Author: rb809rb

  • ‘Hokum’ Review: Adam Scott is Trapped in a Haunted Irish Hotel in Effectively Unnerving but Convoluted Horror

    ‘Hokum’ Review: Adam Scott is Trapped in a Haunted Irish Hotel in Effectively Unnerving but Convoluted Horror

    In “Hokum,” a new supernatural horror outing from Irish filmmaker Damian McCarthy, an American writer, Ohm Bauman (Adam Scott), finds himself on the verge of finishing his popular book series about a conquistador with a bleak ending. McCarthy opens the film in the desert with the conquistador from Ohm’s imagination about to commit murder. The scene is interrupted when in the scribe’s home, shrouded in darkness, eerie sounds distract him from what’s on his digital page. The jump scares start there but will only intensify when Ohm travels to the wooded area in Ireland where his now deceased parents spent their honeymoon.

    With two other horror features to his name (“Caveat,” “Oddity”), McCarthy has mastered how to conjure up unnerving scenes in mundane spaces, but in this case the accumulation of ideas inside his cauldron makes for a convoluted concoction.  

    During the first act, McCarthy plants several characters in and around the charmingly outdated hotel where Ohm is staying for the viewer to suspect of wrongdoing later on. There’s the elderly owner (Brendan Conroy), whose only scene sees him spook a pair of children by telling them about a vicious witch from folktales. Witnessing this interaction with disdain, Ohm reveals his antagonistic personality. He wants to be left alone to work, but he’s an author of substantial fame, so the employees, among them the well-meaning receptionist Mal (Peter Coonan), are curious about his visit. Scott plays to his strengths as a performer with an ironic demeanor well-versed in deadpan humor. In an early scene, he viciously belittles timid bellhop and aspiring writer Alby (Will O’Connell). Scott inflicts Ohm’s nonchalant meanness with a piercingly perverse matter-of-factness that places the character as far away as possible from the realm of likeability. He’s an arrogant jerk.

    Lurking in the forest is Jerry (David Wilmot), a vagabond living in his van, whose animosity with Fergal (Michael Patric), the inn owner’s prickly adult son, will play a role in how the days ahead will go haywire. And then there’s Fiona (Florence Ordesh), a bartender whose exchange with Ohm introduces him to the mystery of the honeymoon suite, which hasn’t been used in years. Fiona and Alby suggest the reason could be the presence of a witch. Ohm, a cynical skeptic, dismisses their claims. On that same night, Halloween, a suicide attempt, and a disappearance rattle the old hotel. McCarthy then thrusts Ohm into a pursuit of the truth, and of Fiona’s whereabouts. He eventually arrives in the dreaded honeymoon suite.

    The time that Ohm spends trapped in that off-limits room, overnight and in near darkness save for a small lamp, packs the film’s most effective scares, but even as information about what’s occurring at this establishment comes to light, more questions about how it’s all meant to fit together arise. The talent of cinematographer Colm Hogan maintains every object and Scott legible to the eye during this extended passage where everything appears coated in gray hues. The hotel’s outdated amenities and overall look — you can almost whiff a musty odor emanating from its dusty fixtures — lend themselves to the narrative: an old bell that communicates with reception or what looks like a dumbwaiter that goes down to the basement are integral to how the plot unfurls. McCarthy astutely uses specific production design elements to heighten the uneasiness of these sequences.

    Nightmarish visions of Ohm’s childhood involving his mother suggest that his personal trauma is also haunting him here, not only the witch that Alby claims to have seen before. Though intensely disturbing, a scene where a TV shows a distorted iteration of a character that Ohm watched as a kid rings out of place, even if the context involves his mother’s tragic passing. On top of these apparitions, a human foe, whose motives for committing a crime seem rather nebulous, also exists. The combination of ghosts, dark magic practitioners, and a flesh-and-blood villain turns “Hokum” into an overstuffed, otherworldly entanglement. In that sense, the content lives to its title as a collection of larger-than-life bizarre elements.

    McCarthy’s previous effort, “Oddity,” about a spirit haunting a home, was a more focused exploration of unseen presences interacting with the mortal plane with righteous intentions. Nonetheless, there’s plenty of terror inducing imagery in “Hokum” that will satisfy the craving for a visceral scare. These shots mostly come in the form of horrifying faces or masks that momentarily peek through the darkness. Probably none of them match the shock of one particular instance in “Oddity,” but McCarthy knows the language and timing to deploy these moments and succeed at jolting the audience.

    McCarthy subverts expectations in that most characters reveal themselves to be the opposite of the archetypes they were broadly painted as, and yet that doesn’t make “Hokum” feel more original. The filmmaker’s desire to give Jerry a bit of a back story beyond his life on the outskirts of society doesn’t extend to any of the other characters but does somewhat bond him to Ohm in a morbid manner: they both feel judged over the death of a loved one. Buoyed by Scott’s level-headed turn — he doesn’t transform into a scream king — “Hokum” is a proficient horror exploit, which hinges on atmosphere instead of gore, even if its many frightening threads feel disjointed, like rooms in distinctly different hotels.

  • 65% of Bitcoin Safe From Quantum Computing Threat

    65% of Bitcoin Safe From Quantum Computing Threat

    A new research report suggests quantum computing poses a long-term risk to bitcoin but is unlikely to threaten the network anytime soon. Experts say advances will occur gradually, giving developers and investors time to implement post-quantum security upgrades.

    New Research Says Quantum Risk to Bitcoin Is Real but Not Immediate

    A new research report by Ark Invest and bitcoin-focused financial services company Unchained, examining the intersection of quantum computing and bitcoin security, concluded that while quantum technology could eventually challenge the network’s cryptography, the threat remains far from imminent.

    According to the study, current quantum systems operate in what researchers call the “Noisy Intermediate-Scale Quantum” (NISQ) era, where machines typically run with fewer than 100 logical qubits and limited computational depth. Breaking bitcoin’s elliptic curve cryptography would require at least 2,330 logical qubits and millions to billions of quantum operations, far beyond today’s capabilities.

    Instead of a sudden “Q-day” where bitcoin security collapses, researchers argue that quantum progress will likely unfold through a series of gradual technological milestones. These stages range from early scientific applications, such as materials simulation and chemistry, to the eventual ability to attack weak cryptographic systems.

    Only in later stages could quantum computers begin to threaten bitcoin’s elliptic curve digital signature algorithm (ECDSA), which secures private keys and transactions.

    Even then, attacks would likely be slow and costly, requiring significant computational resources. The report estimates that electricity costs alone could reach around $100,000 to break a single bitcoin key in early quantum attack scenarios.

    Vulnerable Bitcoin Supply

    Researchers estimate that roughly 35% of the total Bitcoin supply could theoretically be exposed to future quantum risks. This includes about 1.7 million $BTC stored in older address types believed to be lost and roughly 5.2 million $BTC in reusable addresses that could be migrated to safer formats.

    However, the majority of bitcoin remains stored in quantum-resistant address formats, and developers already have potential solutions in motion.

    Several initiatives are underway across the crypto ecosystem. Exchanges like Coinbase have established quantum advisory boards, while developers are discussing proposals such as Bitcoin Improvement Proposal (BIP) 360, which explores new address types designed to withstand quantum attacks.

    Preparing Before the Threat Arrives

    Security researchers emphasize that the broader internet, including banking systems, government communications, and cloud infrastructure, would face disruption long before bitcoin itself becomes vulnerable.

    In parallel, post-quantum cryptography (PQC) standards are already being developed and deployed across the internet infrastructure. If necessary, bitcoin could eventually integrate similar cryptographic upgrades through protocol changes.

    For investors and network participants, the takeaway is clear: quantum computing represents a long-term technological challenge rather than an urgent security crisis.

    As with most transformative technologies, progress will likely unfold over decades, providing the bitcoin ecosystem ample time to adapt.

  • Bitcoin sold off first when the U.S.-Iran war began. Two weeks later, it’s outperforming nearly everything

    Bitcoin was the first asset to price the Iran war because it was the only liquid market open when U.S. and Israel first launched their attack on a Saturday, a few weeks ago.

    It dropped 8.5% that day. Two weeks later, it has outperformed gold, the S&P 500, Asian equities, and the Korean stock market. Only oil and the dollar have done better, and both are direct beneficiaries of the conflict itself.

    Bitcoin’s safe-haven status — a notion that was contested amid late last year’s price lull — seems to be back in investors’ minds. On top of that, it’s acting like the fastest shock absorber in global markets as escalations are getting bigger while drawdowns are getting smaller.

    The pattern becomes clearer when looking at where bitcoin found buyers after each sell-off.

    On Feb. 28, the day of the initial strikes, it bottomed at $64,000. On March 2, after Iran’s retaliatory missiles hit Gulf states, the floor was $66,000. By March 7, after a week of sustained conflict, the low was $68,000. After the tanker attacks on March 12, it held $69,400. And after Kharg Island on Saturday, the low was $70,596.

    In simpler terms, each selloff finds buyers at a higher level than the last.

    The trendline of higher lows has been rising by roughly $1,000-$2,000 per event, compressing the range from below, while $73,000-$74,000 holds as a ceiling that has now rejected bitcoin four times.

    That compression has to resolve eventually. Either the floor catches the ceiling and bitcoin breaks above $74,000 on the next attempt, or the pattern breaks, and a larger escalation finally overwhelms the buying.

    Holding strong

    The most striking part is what bitcoin has done relative to other assets over the same two weeks.

    Oil is up more than 40% since the war began, as the chart below shows. The S&P 500 is down. Gold has been volatile in both directions. Asian equities had their worst week since March 2020.

    All this doesn’t mean bitcoin is suddenly a safe haven, however, as it still sells on every headline. But it recovers faster each time, and each recovery holds at a higher level.

    The contrast with earlier this year is sharp. In early February, a sudden liquidation cascade wiped out $2.5 billion in leveraged positions over a single weekend as bitcoin plunged to $77,000, erasing roughly $800 billion in market value from its October peak.

    That episode looked like the kind of event that could break market confidence for months. Instead, it appears to have cleared out the weakest hands and reset positioning, leaving a leaner market that has absorbed every war headline since without repeating that kind of forced selling.

    The macro overlay adds context, meanwhile. Trump said late Friday he spared oil infrastructure on Iran’s oil-producing Kharg Island “for reasons of decency” but would “immediately reconsider” if Iran kept blocking the Strait of Hormuz. Iran responded that any strike on energy infrastructure would trigger retaliatory attacks on U.S.-linked facilities.

    That conditional threat is new, and if it materializes, the supply disruption the IEA already called the largest in history will get dramatically worse.

    But bitcoin’s adaptation to the war tells traders something about what this market has become.

    It’s not a haven and not purely a risk asset. It has become a 24/7 liquidity pool that absorbs shocks faster than anything else because it’s the only thing trading when the shocks arrive.

  • ‘Hokum’ Review: Adam Scott Gets Spooked in Haunted Irish Hotel Horror Neither Completely Ho-Hum Nor Wholly Satisfying

    ‘Hokum’ Review: Adam Scott Gets Spooked in Haunted Irish Hotel Horror Neither Completely Ho-Hum Nor Wholly Satisfying

    There may be no more fertile ground for screen horror than the enchanted woodlands of the Emerald Isle, which makes it disconcerting when Hokum — a title not entirely inaccurate — opens with a desert scene that’s like an outtake from Sirat. At least until Austin Amelio staggers into the shot in 16th-century conquistador armor, holding an ancient parchment with what appears to be a treasure map. That cumbersome framing device would be superfluous if not for some minor rewards at the end, marking the redemption of a troubled man and his hard-won self-forgiveness.

    But it’s also symptomatic of the frustrations of writer-director Damian McCarthy’s diffuse script, which piles on story points and portentous symbols but fails to elucidate the underlying mystery. It’s a non-negotiable rule for any horror hotelier who wants a decent Yelp rating — or should be — that you don’t put a vengeful ghost in your honeymoon suite if you’re not planning on adequately explaining who she is and how she got there. Otherwise, it’s just, well, hag hokum, with a bunch of loose threads.

    Hokum

    The Bottom Line

    Nothing the Irish tourism board need worry about.

    Venue: SXSW Film Festival (Midnighter)
    Release date: Friday, May 1
    Cast: Adam Scott, Peter Coonan, David Wilmot, Florence Ordesh, Will O’Connell, Michael Patric, Austin Amelio, Brendan Conroy
    Director-screenwriter: Damian McCarthy

    Rated R,
    1 hour 41 minutes

    Adam Scott plays Ohm Bauman, a successful American novelist struggling with the epilogue for the final part of his series known as The Conquistador Trilogy. Seemingly at random after being unsettled by a presence while writing late one night, he takes off for Ireland to scatter his long-deceased parents’ ashes. For a guy whose name is practically a Buddhist chant, Ohm is tetchy, rude and disinclined to hide his American entitlement, alienating the staff as he checks in at the quaint old Billberry Woods Hotel.

    His choice of lodgings is based on the knowledge that his folks stayed there on their honeymoon; the one photograph Ohm has of his mother (Mallory Adams) shows her leaning against a tree in the nearby forest, identified on the back in her handwriting as “the big redwood.” The circumstances of her death, just a short time after the Ireland trip, are at the root of reclusive Ohm’s misanthropic nature.

    He gets off on the wrong foot with gruff hotel handyman Fergal (Michael Patric); has little time for the inane pleasantries of front desk clerk Mal (Peter Coonan); even less patience with Alby (Will O’Connell), a chatty bellhop who aspires to be a writer; and he snaps like an indignant Karen at crusty hotel owner Mr. Cobb (Brendan Conroy) for telling a story about an evil crone to impressionable children. Only the bartender, Fiona (Florence Ordesh), gets semi-civil treatment from him, which pays off when her concern saves Ohm from potential tragedy.

    There are a lot of danger signals in the opening scenes — Mr. Cobb’s tale of a witch that takes lost travelers on a tour of the underworld; Fergal slaughtering goats with his trusty crossbow because they keep jumping on guests’ cars; dotty Jerry (David Wilmot) living out of his van in the woods, who recommends a swig of powdered magic mushrooms in goat’s milk to outrun the demons. Then there’s the mysterious honeymoon suite, which according to Fiona has been kept locked for years, since Cobb trapped the witch in there.

    When Ohm returns after a spell in hospital, one staffer has gone missing since Halloween, Jerry is the No. 1 suspect, and the hotel is closing for the season. Still, Ohm finds a way to stick around, and when the honeymoon suite call bell starts ringing insistently, he goes exploring.

    McCarthy, editor Brian Phillip Davis and composer Joseph Bishara keep the tension mounting as murky deeds come to light and Ohm finds himself trapped in a place where the past is coming for him. Looking increasingly grubby and haggard as the action wears on, Scott is appropriately rattled and desperate, resorting to a protective chalk circle for safety and a rickety dumbwaiter for possible escape — an effectively claustrophobic visual if not much more. The writer has both the living and the dead to worry about, not to mention his own tortured history.

    While it’s a little low on scares, Hokum is pacey and involving enough to keep genre fiends watching once it hits streaming, just for production designer Til Frohlich’s creepy hotel set alone, a place that looks untouched by the passing years. But the writer-director smudges the lines separating an ancient evil from a sordid but disappointingly non-supernatural crime.

    If you were expecting those dead goats being dumped in the forest, that redwood or a conspicuously featured bunny suit to amount to some kind of malevolent-nature payback, or the witch upstairs to be traced back to a living person rather than just your everyday demonic, chain-dragging ghoul, forget it.

    Instead, we get a pointless return to the conquistador in the desert, a fictional story whose allegorical reference to Ohm and his childhood trauma is sketchy at best. All this does is intrude on an otherwise sturdy final scene between the novelist and the undaunted Alby, whose manuscript might be a new nightmare.

  • Bahrain and Saudi Arabia F1 race cancellations confirmed due to Iran war

    Bahrain and Saudi Arabia F1 race cancellations confirmed due to Iran war

    Bahrain and Saudi Arabia’s Formula One Grands Prix races will not be held in April on safety grounds due to the war.

    Formula One and its governing body, FIA, said the Grands Prix races in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia will not happen in April due to safety concerns related to the Iran war.

    Both countries have been hit during Iran’s retaliatory attacks after the United States and Israel launched a wave of strikes on Iran.

    Recommended Stories

    list of 4 itemsend of list

    The announcement was made early on Sunday morning in Shanghai ahead of the Chinese Grand Prix.

    “Due to the ongoing situation in the Middle East region, the Bahrain and Saudi Arabian Grands Prix will not take place in April,” F1 said. “While several alternatives were considered, it was ultimately decided that no substitutions will be made in April.”

    F1 was due to race in Bahrain on April 12 and in the Saudi Arabian city of Jeddah on April 19.

    “While this was a difficult decision to take, it is unfortunately the right one at this stage considering the current situation in the Middle East,” said Stefano Domenicali, president and CEO of F1.

    “The FIA will always place the safety and well being of our community and colleagues first. After careful consideration, we have taken this decision with that responsibility firmly in mind,” FIA’s president, Mohammed Ben Sulayem, said.

    The FIA did not explicitly rule out rescheduling the races and, along with F1, did not use the words “cancel” or “postpone” in announcing that the series would not be in Bahrain or Saudi Arabia next month.

    “Bahrain and Saudi Arabia are incredibly important to the ecosystem of our racing season, and I look forward to returning to both as soon as circumstances allow,” Ben Sulayem said.

    The promoters of the races in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia said they supported the decision.

    F1’s packed schedule does not have any obvious open dates for rescheduled races this year.

    Calling off the Bahrain and Saudi Arabian races means there will be a five-week gap from the Japanese Grand Prix on March 29 and the next race, the Miami Grand Prix, on May 3. Without any rescheduling, the 22-race schedule would be the shortest since 2023.

    The two Middle East races were not to happen until next month, but F1 faced making a decision earlier because it typically flies in the first staff and cargo to tracks weeks in advance. F1 was also faced with the difficulty of selling tickets at short notice, which makes it almost impossible to set up a replacement race in other countries.

    Kimi Antonelli, the Mercedes driver who qualified on pole position for Sunday’s race in Shanghai, said his thoughts were “with the ones that are suffering from this situation” and that safety needed to be the priority.

    “I’m sure they will do the right thing,” he said of FIA and F1.

    The schedule is a joint matter for FIA and for F1’s commercial rights holder, and teams had signalled a willingness to follow their lead.

    “I think we follow the guidance of the FIA and Formula 1, as we always do. They’ve always led us in the right direction,” Audi team principal Jonathan Wheatley said on Friday. “Nobody’s going to compromise on anything that would put teams into an uncomfortable situation.”

    Bahrain had already hosted two preseason F1 tests this season, before Israel and the US launched attacks on Iran. A smaller-scale test of wet-weather tyres was called off in the immediate aftermath of the strikes.

    A travel shutdown affecting major airports in the Middle East also caused disruption for Europe-based F1 and team staff heading to Melbourne for the season-opening Australian Grand Prix.

    The last time a scheduled F1 race was cancelled was in 2023, when the Emilia Romagna Grand Prix in northern Italy was called off at short notice due to deadly floods in the area.

    In 2022, F1 continued with its race weekend in Saudi Arabia, even after Yemen’s Houthi rebels attacked an oil depot during a practice session, with black smoke visible from the Jeddah circuit.

    The same year, F1 cancelled the Russian Grand Prix’s contract after Russia’s full-scale invasion of neighbouring Ukraine.

  • ‘Their Town’ Review: A Familiar but Lovely Coming-of-Age Tale from Katie Aselton and the Duplass Family

    ‘Their Town’ Review: A Familiar but Lovely Coming-of-Age Tale from Katie Aselton and the Duplass Family

    Between exploring new interests, engaging with new styles and making new friends, our young years are a searching pursuit of identity, and thus one of cinema’s enduring topics. That quest is very much at the heart of director Katie Aselton’s lovely coming-of-age drama “Their Town,” a familiar yet cozily comforting film about the soulful kinships that emerge when we least expect them, enriching our world in ways that are permanent and singular.

    A warm family affair on the page and off — the script is by Aselton’s husband Mark Duplass, with the lead played by their daughter, Ora Duplass — “Their Town” doesn’t just wink with its title at Thornton Wilder’s Pulitzer-winning play “Our Town.” It also embraces its small-town spirit beautifully, finding meaning in life’s ordinary moments when everything else seems high-stakes. Ora’s Abby is certainly experiencing one of those extreme crossroads in her young world, when her boyfriend Tyler (William Atticus Parker) exits the school play they’re co-leading. Does that mean he just doesn’t want to be in a production that he deems stupid, or is a break-up imminent — especially considering Tyler hasn’t always been faithful?

    To the relief of their exceedingly vocal and dramatic director Mr. Elliot (Jeffery Self, vibrant despite an overwrought part that errs on the side of comic-relief cliché), Abby half-heartedly stays behind, getting paired with Matt (Chosen Jacobs) instead. Except Matt had only signed up to do stage work, and isn’t all that interested in playing a romantic lead. Still, the two decide to spend some time after school and practice their parts jointly anyway.

    At first, Abby’s reluctance to stick with the play doesn’t make a lot of sense, especially because we get a strong sense of character from her: “I am my own person,” she insists, early in the film. But when we meet her mother Janet (Kim Shaw), the pieces of the puzzle snap into place. Having been let down by men before, and hoping for a less tough life for her daughter, Janet seems to encourage Abby to stick with the popular Tyler as a way out, confusing her about what her individual priorities should be.

    In an especially well-written and deftly orchestrated scene where Janet and Abby quarrel, with Matt overhearing from another room, their mother-daughter dynamic comes into sharp focus with heartbreak and humor. In the heat of the fight, Janet’s protectiveness of Tyler is surprising: Shouldn’t she encourage her daughter to build a life on her town terms? Then we realize the very point at the heart of “Their Town” (and perhaps our own memories of youth): Grown-ups are older but not always wiser, and young instincts can sometimes be the right ones.

    Settling into this realization, we can blissfully enjoy the unforced chemistry that emerges between Matt and Abby when they head to his family home — a lot more upscale than Abby’s — for practice. We learn that Matt’s parents have been divorced since his father Anthony (Daveed Diggs) came out as a gay man. A loving father, he now often visits his boyfriend Wei (Leonard Nam) abroad, checking in with Matt via Zoom daily. (An especially amusing Zoom call makes for another memorable scene in the film.)

    With their past connections delightfully rediscovered and all the cards on the table, the youngsters spend the evening strolling around their town over confessional conversations, bringing to mind the relaxed rhythms of Richard Linklater’s “Before” trilogy. While their exchanges aren’t quite as deep as Jesse and Celine’s, Abby and Matt are still wonderful screen partners, and ones we root for. A winsome scene with Gloria (Annie Henk), the owner of a taco truck that Abby frequents, furthers that sentiment. Elsewhere, the crisp New England environs of Bangor, Maine provide a stunning backdrop for the proceedings — charming, but not romanticized in an overly syrupy way.

    “Their Town” is less successful when it dials up the dramatic intensity by teasing a mental illness angle for Matt, explaining the episodes that forced his family to move. Fluid and organic until then, the film stumbles a little with this revelation, with even the young cast seeming ill at ease as they navigate a storyline that almost comes out of nowhere. This also makes us question other narrative choices: If Matt’s struggle is so recent, how is his father this comfortable leaving him alone for long periods of time?

    Still, “Their Town” finds its footing, thanks mostly to its exceptional performances and Aselton’s sharp, unfussy direction, which allows the leads’ chemistry and the locale’s warmth speak for themselves. In return, we gladly embrace the gentle touch of this small and spirited film.

  • ‘Sender’ SXSW Review: Britt Lower and Rhea Seehorn Deliver the Goods in a Paranoid Mystery Centered on the Sinister Ease of Online Ordering

    ‘Sender’ SXSW Review: Britt Lower and Rhea Seehorn Deliver the Goods in a Paranoid Mystery Centered on the Sinister Ease of Online Ordering

    The catchy premise motoring “Sender,” a story about a harried woman who moves into a rental home and quickly becomes inundated with packages she didn’t order, transforms beyond its simple, straightforward hook. Writer-director Russell Goldman re-fashions the puzzle box constraints of his short “Return to Sender” into an intricately-faceted feature, making way for a deep character study to emerge, crawling under our skin to truly unnerve in its damning examination of how commercialism is insidiously interwoven into our daily lives. Boldly off-kilter, brilliant and bizarre, its dark humor and taut psychological horror are laced together in a delightfully heady blend.

    Julia (Britt Lower) has recently experienced a few major lifestyle changes. She was fired from her low level job, quit drinking and moved into a rental home three weeks prior to when we first meet her hiding in the kitchen at an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting. After the group breaks for the day, she introduces herself to Whitney (Rhea Seehorn), who appears to be struggling with some light anger issues on top of her drinking problem. Julia asks for Whitney’s help on her sobriety journey, but Whitney is reluctant to agree, offering a recommendation for a different rehab program. Whitney’s compliance doesn’t really matter anyway as Julia is hell-bent on having her as a sponsor, so when Julia’s overbearing, soft-spoken sister Tatiana (Anna Baryshnikov) drops by to check on her, Whitney can provide a buffer.

    Meanwhile, mysterious packages begin showing up to Julia’s home from an Amazon-esque e-commerce site, Smirk. First, it’s a lipstick that’s similar in color to her own signature shade. But then the goods become specifically targeted to items in Julia’s hazy, destructive past, from condoms to jugs of protein powder that her former colleague (Utkarsh Ambudkar) now sells. Even a creepy, homemade duct tape balaclava mask shows up. Not knowing how to proceed, she consults the kindly Smirk delivery driver she’s befriended, Charlie (David Dastmalchian), but he’s not much help either. Julia’s psychosis starts to shatter, overcome by cardboard shipping boxes and torturous insomnia. Matters worsen for her when Tatiana moves in and Whitney disappears. It’s up Julia to battle her way through the corporate red tape to uncover the answers for herself, which turns into trippy, mind-blowing insanity and shattering revelations.

    Goldman keeps things moving at a quick clip to augment the film’s atmospheric pull and tighten the tension. Making the unreliable narrator a recovering alcoholic gives the prickly psycho-thriller a character-driven edge. Her journey towards long-lasting sobriety aligns with her unfolding detective work to find her anonymous aggressor. Characters’ emotional catharses are earned. The mystery of who’s behind it all is revealed in an amusing manner, unfolding before we’re ahead of anyone on screen and never collapsing into lazy, expository speech dumps. Editor Marco Rosas’s montages and abrupt cuts give the proceedings an electric energy and deliberate discomfort.

    The auteur places us directly in his heroine’s tormented psyche through the use of ingenious sound design (courtesy of Nathan Ruyle’s outside the box thinking), unsettling cinematography (courtesy of Gemma Doll-Grossman’s innovative utilization of blurred-edge lenses and light) and a percussive score (courtesy of Gavin Brivik’s compositions forming a cohesive identity through their disparate rhythms). Distressing environmental sounds – like the low crackling hum of a guitar amp ready for use, Julia’s booming punches as she pries open her mystery deliveries, or the sharp surprise of a blender or shower turning on – plug us into Julia’s destabilizing experiences. Her sobering memories are accompanied by stark, cold daylight, shot with a handheld camera to express immediacy and intimacy.

    Because the dialogue is perhaps a little too lean, we’re left to infer some of the character construction through the world these players inhabit. Melisa Myers’ clever production design adds intrigue. Julia’s mixed medium mural hanging on her family room wall clues us into her cluttered, frenzied mindset. Rather than show her living quarters growing messier the longer she’s tormented by her stalker escalating their threats into excruciating psychological warfare, it’s a shrewd juxtaposition to see her home transformed into a tidy, attractive and cozy space.

    The ensemble elevates the sharp material. There are no weak links in the cast either. Lower has the yeoman’s task of heightening the narrative’s frenetic unease. In her capable hands, her flawed heroine is infused with an innate rootability. We like her in spite of her caustic tendencies. She’s absolutely captivating, adopting an imposing physicality when guarded, yet shrinking when scared. She gets her steps in by pacing, jittery from chugging Celsius energy drinks. Seehorn is equally as magnetic a performer. Though she doesn’t have a lot of screen time, she’s a looming presence, thanks to her curt way of dealing with her pesky, persistent charge. Baryshnikov is the soul of the film as the beleaguered victim of Julia’s hijinks. Yet it’s Dastmalchian who serves as the MVP of the supporting cast. He’s charming, tender and vulnerable, striking up sweet (but never saccharine) rom-com-inspired chemistry with Lower.

    In addition to Goldman’s visual dexterity capturing his anti-heroine’s insular life, he exercises a compelling gift for world-building. The prologue, featuring a disabled elderly woman (played by an almost unrecognizable Jamie Lee Curtis, who also serves as the film’s producer) feeling suicidal after opening a package containing a meaningful childhood memento, hints at a larger context in which the filmmaker’s thematic and narrative concepts could exist outside of one film. It’s perfectly suited for expansion through spinoffs, sequels and prequels. With a creeping dread bubbling beneath the surface, ruminating on the ease with which bullies and corporations inextricably insinuate themselves into our lives, “Sender” deserves to be added to your cart.

  • On-Chain Data Shows Why Bitcoin’s Next Stop Could Be At $82K

    On-Chain Data Shows Why Bitcoin’s Next Stop Could Be At $82K

    The Bitcoin price has not particularly impressed over the past two weeks, but it appears to have steadied its movement within a clear consolidation range. In its latest attempt to shine, the premier cryptocurrency faced fierce resistance around $74,000 on Friday, March 13.

    Interestingly, the latest on-chain data suggests that the $74,000 resistance might not be the barrier it appears to be. According to a prominent crypto analyst on the social media platform X, the Bitcoin price seems to have a free runway to return to above the $80,000 mark.

    $BTC Price Has Free Runway To $82,000: Analyst

    Market pundit Ali Martinez took to the X platform to share an on-chain insight into the Bitcoin price movement over the coming weeks, with a return to around $82,000 looking more likely with no obstacles. This on-chain observation is based on the UTXO Realized Price Distribution (URPD) metric, which shows the next relevant levels for $BTC.

    The URPD metric shows how critical a price level is by tracking the volume of cryptocurrency purchased at a specific level. This is because the capacity for a Bitcoin price level to function as a support or resistance zone usually depends on the number of $BTC investors who have their cost basis at the given level.

    Typically, price levels below the current spot value with substantial buying activity are often considered major support regions. Meanwhile, levels above the current price with significant investor cost bases usually function as major resistance areas.

    According to Martinez, the Bitcoin price has entered a low-resistance region, with barely any obstacles in its way until around $82,045. This puts into question the rejection recently faced around the $74,000 mark, which has insignificant investor activity per the UTXO Realized Price Distribution metric.

    A move to this next major on-chain resistance would mean an over 17% surge from the current price point, with an upward movement of that magnitude not seen so far this year. However, if the Bitcoin price doesn’t find the bullish momentum necessary to spur a rally toward the $82,000 mark, the next major support cushion sits at around $66,898.

    Ultimately, it appears that Bitcoin price might be looking to expand its consolidation range, with $82,000 as the potential upper boundary.

    Bitcoin Price Overview

    As of this writing, the price of $BTC stands at around $70,820, reflecting a mere 0.5% jump in the past 24 hours. According to data from CoinGecko, the flagship cryptocurrency is up by more than 3% in the past seven days.

    Featured image from DALL-E, chart from TradingView

  • Ethereum Foundation sells 5,000 ETH to Bitmine to fund operations and grants

    Ethereum Foundation sells 5,000 ETH to Bitmine to fund operations and grants

    The Ethereum Foundation announced today it executed an OTC sale of 5,000 $ETH to Bitmine, the largest Ethereum treasury firm led by Thomas “Tom” Lee.

    0/ Today, the Ethereum Foundation finalized the terms of a 5,000 $ETH sale at an average price of $2,042.96 via OTC.

    For this sale, our OTC counterparty was @BitMNR.

    — Ethereum Foundation (@ethereumfndn) March 14, 2026

    The EF plans to use proceeds from the sale to support its ongoing activities, including protocol research and development, ecosystem growth initiatives, and community grant programs.

    The Foundation still holds approximately 170,000 $ETH worth around $356 million, according to Arkham Intelligence data. The entity has begun staking its treasury $ETH, starting with 2,016 in February and planning to stake about 70,000 $ETH in total.

    Bitmine has steadily accumulated $ETH since launching its treasury strategy last June. The company’s holdings have exceeded 4.5 million units, valued at $9.5 billion at current market prices.

    Over 3 million $ETH is currently staked, producing annualized staking revenues of roughly $174 million, with potential to reach $259 million when fully deployed through its upcoming MAVAN validator network.

    Ethereum Foundation outlines mission and principles in new EF Mandate

    The sale follows the Foundation’s recent release of the EF Mandate, a document defining its role and guiding philosophy in supporting the development of Ethereum.

    The foundation said its primary responsibility is safeguarding Ethereum’s commitment to user self-sovereignty.

    The mandate says the network must remain censorship-resistant, open source, private, and secure, while emphasizing that the foundation is one steward among many, not the network’s authority.

    Disclosure: This article was edited by Vivian Nguyen. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.

  • ‘Manhood’ Review: Documentary Takes a Graphic, Compassionate Look at the Wild World of Penile Enhancement

    ‘Manhood’ Review: Documentary Takes a Graphic, Compassionate Look at the Wild World of Penile Enhancement

    Daniel Lombroso’s new documentary Manhood features the tantalizing subhead, “Inside the secret booming world of penile enhancement,” and while a full review will follow, I think most readers will have three primary questions.

    1. Is Manhood coy regarding its depiction of its subject matter or is it brazen?

    Manhood

    The Bottom Line

    Very gnarly and admirably non-judgmental.

    Venue: SXSW Film Festival (Documentary Spotlight)
    Director: Daniel Lombroso

    1 hour 31 minutes

    Manhood is not coy. Manhood contains a whole lot of dicks. Manhood is not a documentary that you should ever consider watching on an airplane or with elderly conservative relatives. I would say it’s a bad movie to see on a first date, but I don’t know you or your taste in significant others. It’s absolutely a movie that Travis Bickle would go to on a first date, if that helps. Oh and probably it’s not a good movie to watch while eating — not because penises are necessarily good or bad accompaniments for a meal, but because enhancement means surgery and surgery means needles and surgery means botched surgery.

    2. Is Manhood‘s approach to its subject matter earnest or is it jokey?

    There are places in Manhood that will make you laugh, sometimes nervously and sometimes unabashedly, and you will probably find yourself laughing at some of the people in the documentary, because you are mean. The film is not opposed to the occasional piece of puerile humor, like introducing the Dallas skyline exclusively with the decidedly phallic Reunion Tower. But Lombroso is as non-judgmental as one could possibly be regarding this subject matter. You may laugh, but it won’t be because the filmmaker is passing overt judgment. That’s a level of maturity I would not possess, but one that I am capable of respecting a tremendous amount.

    I’d add that you can simultaneously laugh at and find sad truth in this observation from one doctor: “I can fill your penis with filler, but I cannot fill the hole in your heart.”

    3. Assuming that Manhood approaches “the secret booming world of penile enhancement” as one that is impacted by masculine insecurities brought about by our culture, does Joe Rogan get blamed?

    Yup! Manhood is nonjudgmental toward its participants, but that doesn’t mean there is a complete lack of judgment. Joe Rogan and the manosphere podcasts, their advertisers and their guests are treated as perpetrators in an epidemic for which having a big penis is seen as a solution. A finger is pointed in that direction. No finger is pointed precisely at pornography or certain conservative religious groups, but they’re presented as additional sources of anxiety.

    So have I told you everything you need to know? Manhood is a documentary about a subject that will produce much uncomfortable giggling, but it is not a sniggering documentary. It’s a documentary that basically says, “Here is a thing that is happening and here is a clear-eyed glimpse at how and why it’s happening, but what you do with that information is up to you.”

    It left me with questions — some extremely important — and frustration at multiple things that go totally unaddressed. But it’s a movie with a whole lot of dicks that is capable of prompting conversations that go well beyond issues of length (not functionally altered by current surgical procedures) and girth (very much functionally altered by current surgical procedures, but not always in the ways you want) into serious contemplations of what it means when pundits refer to a crisis of masculinity.

    Lombroso chooses to focus on three people:

    Bill Moore runs the AdvancedYou clinic out of a strip mall in Dallas. It appears to do Botox and body sculpting and to have various chambers that freeze and relax you. But for the purposes of the documentary, their major service is penile enhancement — specifically the PhalloFill program, which is itself enhanced with something called a PhalloSleeve, which Bill has patented.

    Ruben is one of Bill’s clients. A father of five who only began enhancing as he approached middle age, Ruben is an aspiring stand-up comic and a huge Joe Rogan fan. His partner says that she didn’t ask Ruben to get these enhancements and she says they make no difference to her, but Ruben insists, multiple times, that she loves it and just doesn’t want to say so. It’s hard to explain why Ruben is doing this, but he likes change and he notes that the world is full of ways that women can alter their appearances, but the same isn’t true for men — therefore he compares what he’s doing to breast augmentation or a BBL.

    Then there’s David, who lives in Miami and comes from a very religious Christian family. David, who hasn’t told his family he’s gay, has a very graphic OnlyFans page with half-a-million subscribers. It’s hard to explain why, but David went to a Miami doctor for an enhancement procedure and it was botched. He has now turned to Bill for help that may require expertise that Bill does not possess or provide, though Bill is happy to help in various other ways.

    If you have an image in your head of the type of person going in for penile enhancement, neither Ruben nor David is precisely what you’re imagining, nor are their motivations precisely what you’re imagining. Bill is probably closer to what you’d picture as the slick-talking proprietor of the operation. Then you see the parade of on-camera urologists who lament how enhancement technology has fallen into the hands of charlatans, but who then gladly work with Bill, who boasts about the amount of aesthetic work he’s done on himself, claiming nobody suspects (which we all surely do).

    There’s an effort here to combat expectations, though we briefly meet a bunch of Bill’s other patients, who conform more to stereotypes. But our featured characters? They’ve all been chosen and edited for backstories that make them worthy of sympathy, even if many viewers may fall short of feeling empathy. Ruben seems brainwashed by one corner of the media, David by a different corner and I guess it’s up for grabs on whether Bill is brainwashed or brainwasher. The point is that male fragility is a thing amplified by the current moment.

    Manhood is sometimes more interested in freaking you out with the quantity and quality of penises — the first “graphic imagery warning” comes 23 minutes in, at which point most viewers will say, “But what were we getting before?” — than going deep (or in some cases even shallow) on, for example, the bigger questions of gender and sexuality raised by the procedure.

    Many of my other unanswered questions are logistical, dealing with legality, certification and qualification for spas and clinics, doctors and clinicians. As in, I don’t completely understand, procedure-wise, what Bill Moore can or cannot do and why he can or cannot do those things, what training he has and whether that’s something we should be concerned with. We definitely should be concerned about the doctors who botch procedures like this, but David’s legal recourse is glossed over. Plus, Bill does several jaw-dropping things in the documentary that sure seem questionable, but are they or should they be?

    Mental health options, from a professional perspective, are discussed, but not nearly enough.

    But maybe Manhood is, more than anything, about legitimizing all serious conversation on this topic and, in establishing that validity, it opens the door for more documentaries in this sphere. That’s worthy, but just remember: Don’t watch Manhood on a plane.