porky’s and American Pie. These movies won over audiences through a simple combination of raunchy jokes and scantily clad stars.
These days, the R-rated comedy has been retired in favor of streamer-friendly slop, and it’s nearly impossible to find films featuring this potent combination of dirty jokes and exposed flesh. But over two decades ago, we got a criminally underappreciated sex comedy with a twist: instead of focusing on men, it focuses on women proving just how much they love to get nasty when the boys aren’t around. That film is The Sweetest Thing (2002), and you can now stream this star-studded classic for free on Tubi!
Treat Yourself To Some Pleasure
The premise of The Sweetest Thing is that Cameron Diaz plays a woman with a reputation for loving and leaving men so that she can keep enjoying the single life. However, she runs into a man who pushes back against her take-charge attitude, getting under her skin like no man ever had before. After getting an invite to a wedding the man is attending, she embarks on a raunchy road trip with her best friends, proving once and for all that the fairer sex can be just as rude, crude, and hilariously nasty as any man.
For a relatively unknown raunch comedy, The Sweetest Thing has a really star-studded cast, including Christina Applegate (best known for Married…With Children) as a divorce lawyer and BFF who really holds her gal pals together. Selma Blair (best known for Cruel Intentions) plays one of those pals, someone who might just rebound with a confident hunk played by Thomas Jane (best known for Boogie Nights). He has a chauvinistic brother played by Jason Bateman (best known for Arrested Development); however, the performer who anchors the entire thing is Cameron Diaz (best known for Charlie’s Angels), who delivers a dirty-talking, fearlessly raunchy performance that may forever change how you see this cinematic girl-next-door.
Hated By The Critics
The Sweetest Thing proved to be a modest box office success, earning $68.7 million against a $43 million budget. Sadly, the film didn’t prove to be the same kind of pop culture phenomenon that earlier gross-out movies like There’s Something About Mary were. However, this movie did cement Cameron Diaz (who notably played Mary in the earlier film) as an actress who is never afraid to get down and dirty in order to make the audience laugh.
When The Sweetest Thing came out, critics really hated it: the movie has a 25 percent critical rating on Rotten Tomatoes, with reviewers complaining about the thin plot and the bevy of hit-or-miss gags. However, it’s worth noting that the movie has a 64 percent critical score. This helps prove that this raunchy film is quite the crowd-pleaser, with audiences deeming it “fresh” even as critics declared it downright rotten.
More Than A Few Surprises
So, the critics hated it, and it wasn’t exactly a box office darling. Why, then, should you watch The Sweetest Thing? The short answer is that it is funny in the most transgressive way, and if you have a dirty mind (it’s not just me, right?), you’ll find plenty to love in this raucously funny raunchiest.
Then and now, part of what makes The Sweetest Thing so entertaining is that it is an unflinchingly gender swapped version of the “boys behaving badly” genre of film. Even if you’ve seen male-led movies like The Hangover a million times, there is something refreshing about seeing women take part in the same kinds of gross-out gags and filthy conversations usually reserved for men. It helps that the central actors embrace the sex jokes with such gusto, and Cameron Diaz’s hypnotic performance is practically an ecstasy of exhibitionism.
Guys are sure to enjoy the film; after all, it’s filled with hot ladies, dirty talk, and nudity, all of which can reliably rev a fellow’s motor. But The Sweetest Thing is designed by and for women, and much of its humor works by making men the butt of some fairly hilarious jokes.
Time To Get Down And Dirty
The scene is funny in and of itself, but the punchline doesn’t come from girls behaving badly; rather, it comes from the fact that guys are so easy to manipulate when it comes to anything and everything naughty. This is just one small example of the film’s surprising emphasis on sex positivity and its emphasis on female agency. It’s the rare raunchy comedy framed from the perspective of the female gaze, but most men will be too busy laughing to realize that male horniness is the butt of each and every surprisingly funny joke.
Will you agree that The Sweetest Thing deserves more love when you watch it on Netflix, or will these gals gross you out before the end of the first scene? The only way to find out is to stream the film and rediscover this overlooked classic for yourself. If nothing else, you’ll never look at Cameron Diaz the same way after these credits roll!
Entertainment
NYT Pips hints, answers for February 28, 2026
Welcome to your guide to Pips, the latest game in the New York Times catalogue.
Released in August 2025, the Pips puts a unique spin on dominoes, creating a fun single-player experience that could become your next daily gaming habit.
Currently, if you’re stuck, the game only offers to reveal the entire puzzle, forcing you to move onto the next difficulty level and start over. However, we have you covered! Below are piecemeal answers that will serve as hints so that you can find your way through each difficulty level.
How to play Pips
If you’ve ever played dominoes, you’ll have a passing familiarity for how Pips is played. As we’ve shared in our previous hints stories for Pips, the tiles, like dominoes, are placed vertically or horizontally and connect with each other. The main difference between a traditional game of dominoes and Pips is the color-coded conditions you have to address. The touching tiles don’t necessarily have to match.
The conditions you have to meet are specific to the color-coded spaces. For example, if it provides a single number, every side of a tile in that space must add up to the number provided. It is possible – and common – for only half a tile to be within a color-coded space.
Here are common examples you’ll run into across the difficulty levels:
-
Number: All the pips in this space must add up to the number.
-
Equal: Every domino half in this space must be the same number of pips.
-
Not Equal: Every domino half in this space must have a completely different number of pips.
-
Less than: Every domino half in this space must add up to less than the number.
-
Greater than: Every domino half in this space must add up to more than the number.
If an area does not have any color coding, it means there are no conditions on the portions of dominoes within those spaces.
Easy difficulty hints, answers for Feb. 28 Pips
Number (6): Everything in this space must add up to 6. The answer is 6-4, placed horizontally.
Equal (4): Everything in this space must be equal to 4. The answer is 4-0, placed horizontally; 6-4, placed horizontally; 4-4, placed vertically.
Equal (0): Everything in this purple space must be equal to 0. The answer is 4-0, placed horizontally; 0-5, placed horizontally.
Greater Than (4): Everything in this space must be greater than 4. The answer is 0-5, placed horizontally.
Number (6): Everything in this space must add up to 6. The answer is 6-2, placed vertically.
Medium difficulty hints, answers for Feb. 28 Pips
Greater Than (1): Everything in this space must be greater than 1. The answer is 5-2, placed horizontally.
Mashable Top Stories
Number (9): Everything in this space must add up to 9. The answer is 5-2, placed horizontally; 4-0, placed vertically.
Number (0): Everything in this space must add up to 0. The answer is 4-0, placed vertically.
Number (3): Everything in this space must add up to 3. The answer is 1-1, placed vertically; 2-1, placed horizontally; 0-5, placed vertically.
Equal (2): Everything in this space must be equal to 2. The answer is 2-1, placed horizontally; 2-2, placed vertically.
Greater Than (0): Everything in this space must be greater than 0. The answer is 1-4, placed horizontally.
Number (15): Everything in this space must add up to 15. The answer is 0-5, placed vertically; 1-4, placed horizontally; 6-2, placed horizontally.
Greater Than (1): Everything in this space must be greater than 1. The answer is 6-2, placed horizontally.
Hard difficulty hints, answers for Feb. 28 Pips
Greater Than (3): Everything in this space must be greater than 3. The answer is 5-2, placed vertically.
Equal (2): Everything in this purple space must be equal to 2. The answer is 5-2, placed vertically; 3-2, placed vertically.
Number (2): Everything in this space must add up to 2. The answer is 1-3, placed vertically; 1-4, placed vertically.
Number (1): Everything in this space must add up to 1. The answer is 6-1, placed horizontally.
Less Than (6): Everything in this space must be greater than 6. The answer is 4-5, placed horizontally.
Number (6): Everything in this space must add up to 6. The answer is 3-3, placed vertically.
Number (5): Everything in this space must add up to 5. The answer is 1-3, placed vertically; 2-4, placed horizontally.
Number (4): Everything in this space must add up to 4. The answer is 4-6, placed vertically.
Equal (4): Everything in this space must be equal to 4. The answer is 4-4, placed vertically; 1-4, placed vertically; 4-5, placed horizontally; 2-4, placed horizontally; 4-0, placed vertically.
Number (0): Everything in this space must add up to 0. The answer is 4-0, placed vertically.
Number (3): Everything in this space must add up to 3. The answer is 6-3, placed horizontally.
If you’re looking for more puzzles, Mashable’s got games now! Check out our games hub for Mahjong, Sudoku, free crossword, and more.
Entertainment
New Scream Movie Panned By Critics Over Politics, Breaks Franchise Box-Office Records
By Jennifer Asencio
| Published
According to film critics, Scream 7 is the death of the franchise. With an aggregate of 33% from 120 critic reviews as of this writing, it’s easy to believe they are right. There is just one problem: the movie is so popular that it’s poised to break opening-weekend franchise records.
The previous record was set by Scream VI, which opened with $44 million. The new movie is projected to approach or break $50 million, with some estimates as high as $59 million. Fans gave Scream 7 a 77% rating on Rotten Tomatoes, indicating a big gap between audiences and critics.
How Politics Influences The Reviews Of Critics
The one thing that all the bad reviews have in common is discussion of the firing of Melissa Barerra and the subsequent departure of Jenna Ortega, both of whom played characters central to the two previous installations. Barerra was fired for making inflammatory remarks about Israel’s response to the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack, sentiments which are shared by many in the entertainment industry; Ortega left in protest of Barrera’s dismissal. A lot of critics and major entertainment news venues sympathize with Barrera’s views, and some of these are gleefully reporting the Rotten Tomatoes critics’ ratings as though it means something for the movie.
Critics also infamously panned the biopic of the First Lady, Melania, with an even wider gap of 11% based on 53 reviews, while over 1000 audience reviewers average 98%. They are also offering great praise to the politically motivated series Starfleet Academy, the latest Star Trek show that hasn’t really resonated with fans, but which we keep being told is the best Star Trek yet. Meanwhile, the Daily Wire+ show The Pendragon Cycle has been ignored by mainstream critics, with no score on Rotten Tomatoes at all, not even a 0, despite an average of 85% from viewers.
What this all indicates is that industry reviewers are circling the wagons based on political divides rather than giving honest reviews. They are evaluating movies with greater consideration of whether they check certain boxes off-screen, and are boycotting or panning films that don’t neatly fit their mold. Critics are relying on their authority as insiders to dictate culture through the lens of politics rather than examining movies on their own merits and audience potential.
Professional Review Bombing
Some commenters have even accused the collective of mainstream critics of “review bombing” Scream 7. Review bombing is a phenomenon in which individuals give a movie a bad rating for some motive outside the show. Recently, a review bombing war between A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms fans and Breaking Bad fans resulted in the IMDB rating of the latter’s crowning episode, “Ozymandias,” being reduced to a 9.5 from a perfect 10. The war started because the Game of Thrones spinoff received some bad reviews from Breaking Bad fans, who may or may not have been acting in bad faith.
However, those are individuals, even if some of them coordinated via an internet campaign. They are not the professionals relied on to be unbiased and to evaluate movies and television based on the productions themselves, not on who made them or their politics. The fact that the critics don’t seem to be connected to what audiences seem to want makes it even worse, because we are all being told that liking the stuff we like makes us bigoted if they don’t like it. And they also seem to think that if they ignore it altogether, like with The Pendragon Cycle, that maybe it will slip by unnoticed.
How much of our culture is being suppressed by critics with political agendas? Scream 7 indicates that the question needs to be asked as it is such a runaway hit that the motives of mainstream reviewers may not be critique, but activism.
Cale Makar scores twice as Avalanche break through against Blackhawks
Michigan G L.J. Cason (ACL) to miss rest of season
