Nebraska plans not to get caught sleeping vs. South Dakota
The Taiwanese defence ministry is on high alert as it monitors the movements of a Chinese aircraft carrier, amid speculations of imminent military exercises by China. Sources suggest that these exercises could coincide with Taiwan President Lai Ching-te's trip to the Pacific, which includes visits to Hawaii and Guam. China, claiming Taiwan as its territory, has repeatedly expressed its displeasure towards President Lai, labeling him a 'separatist.' The Chinese government, already displeased by Lai's U.S. visit, might use military drills to underscore its stance. Recent intelligence indicates a 'busier' than usual maritime activity, possibly signifying preparation for the drills. Adding to the region's military complexity, a Russian naval fleet has approached Taiwan's contiguous zone, conducting simulated joint attacks with Chinese counterparts. These developments, coupled with China's deployment of an aircraft carrier group, amplify concerns over potential military conflict in the region. (With inputs from agencies.)
Pakistan agrees to host ICC Champions Trophy 2025 Under ‘Hybrid Model’ with conditionsHugh Grant ‘s career has entered what the actor himself coined the “freak show stage” of his career. From the oh-so-tiny Oompa Loompa in Wonka to the short-lived Edward Keplinger in The Regime , the seasoned British actor has departed from his romantic lead typecast. For his most recent leading role as Mr. Reed in Heretic , Grant traps two young Mormon missionaries in his basement game of faith and horror. Green-haired, dancing orange man aside, Mr. Reed is his most extreme role to date. Playing a man who traps women in cages is as large a departure as he can take, especially when his origins are largely rooted as charming leads in romantic comedies. And not just any romantic leads. Grant has starred in some of the most iconic romantic comedies: Edward Farris in Ang Lee’s Sense and Sensibility , William Thacker in Richard Curtis ‘ Notting Hill , Charles in Four Weddings and a Funeral (the first of his three films with the famed romance director), David the Prime Minister in Curtis’ Love Actually . Essential to each of these roles, Grant’s charming smile and self-effacing mumble made him a heartthrob of the ’90s and ’00s. But a heartthrob is not exempt from their red flags. Like a wolf in a beloved Englishman’s clothing, Grant’s characters have always been more villainous than they appear. The actor’s breakthrough role as Charles in Four Weddings and a Funeral marked him as good-looking and disarmingly likable. Charles flipped a leading man’s role on his head, appearing as non-threatening and passive, his true motives often taking a backseat to politeness. However, for the friend who forgets rings, arrives late, pursues a woman in a relationship, and abandons his fiancée at the altar, suave and shy are not necessarily the first words that come to mind. Perhaps his most cardinal sin of all was committed in Notting Hill . How did he allow Julia Roberts walk out the door to be ambushed by the paparazzi?! Without her pants?! On multiple occasions, when given the opportunity to profess his feelings to his own heartthrob Anna (played by the real-life movie star Roberts), William chose silence and inaction. He even rejected Anna’s own proposal to pursue the relationship legitimately after he had spent an entire year forlorn about what could have been. Never establishing a backbone to communicate properly with the women he truly loves has perhaps been a throughline of Grant’s romantic career. Even his casting as Edward Farris in the 1995 Sense and Sensibility fits the bill, the price of his inactions and omissions being paid by the woman who loved him most. His most meaningful encounter in the film, in my opinion, came far too late. In the final act, Elinor Dashwood ( Emma Thompson ) realized that Farris had been engaged to and then married a woman of higher society. This was the engagement that Farris had failed to mention during the entirety of their courtship. The man was shelling out his monogrammed kerchiefs left and right. Unforgivable! Lastly, Curtis’ 2003 holiday rom-com Love Actually follows the love stories of 10 different individuals and those in their lives. “Love” is used liberally as Grant is one of the many male characters engaging in inappropriate romantic relationships with his own employees. Grant plays David, the Prime Minister, who initially resists the urge to act on his attraction to a junior member of staff, Natalie ( Martine McCutcheon ). While he presents himself as a moral politician, looking down on the U.S. President ( Billy Bob Thornton ) for making his own advances on Natalie, David acts on his attraction in the end nonetheless. While the pair ends up in a public, seemingly unproblematic relationship (for now) by the end of the film, we can’t overlook their checkered origins. Looking back, Grant has actually always played the villain. We just weren’t looking hard enough. More Headlines:Police appeared to use pepper spray while trying to break up a wild postgame brawl between Ohio State and Michigan . The Fox Sports broadcast caught Wolverines Tavierre Dunlap and Jason Hewlett on the sideline with tearing eyes after apparently being pepper sprayed by police officers on the field. Multiple reports said pepper spray was used to de-escalate the skirmish after the Wolverines’ 13-10 upset of the No. 2 Buckeyes in Columbus, Ohio on Saturday. Other footage showed Michigan defensive lineman Mason Graham seemingly getting pepper sprayed amid the chaos. A third angle shows a police officer pepper-spraying a group of Ohio State players as they try to break up the skirmish. Sports Illustrated senior writer Pat Forde said he was caught in the crossfire. “Just got secondhand pepper sprayed,” Forde wrote on X . The brawl broke out moments after Michigan upset Ohio State as Wolverines players tried to plant their flag on the Buckeye’s logo at midfield. “I don’t know all the details of it, but I know these guys are looking to put a flag on our field and our guys weren’t not gonna let that happen,” Ohio State head coach Ryan Day said after the game. “I’ll find out exactly what happened, but this is our field. We certainly were embarrassed of the fact that we lost the game, but there’s some prideful guys on this team that weren’t just gonna let that happen.” Multiple players could be seen going at it as security, police and team staff tried to separate them. “For such a great game, you hate to see stuff like that after the game,” Michigan running back Kalel Mullings said. “That’s just bad for the sport, bad for college football. But at the end of the day, some people gotta learn how to lose. “You can’t be fighting and stuff just because you lost a game. All that fighting, we had 60 minutes, we had four quarters to do all that fighting. And now people want to talk and fight, that’s wrong. It’s just bad for the game. Classless, in my opinion. People gotta better.” The ugly scene went on for several minutes before tempers calmed. “Unnecessary gesture by the Wolverines,” Fox play-by-play man Gus Johnson said. “They won the game, no need to be disrespectful.”
“Gladiator II” asks the question: Are you not moderately entertained for roughly 60% of this sequel? Truly, this is a movie dependent on managed expectations and a forgiving attitude toward its tendency to overserve. More of a thrash-and-burn schlock epic than the comparatively restrained 2000 “Gladiator,” also directed by Ridley Scott, the new one recycles a fair bit of the old one’s narrative cries for freedom while tossing in some digital sharks for the flooded Colosseum and a bout of deadly sea-battle theatrics. They really did flood the Colosseum in those days, though no historical evidence suggests shark deployment, real or digital. On the other hand (checks notes), “Gladiator II” is fiction. Screenwriter David Scarpa picks things up 16 years after “Gladiator,” which gave us the noble death of the noble warrior Maximus, shortly after slaying the ignoble emperor and returning Rome to the control of the Senate. Our new hero, Lucius (Paul Mescal), has fled Rome for Numidia, on the North African coast. The time is 200 A.D., and for the corrupt, party-time twins running the empire (Joseph Quinn and Fred Hechinger), that means invasion time. Pedro Pascal takes the role of Acacius, the deeply conflicted general, sick of war and tired of taking orders from a pair of depraved ferrets. The new film winds around the old one this way: Acacius is married to Lucilla (Connie Nielsen, in a welcome return), daughter of the now-deceased emperor Aurelius and the love of the late Maximus’s life. Enslaved and dragged to Rome to gladiate, the widower Lucius vows revenge on the general whose armies killed his wife. But there are things this angry young phenom must learn, about his ancestry and his destiny. It’s the movie’s worst-kept secret, but there’s a reason he keeps seeing footage of Russell Crowe from the first movie in his fever dreams. Battle follows battle, on the field, in the arena, in the nearest river, wherever, and usually with endless splurches of computer-generated blood. “Gladiator II” essentially bumper-cars its way through the mayhem, pausing for long periods of expository scheming about overthrowing the current regime. The prince of all fixers, a wily operative with interests in both managing gladiators and stocking munitions, goes by the name Macrinus. He’s played by Denzel Washington, who at one point makes a full meal out of pronouncing the word “politics” like it’s a poisoned fig. Also, if you want a masterclass in letting your robes do a lot of your acting for you, watch what Washington does here. He’s more fun than the movie but you can’t have everything. The movie tries everything, all right, and twice. Ridley Scott marshals the chaotic action sequences well enough, though he’s undercut by frenetic cutting rhythms, with that now-familiar, slightly sped-up visual acceleration in frequent use. (Claire Simpson and Sam Restivo are the editors.) Mescal acquits himself well in his first big-budget commercial walloper of an assignment, confined though he is to a narrower range of seething resentments than Crowe’s in the first film. I left thinking about two things: the word “politics” as savored/spit out by Washington, and the innate paradox of how Scott, whose best work over the decades has been wonderful, delivers spectacle. The director and his lavishly talented design team built all the rough-hewn sets with actual tangible materials the massive budget allowed. They took care to find the right locations in Morocco and Malta. Yet when combined in post-production with scads of medium-grade digital effects work in crowd scenes and the like, never mind the sharks, the movie’s a somewhat frustrating amalgam. With an uneven script on top of it, the visual texture of “Gladiator II” grows increasingly less enveloping and atmospherically persuasive, not more. But I hung there, for some of the acting, for some of the callbacks, and for the many individual moments, or single shots, that could only have come from Ridley Scott. And in the end, yes, you too may be moderately entertained. “Gladiator II” — 2.5 stars (out of 4) MPA rating: R (for strong bloody violence) Running time: 2:28 How to watch: Premieres in theaters Nov. 21. Michael Phillips is a Tribune critic.
Ruto's strategy to regain Mt Kenya backingHow Trump's bet on voters electing him managed to silence some of his legal woes