If rock-n-roll or old-school blues rock and its derivatives are your thing, the pickings these days are slim.

Washy synthesizers and ornately produced rap dominate, which is fine. I'm still trying to figure out how I feel about St. Vincent's "Masseduction," and one of my kids is bringing a lot of contemporary hip-hop into the house, which has actually given me an excuse to revisit the Public Enemy catalog.

But of course I was raised on rock on the 1970s, and at the moment, the authors of that art form are aging toward their final rewards. Presumably. Keith Richards might live forever.

The year 2017 was actually a great one for the dinosaurs. Numerous classic rock Rexes released new albums, and they were all quite good.

Here's a rundown of my favorites:

The Rolling Stones, "Blue & Lonesome"

This might be my favorite Rolling Stones album ever, and I'm a student of their vaunted run of records from the late 1960s through the mid-1970s that featured "Sticky Fingers," "Exile on Main Street," and "It's Only Rock 'n Roll."

"Blue & Lonesome" consists entirely of blues covers, so in a sense it's a true back-to-the-beginning effort from Mick, Keith, Ronnie, and Charlie. The Stones started out as a cover band, determined to preach the gospel of American blues, as Keith once put it. 

The Stones' core garage-band vibe matches up perfectly with heavy, rollicking blues numbers originally composed by Howlin' Wolf, Little Walter, and Willie Dixon. Imagine the young, raw Stones of the early 1960s combined with decades of experience and modern production. The result is just great, but the revelation is Mick Jagger's skill as a harmonica player.

You don't really get a lot of high-profile harmonica albums these days, but the instrument is crucial to the authentic Chicago blues sound, and Mick is a master. As Richards said when recounting how the album — recorded in just a few days and released in December of 2016 (I've grandfathered it into my 2017 list) — came about, he and Ronnie Wood were working up a few blues cover to get the band back into a groove, and Mick's "harp" playing inspired them to keep going.

The goal was basically to get Mick playing more harp, Richards said. Was it ever worth it! (And for good measure, Eric Clapton joins in for a few tracks.)

Jeff Beck, "Loud Hailer"

Beck was one of the three former Yarbirds guitarists — the other two were Eric Clapton and Jimmy Page — to invent the British blues-rock sound of the 196os. But Beck didn't stick with vibe, while Clapton refined the form and Page went on to start Led Zeppelin.

Beck moved in a progressive direction and has been relentlessly and restlessly reinventing himself ever since. It's kept him young, and because he doesn't sing, he's open to new vocal talent. Which he found and then some on "Loud Hailer" in Rosie Bones of the eponymous UK group Bones.

Beck's tone is rich, gruff, scratchy, supple, energized, and virtuosic, usually all at the same time. He has power to burn, and combined with Bones' fierce, confrontational vocals, he unleashes the incandescence on proggy, punky gut-checks such as "Live in the Dark." 

This is a dark, futuristic album that sounds like the soundtrack to something bad. Beck is trying to get our attention. And at 73, he proves he can do it again and again.

This is the most in-your-face record I've listened to from anybody in years. When Beck isn't blowing your mind with the effects he can extract from a Stratocaster, he's captivating your imagination with beautiful phrasing and, huge, chunky riffs.

"Scared for the Children" is the ballad, if you could call it that. More like a warning. Heed it.

Robert Plant, "Carry Fire"

In his late sixties, Plant — with his group the Sensational Shape Shifters — has been exploring a kind of world-music-meets-The-Band semi-solo career.

Zep is ain't, but the yowling, yelping, shrieky vocals that made Plant such an icon in the 1970s aren't really suited to a musician of his stature, as he himself has said many times when asked about a Zep reunion.

Instead, on "Carry Fire," we get a rumbling, meditative Plant, backed by a versatile, crackerjack lineup. Almost all the songs feature rolling, drone-like structures, evocative of Middle-Eastern music and folk. It's hypnotic, and for fans of Plant's post-Zep record with Jimmy Page, an extension of a slightly bluesy take on those traditions, heavy and serious.

What it is, in the end, is classic rock for the thinking person. Standouts are the title track and "Bluebirds Over the Mountain," a simultaneously menacing and uplifting exercise in thrum and feedback that features a guest appearance by Chrissie Hynde.

You can put this one on an endless loop.

This is a preview of a research report from BI Intelligence, Business Insider's premium research service. To learn more about BI Intelligence, click here.

What is eSports? History & Rise of Video Game Tournaments

Years ago, eSports was a community of video gamers who would gather at conventions to play Counter Strike, Call of Duty, or League of Legends.

These multiplayer video game competitions would determine League of Legends champions, the greatest shooters in Call of Duty, the cream of the crop of Street Fighter players, the elite Dota 2 competitors, and more.

But today, as the history of eSports continue to unfold, media giants such as ESPN and Turner are broadcasting eSports tournaments and competitions. And in 2014, Amazon acquired Twitch, the live streaming video platform that has been and continues to be the leader in online gaming broadcasts. And YouTube also wanted to jump on the live streaming gaming community with the creation of YouTube Gaming.

eSports Market Growth Booming

To put in perspective how big eSports is becoming, a Google search for "lol" does not produce "laughing out loud" as the top result. Instead, it points to League of Legends, one of the most popular competitive games in existence. The game has spawned a worldwide community called the League of Legends Championship Series, more commonly known as LCS or LOL eSports.

What started as friends gathering in each other's homes to host LAN parties and play into the night has become an official network of pro gaming tournaments and leagues with legitimate teams, some of which are even sponsored and have international reach. Organizations such as Denial, AHQ, and MLG have multiple eSports leagues.

And to really understand the scope of all this, consider that the prize pool for the latest Dota 2 tournament was more than $20 million.

Websites even exist for eSports live scores to let people track the competitions in real time if they are unable to watch. There are even fantasy eSports leagues similar to fantasy football, along with the large and growing scene of eSports betting and gambling.

So it's understandable why traditional media companies would want to capitalize on this growing trend just before it floods into the mainstream. Approximately 300 million people worldwide tune in to eSports today, and that number is growing rapidly. By 2020, that number will be closer to 500 million.

eSports Industry Analysis - The Future of the Competitive Gaming Market

Financial institutions are starting to take notice. Goldman Sachs valued eSports at $500 million in 2016 and expects the market will grow at 22% annually compounded over the next three years into a more than $1 billion opportunity.

And industry statistics are already backing this valuation and demonstrating the potential for massive earnings. To illustrate the market value, market growth, and potential earnings for eSports, consider Swedish media company Modern Times Group's $87 million acquisition of Turtle Entertainment, the holding company for ESL. YouTube has made its biggest eSports investment to date by signing a multiyear broadcasting deal with Faceit to stream the latter's Esports Championship Series. And the NBA will launch its own eSports league in 2018.

Of course, as with any growing phenomenon, the question becomes: How do advertisers capitalize? This is especially tricky for eSports because of its audience demographics, which is young, passionate, male-dominated, and digital-first. They live online and on social media, are avid ad-blockers, and don't watch traditional TV or respond to conventional advertising.

So what will the future of eSports look like? How high can it climb? Could it reach the mainstream popularity of baseball or football? How will advertisers be able to reach an audience that does its best to shield itself from advertising?

Robert Elder, research analyst for BI Intelligence, Business Insider's premium research service, has compiled an unparalleled report on the eSports ecosystem that dissects the growing market for competitive gaming. This comprehensive, industry-defining report contains more than 30 charts and figures that forecast audience growth, average revenue per user, and revenue growth.

Companies and organizations mentioned in the report include: NFL, NBA, English Premier League, La Liga, Bundesliga, NHL, Paris Saint-Germain, Ligue 1, Ligue de Football, Twitch, Amazon, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, ESPN, Electronic Arts, EA Sports, Valve, Riot Games, Activision Blizzard, ESL, Turtle Entertainment, Dreamhack, Modern Times Group, Turner Broadcasting, TBS Network, Vivendi, Canal Plus, Dailymotion, Disney, BAMTech, Intel, Coca Cola, Red Bull, HTC, Mikonet

Here are some eSports industry facts and statistics from the report:

• eSports is a still nascent industry filled with commercial opportunity.
• There are a variety of revenue streams that companies can tap into.
• The market is presently undervalued and has significant room to grow.
• The dynamism of this market distinguishes it from traditional sports.
• The audience is high-value and global, and its numbers are rising.
• Brands can prosper in eSports by following the appropriate game plan.
• Game publishers approach their Esport ecosystems in different ways.  
• Successful esport games are comprised of the same basic ingredients.
• Digital streaming platforms are spearheading the popularity of eSports.
• Legacy media are investing into eSports, and seeing encouraging results.
• Traditional sports franchises have a clear opportunity to seize in eSports.
• Virtual and augmented reality firms also stand to benefit from eSports.  

In full, the report illuminates the business of eSports from four angles:

• The gaming nucleus of eSports, including an overview of popular esport genres and games; the influence of game publishers, and the spectrum of strategies they adopt toward their respective esport scenes; the role of eSports event producers and the tournaments they operate.
• The eSports audience profile, its size, global reach, and demographic, psychographic, and behavioral attributes; the underlying factors driving its growth; why they are an attractive target for brands and broadcasters; and the significant audience and commercial crossover with traditional sports.
• eSports media broadcasters, including digital avant-garde like Twitch and YouTube, newer digital entrants like Facebook and traditional media outlets like Turner’s TBS Network, ESPN, and Canal Plus; their strategies and successes in this space; and the virtual reality opportunity.
• eSports market economics, with a market sizing, growth forecasts, and regional analyses; an evaluation of the eSports spectacle and its revenue generators, some of which are idiosyncratic to this industry; strategic planning for brand marketers, with case studies; and an exploration of the infinite dynamism and immense potential of the eSports economy.

Interested in getting the full report? Here are two ways to access it:

1. Subscribe to an All-Access pass to BI Intelligence and gain immediate access to this report and over 100 other expertly researched reports. As an added bonus, you'll also gain access to all future reports and daily newsletters to ensure you stay ahead of the curve and benefit personally and professionally. >> START A MEMBERSHIP
2. Purchase & download the full report from our research store. >> BUY THE REPORT

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: 10 things you missed in the new 'Star Wars: The Last Jedi' trailer

• "Saturday Night Live" faced backlash for a joke host Larry David made about the Holocaust.
• The NBC sketch show also took on the Paul Manafort indictment as part of special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia investigation.

Host Larry David made a joke about the Holocaust on "Saturday Night Live" this week, and the online backlash was swift.

With sexual harassment "in the news," David began in his opening monologue, he couldn't help but notice a "disturbing pattern" that "many of the predators — not all, but many of them — are Jews."

"I've always been obsessed with women, and I've often wondered, if I'd grown up in Poland when Hitler came to power, and was sent to a concentration camp, would I still be checking out women in the camp? I think I would," he said, as the audience reacted with a mixture of hesitant laughter and groans.

"The problem is, there are no good opening lines in a concentration camp," he continued, trying a few out in a hypothetical. "'What, what'd I say? Is it me, or is it the whole thing?'"

David was trending on Twitter Sunday morning, and the backlash was made into a Twitter moment. "Did Larry David really just use his platform on SNL to turn a comment about the Weinstein scandal into a holocaust joke?one Twitter user wrote. "Yes. Yes he did." 

Manafort reactions

"SNL" also took on the Paul Manafort indictment in the Russia investigation, opening with Alec Baldwin playing President Donald Trump, and visiting his former campaign chairman on house arrest in his DC apartment.

The two went in the shower "'Gone Girl'-style" to discuss the plan to pardon Manafort in secret. Attorney General Jeff Sesions (played by Kate McKinnon), and Vice President Mike Pence (Beck Bennett) joined them.

Baldwin started by making a dig at disgraced Hollywood executive Harvey Weinstein, whom dozens of women have accused of sexual misconduct.

"What an idiot that Harvey Weinstein is," he said. "He could have gotten away with all of it if only he'd gotten himself elected president."

Their "foolproof" plan was to wait until Thanksgiving, dress Manafort up like a turkey, and pardon him then.

"Weekend Update" also welcomed the president's sons, played by Alex Moffat and Mikey Day, to discuss the Manafort news out of special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia probe.

"So you guys are not worried about this Mueller investigation?" Colin Jost asked them.

"Who Robert Mueller should be investigating, Colin, is Hillary Clinton," Donald Trump, Jr. (Day) responded. "As we learned from Donna Brazile, crooked Hillary and company did some shady backroom deals with the Russians, and tried to rig the election in her favor."

"Just like dad!" Eric Trump (Moffat) interjected.

Elsewhere on episode four of season 43, Miley Cyrus was the musical guest, David revived his popular Sen. Bernie Sanders impression as a "Price is Right" contestant, and Aidy Bryant performed a musical number as White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders.

SEE ALSO: 'SNL' finally takes on the Harvey Weinstein scandal

DON'T MISS: 'SNL' skit depicts Kellyanne Conway as the clown from 'It'

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: 'They’re bad for chefs, they're bad for restaurants' — Anthony Bourdain goes on an epic rant against Yelp

• Internet radio service Pandora has been bleeding users for multiple quarters.
• New CEO Roger Lynch wants to turn that trend around.
• The startling indifference of teens to the service, however, could sink that effort.

Internet radio pioneer Pandora took a beating on Friday, as its stock plunged around 25% after a dismal Q4 revenue forecast. And there’s a sign that more trouble is on the horizon: teens are fleeing the service at a staggering rate, according to a recent survey by Piper Jaffray.

Pandora has gone through a flurry of changes over the last year, both in management and strategy, culminating with a CEO change in which cofounder Tim Westergren stepped down in June, and was replaced by former Sling CEO Roger Lynch in August.

In Lynch's prepared remarks for Pandora’s earnings call Thursday, he acknowledged that he had a tough road ahead of him — “tangible challenges,” as he put it.

“First, it is essential that we stabilize and then grow our base of listeners,” Lynch said, after saying that Pandora's “user base has declined in recent quarters.” That's true. At the end of 2016, Pandora had 81 million active listeners, whereas it now has 73.7 million. That is a troubling trend for investors.

But how can Pandora turn things around?

Lynch suggested a few things. He mentioned looking at “new forms of content,” like podcasts or “spoken word.” He also brought up leaning into voice-activated devices, like the Amazon Echo, and bringing better features to Pandora’s ad-supported tier to compete with services like YouTube.

But none of these are clear game-changers, especially in light of how quickly Pandora’s popularity is eroding with teens. In its semi-annual survey of US teens released last month, Piper Jaffray asked the question: “Do you listen to music on Pandora internet radio.” Only 35% of respondents said “yes.” If you want some context for how brutal that is, think about early 2014, when 74% answered "yes" to the same question.

Here’s a chart from Piper Jaffray that shows the dramatic decline:

Another big focus Lynch mentioned was that Pandora needed to “hold onto and build on our status as a best-in-class publisher of targeted digital advertising, which means a significant upgrade to our advertising technology and the capabilities we can offer advertisers.”

But some analysts are wary of Pandora’s advertising prospects.

"We have been trying to stick with Pandora through its multiple management changes and multi-year turnaround process," J.P. Morgan analyst Doug Anmuth wrote in a note cited by CNBC. "However, near-term advertising trends are deteriorating and we believe it will take time for the company to realize the benefits of its ad tech investments."

In other words, don’t hold your breath.

SEE ALSO: A founder who sold his last startup for ~$50 million wants to make iconic TV for teens in the YouTube era

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Here's how to figure out exactly how your take-home pay could change under Trump's new tax plan - CLONE

• The third Thor movie had the biggest opening weekend of the franchise.
• Its success continues the dominance Disney/Marvel has at the box office in November.

Marvel/Disney is celebrating another dominant box office performance. The third movie in the Thor franchise, "Thor: Ragnarok," won the weekend and gave a jolt to the recently stagnant North American box office with an estimated $121 million opening weekend, according to The Wrap.

It's almost unheard of in Hollywood for a successful franchise to suddenly change course, but that's exactly what Marvel did with "Ragnarok", and its proved to be the perfect move.

After two movies that had impressive worldwide box office earnings — 2011's "Thor" with $449.3 million and 2013's "Thor: The Dark World" with $644.5 million— it seemed the franchise was like anything Marvel Studios makes: a cash cow.

And perhaps that made it easier to go forward with making a third movie that was different in tone than the previous two, but the decision to turn "Ragnarok" into a weird comedy that's centered mostly on Thor (Chris Hemsworth) and Hulk (Mark Ruffalo) trying to get off a rouge planet has performed far beyond the opening weekends of its two previous titles ("Thor" opened at $65.7 million, "The Dark World" $85.7 million).

Indications that Marvel made the right decision was evident very quickly. Director Taika Waititi's comedic style was a hit for critics, which gave the movie a 93% on Rotten Tomatoes (it was in the high 90s leading up to its opening day). That led to "Ragnarok" scoring $14.5 million in Thursday preview screenings.

Things only got better for the God of Thunder. The movie, which is playing on just over 4,000 screens, earned $46.8 million its opening day (including preview screening sales). That followed with around $40 million on Saturday, with many of the Thursday preview crowd actually returning to see it again, according to Deadline.

"Ragnarok" continues the dominance by Marvel/Disney in the month of November. Last year it was the combination of "Doctor Strange" and "Moana" that brought audiences out of their binge watching habits and into the multiplexes. This November is likely going to be the tandem of "Ragnarok" and "Coco," the upcoming release by Pixar opening on Thanksgiving.

"A Bad Moms Christmas" scored a distant second place, with $17 million for the weekend. The sequel — featuring Mila Kunis, Kristen Bell, Kathryn Hahn, Christine Baranski, and Susan Sarandon — received a dismal 32% rating on Rotten Tomatoes.

SEE ALSO: The director of 'Thor: Ragnarok' says the movie is so unconventional Mark Ruffalo joked they'd both get fired

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: A legal loophole prevents most workplace sexual-harassment cases from seeing the light of day — here's how to close it

• Korg is a minor character in "Thor: Ragnarok," but is a major reason why the movie is so funny.
• Director Taika Waititi voiced the character and did the motion-capture.
• Originally supposed to be in one or two scenes, Chris Hemsworth loved the character so much Korg scenes continued to get added to the movie.

Warning: Minor spoilers below if you haven’t seen “Thor: Ragnarok.”

Part of the fun of the Marvel movies is they introduce us to characters we might not have been aware of if we didn’t grow up on the comics.

For many, the appearance of Korg in “Thor: Ragnarok” (currently playing in theaters) will be a delightful introduction.

Korg is a rock giant creature who befriends Thor (Chris Hemsworth) when the God of Thunder is on the planet Sakaar, and is forced by the Grandmaster (Jeff Goldblum) to take part in a gladiator-like battle and face his champion (which turns out to be the Hulk).

Korg, who first appeared in the “Planet Hulk” story within an “The Incredible Hulk” comic in 2006, is depicted in the movie as a gentle giant with a soft voice. He brings some of the best comedic moments of the movie and later fights alongside Thor in the movie’s conclusion.

The character is a scene-stealer, and credit has to go to the person who decided to take it on for the movie, “Ragnarok” director Taika Waititi.

However, Waititi admits he didn’t decide to voice Korg because he had some grand idea of how to make the character stand out. It really all happened by chance.

“I knew I was going to play something in the film, because I always put myself in my films, but I didn’t know what,” Waititi told Business Insider. “He was one of the few minor characters that hadn’t been cast yet so I decided to do that one.”

Figuring the role of Korg was small enough that doing the motion-capture on set for the character, and voicing it, wouldn’t be much added work to his already busy schedule as the director, he claimed Korg and moved on to more pressing matters.

“We didn’t end up doing a huge amount of it until much later in prep,” Waititi said. “There were many other story points we had to worry about. We knew this character was going to be in at least one or two scenes as kind of an information giver.”

But when Waititi began coming up with the voice for Korg in read-throughs, he and star Chris Hemsworth couldn’t stop coming up with jokes for him.

“We would start getting into those scenes and I would play with the voice and we thought wouldn't it be funny if this big hulking rock guy had this very delicate voice?” Waititi said. “I kind of based it on people I remember from home. So it's a strange combination of a big guy with a gentle-natured presence. Chris was loving that when we started doing those scenes, and we started shooting some stuff.”

Waititi said Marvel loved Korg too, so what started as a character that was in there just for exposition turned into Marvel’s newest sensation.

“We injected him into more and more scenes and before you know it he was all over the movie,” Waititi said.

Always feeling the pulse of its fans, Marvel can already tell audiences are in love with the big guy — along with his sidekick Miek— and the studio has hinted that there will be more from the bashing duo.

“We have plans for Korg and Miek,” Marvel Studios president Kevin Fiege told Fandango. “When and where we’ll have to wait and see, but we, like the audience now that they’ve seen them, can’t get enough.”

Waititi better rest up.

SEE ALSO: The director of "Thor: Ragnarok" says the movie is so unconventional Mark Ruffalo joked they'd both get fired

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: A legal loophole prevents most workplace sexual-harassment cases from seeing the light of day — here's how to close it

Few games are as delightful and downright joyous as "Super Mario Odyssey," the new Mario blockbuster on Nintendo's Switch console.

It's a great game unto itself, and it's a game that celebrates Nintendo's long history. Look no further than "New Donk City," one of the game's many massive open worlds, for proof of this duality.

And it's here, in New Donk City, that I experienced the most incredible moment of "Super Mario Odyssey."

SEE ALSO: 6 reasons you should buy a Nintendo Switch instead of a PlayStation 4 or Xbox One this year

WARNING: This piece speaks in detail about "Super Mario Odyssey," and contains spoilers.

It's clear from the name of the city, and the endless references to Donkey Kong, that he must be somewhere. Right?

Did you notice that the street Mario's walking away from here is named "Cranky Road"? That's a reference to Cranky Kong, the aged ape who originally starred in "Donkey Kong" in arcades. This old fogey right here:

Perhaps you didn't know: The character known as "Cranky Kong," who appears in various "Donkey Kong Country" games, is actually the original Donkey Kong. I hope you were sitting down for that. The character in the "Donkey Kong Country" series named "Donkey Kong" is actually Donky Kong Jr. Really!

New Donk City is even run by Mayor Pauline — the same Pauline who appeared in the original "Donkey Kong" game as the damsel in distress.

Mayor Pauline is not Princess Peach, to be clear.

This is Princess Peach, who is also in "Super Mario Odyssey":

There have been several "damsel-in-distress" characters in the history of Mario games. Pauline was the very first, appearing in the original "Donkey Kong" game as the woman who "Jumpman" was trying to rescue from the eponymous ape villain. The Kong family is now known for heroics rather than stealing ladies.

In the case of "Super Mario Odyssey," Pauline is now a mayor and she's seeking Mario's help for energy-related issues. She actually doesn't mention Donkey Kong.

• Andy Weir, author of sci-fi blockbuster "The Martian", is publishing a novel about the moon, "Artemis", on November 14.
• The book follows the misadventures of a witty female smuggler, Jasmine "Jazz" Bashara.
• Weir told Business Insider he's convinced humans will colonize the moon before Mars because it has one thing the red planet doesn't: an economic rationale.
• The author says Elon Musk's and SpaceX's plan to colonize Mars before the moon is not realistic.

Andy Weir, author of "The Martian", a realistic tale of survival in space, is about to release his second and highly anticipated novel, "Artemis".

"Artemis" takes place on the moon in the 2080s at humanity's first and only lunar city of the same name. It's a riveting story about a high-stakes lunar heist featuring Jasmine "Jazz" Bashara, a Saudi-born woman and witty smuggler who's lived inside the aluminum bubbles of Artemis since she was a child.

In Weir's typical style, the novel — which goes on sale on November 14— is wildly entertaining and far-fetched, but stays surprisingly believable by leaning heavily on real-life science and engineering.

Business Insider spoke with Weir about the book's genesis, why he thinks humanity will colonize the moon first, his major criticism of Elon Musk's and SpaceX's plans to inhabit Mars, and why he'd never visit Artemis if he could.

Note: This interview has been edited for style, length, and clarity.

BUSINESS INSIDER: You could have picked any place in the universe for your next novel to take place. Why the moon, and why Artemis — a city on the moon?

ANDY WEIR: I wanted to write a story about the first human settlement somewhere other than Earth. And I just really think that's going to be the moon. That'll definitely be the first place that we colonize outside of Earth.

A lot of people who would like us to just leap-frog to Mars, but Mars is so much farther away. It would be like if the ancient British colonize North America before they colonize Wales.

It's just ... The moon is definitely the first place that we will colonize.

BI: And that's your opinion, or what experts have told you?

AW: Well, yeah, it is just my opinion. But it seems ... It's one of those things that I feel pretty confident about that's how it's gonna shake out.

BI: What gave you the idea to write "Artemis"?

AW: I'm not sure exactly when I came up with the idea, but it started off with me saying, "OK, I want a story that takes place in the city on the moon." And I kind of work forward from there.

I had all of Artemis designed and even its history and its economic foundation and stuff before I ever made characters or story for it. So I really wanted to write a story about this — about life on the first colony off of Earth.

"The Martian" was a survival story and I didn't want to just write another one; I wanted a unique story. I love crime novels and I love crime stories, I like heist and caper kind of stories and I thought, "Hey, why not do a caper on the moon?"

BI: Like "The Martian", "Artemis" struck me as very realistic — the claustrophobic hallways in lower-income areas, the local construction materials, the chemistry ...

AW: Every part of Artemis is about the economics of making it a profitable tourist engine. They had to build it there, and they had to build it with resources that they had on the moon. So I had to figure out, how do you make metal on the moon? And to make it cheaper?

Also, I based Artemis' internal economy — and kind of its social structure that emerges as a result — on resort towns, tourism towns. Imagine a resort town in the Caribbean, where there's some high-end hotels, casinos, whatever, along the shoreline. And then behind that are the more, shall we say, "austere" living environments of the people who live and work there.

And so I figured, well, Artemis would be that. It doesn't matter if it's on the moon: Economics determines how these things pan out. Artemis' economy is a tourist economy, so I figured it'd be just like any other tourist town.

BI: Was the realism the goal here, or a product of the story you wanted to tell?

AW: I wanted it to be as realistic as possible. I wanted a very believable and realistic setting. The book would not work if you weren't buying into the setting. You'd just be like, "Nah, every part of this is bulls---" — especially considering so much of the plot revolves around the setting, like the details of how Artemis operates.

So if your suspension of disbelief isn't completely satisfied by what Artemis is, then you're not going to like the book at all, right? So I had to really make that work — and put a lot of work into it.

BI: You seem very invested in the idea of a moon colony. When do you think it's going to happen — and when would you like to see it happen?

AW: "Artemis" takes place in the 2080s, and construction on the city began on the 2060s. So that was kind of the prediction I made.

When would I like it to happen? Later today. When do I think it'll happen? I don't know, it's hard.

The whole premise of "Artemis" is the presumption that the cost to low-Earth orbit would be driven down by a competition in the commercial space industry. And I actually wrote a paper about that. I mean, it's amateur-hour-level economics, but it's good enough for fiction.

It's funny, I always have to remind myself: I find economics fascinating. I think it's really interesting. But I have to remember that most readers ... don't. So I can't just go off on prolonged discussions of economics, or they'll just put the book down and never come back. But it's all stuff that's under the hood — it's all there, I wanted it to work.

BI: You've visited SpaceX, a company founded by Elon Musk that's intent on colonizing Mars. What's your impression of their goal?

AW: Talking about getting humans to Mars, like getting a flags-and-footprints kind of mission? I think [that] is very realistic to happen this century. I think that could definitely happen.

But colonizing Mars is way, way far in the future, regardless of what everyone says. I just don't see it happening soon. There's a certain appeal to Mars because it's interesting and exciting and people are like, "Oh, that's neat!" But the reality is that there is no economic reason to colonize Mars. At all.

There's a saying in that kind of space industry: "There is no Planet B." It's like, you don't just get to say, "Oh, f--- this, we'll go elsewhere." And I guarantee you that regardless of how bad the problems are on Earth, environmentally or whatever else, it is easier to fix them than to colonize another planet. I guarantee you that.

If you take the trillion dollars that you were going to spend colonizing Mars and put it into environmental amelioration things, you might find that it's better done here. Leaving Earth as an idea of saving it is just not viable. That's not why people will leave. The environment of Earth is not a factor that would affect the colonization of our solar system, in my opinion.

BI: So you don't think humanity will colonize Mars first?

AW: In terms of people bulldozing directly toward Mars like saying, "Ok, we're going to colonize Mars" — I just don't think that's realistic.

It's kind of like building a railroad track, but it's not like it's time for Manifest Destiny and Westward Expansion, where we have the East Coast colonized, and now we want to colonize the rest of the country. That would be like if we said, "Let's forget about all the stuff in the middle, and just go straight to Nevada. Let's forget about all of this really usable stuff in the middle." It's like, we'll sort with New Amsterdam and then we'll go to Carson City — with nothing in between. I just don't see it.

And colonization of the moon would be incredibly useful to colonizing Mars. First off, everything you want to do on Mars you could do on the moon to see if it works. And second off, the moon has a much smaller gravity well. So anything manufactured there out of local resources is a lot easier to get to Mars.

If anybody asks, "Why would you go to the moon?" I'd say, "Why would you go to Mars?"

BI: I'm sure you've heard Elon Musk's Mars colonization talks in 2016 and 2017. What's your overall impression?

AW: I think Musk's plan is overly optimistic. I think that it's a sort of thing that could happen, but not on the timelines that he's talking about.

I think that neither Musk nor anybody else seems to be considering, what economic reason is there to go to this other planet? So far, I've never heard an answer to that. It's like, "We can put people on Mars!" And I'm like, "Why? So they'll be there? Well, we can put people on Antarctica, why not do that?"

I'm not seeing a reason why, aside from people being overly idealistic and thinking, "Man, it'd be awesome to be on Mars." I don't see any reason why they would move there.

The people who are like, "Man, I would totally move to Mars!" — No, you would totally fantasize about moving to Mars. But when it came to the point where someone's like, "All right, it's time to leave your entire life, your family, everyone you know behind and go to another planet forever until you die," people would probably say, "Uh, actually ... no."

BI: You set up an economy on the moon which has a frightening underbelly to it ...

AW: Well, it's not that bad ...

BI: ... OK, "checkered" underbelly. In real life, there's talk about mining helium-3 on the moon for fusion reactors, among other things. What do you think would be an actual lunar economic engine?

AW: I still believe that with the first settlement on the on the moon, the first economic drive behind it will be tourism.

In terms of things like mining helium-3 — even if it does become a thing — anything that's just a task or a labor or anything that's just resource collection or acquisition, you'd just send robots.

Just imagine there were big bricks of gold on the moon and all you'd have to do is go pick them up. All people would have to do is make probes to go pick them up. You wouldn't send humans — why would you send humans? They're so much harder to keep alive on the moon and people get really mad when you fail. Nobody minds if you break your own million-dollar robot.

Most of the explanations for colonizing the moon that I've seen in science fiction are really lacking. They're like, "We colonized the moon to mine things." And I'm like, "Well then send robots."

Or they're like, "We colonized the moon because of population pressure on Earth." And I'm like, "It is so much easier to colonize the Sahara or Antarctica or the ocean than it would be to colonize the moon."

Or they're like, "We came here to avoid persecution." And I'm like, "If you can get there, the people persecuting you can absolutely get there."

So I just don't see it. The only thing that I can think of is if humans being there is inherently part of the economy — and the only way that happens is tourism.

BI: Hence a resort town on the moon and all of its support systems and smuggling and all of that.

AW: Well, what happens is once you have the tourism industry there, then people live there. And then once you have people living somewhere, then that itself becomes the economy, right?

If there's 2,000 people living on the moon, well I'm gonna move there to sell them shoes — and now there's 2,001 people living on the moon. That's how human settlement and expansion works, but there has to be some sort of seed.

If you look in any city anywhere in the world, there is an economic reason why it exists. Maybe it was at a convenient place on the river, it was in a nice valley that's easy to pass through, going from one trade hub to another, or its near some resources that people needed — something.

BI: Would you go to Artemis if it existed today, and would you want to just be a tourist or actually live there?

AW: I don't think I'd like to live in Artemis. First off, I would not like the trip out there. Secondly, I have a lot of friends and family on Earth that I would miss too much.

It takes a certain special kind of lifestyle and personality to live in a frontier town, and I don't have that. I like the comforts of civilization.

SEE ALSO: SpaceX has published Elon Musk's presentation about colonizing Mars — here's the full transcript and slides

DON'T MISS: Scientists have discovered a potentially suicidal problem with going to Mars

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Stephen Hawking just set humanity a 100-year-deadline to colonize other planets — but this astronaut says we’re not ready

• Season two of "The Girlfriend Experience" will be told through two different storylines. 
• Directors Lodge Kerrigan and Amy Seimetz wrote and directed the stories separately.
• The two made the season despite having the same budget they had in season one.

Lodge Kerrigan and Amy Seimetz teamed to direct the entire first season of Starz’s hit show, “The Girlfriend Experience,” and though both are helming season two (premiering November 5), they are doing things very differently this time around.

Based on Steven Soderbergh’s 2009 movie “The Girlfriend Experience” (he is an executive producer on the show), the anthology series looks at high-end escorts who engage their clients on an emotional level, not just a sexual one. The focus of season one was Christine Reade (Riley Keough), who juggles school and an internship at a law firm with being an escort in the evenings.

In the midst of discussing season two with Starz, Kerrigan and Seimetz threw out an idea: They wanted to direct separate storylines within the same season. 

So instead of following one story, season two will have two. Each Sunday night, the first half-hour episode will be from one director’s standalone story, and the other half-hour episode will show the other’s.

“We were just interested in certain themes and thought it would be interesting to push the format of television,” Kerrigan told Business Insider while showing a sneak peek of the season at the Toronto International Film Festival in September, along with Seimetz. “Steven encourages us to just break the rules.”

“Just to keep the series fresh it just seemed like, why would we repeat what we did last season and tell the same thing?” Seimetz added.

Starz was all for it. Unlike the first season, when Kerrigan and Seimetz wrote the season together in Soderbergh’s office, this time the two split up. They wrote their stories separately and then shot them with their own with separate cast and crew.

For Kerrigan’s story, we follow Anna Greenwald (Louisa Krause), who after blackmailing one of her politically prominent clients, gets involved with one of his rivals, Erica Myles (Anna Friel).

Seimetz's story looks at Bria Jones (Carmen Ejogo), a former escort who enters witness protection to escape her ex, who has a criminal past.

Seimetz said she was inspired to tell a story that went beyond the corporate world that season one was in. She wanted to “see how far I could take what the idea of the ‘girlfriend experience’ could mean.” That led her to shooting in drab locations and having Bria look as unglamorous as possible. The boring existence causes the character to be tempted to go back into the escort world.

Kerrigan wanted to delve deeper into the themes of money and power that were explored in season one, using the backdrop of politics. Anna and Erica build a relationship through teaming up to take down a dirty politician, but things then get more complicated when Erica’s former flame, Sandra (Emily Piggford), enters the mix.

“I was really interested in the power dynamics between three women in a sexual relationship and how that power dynamic changes,” he said.

Like Keough in season one, both leads for season two are unknown to most audiences. Kerrigan found Krause through an audition tape she sent in. Seimetz, who is also an actress (she plays Becky Ives on “Stranger Things”), was introduced to Ejogo through a casting director before the two starred in Ridley Scott’s “Alien: Covenant.”

“I knew I was going to cast her in the show, so then being able to act with her in the movie before doing the show was great,” she said.

Seimetz said Ejogo was informed she was going to be cast on the show before they made “Covenant,” which led to the two having a lot of talks about the show while taking breaks on the big blockbuster.

“Because I cast her so early I was writing for her,” Seimetz said. “So I would send her things as it developed.”

The directors' season two storylines are vastly different visually, and in tone, from one another. Kerrigan’s is full of wide shots, which he said he hoped would “emphasize the performative nature of politics and personal relationships.” Seimetz’s has a claustrophobic feel with all its tight close-ups. “I wanted it to look and feel more frantic than last season,” she said.

Despite basically making two TV shows at the same time, the two filmmakers say they were working with the same budget from season one. That didn’t seem to phase the two veterans of indie film projects. In fact, Kerrigan thought, “It was great!”

“Because we had complete creative freedom,” he said. “Steven gets final cut and in essence he gives it to Amy and myself. If we stay in those certain budget parameters, we can pretty much do what we want.”

The two said the biggest challenge from season one to season two was their interaction in the writing process. It was a lot harder to get to the finish line by themselves.

“It got lonely,” Kerrigan said of writing season two.

“Which is funny because we would fight,” Seimetz said with a laugh. “When you’re writing alone you just have yourself and you’re like, ‘This sucks.’ When you have someone else you have to do it. This time I needed it to feel like a job, so I hired an assistant and that really got me going.”

Watch the season 2 trailer below:

SEE ALSO: The 9 biggest questions we have after watching "Stranger Things" season 2

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The full 'Black Panther' trailer is here — and it's amazing

• Netflix's "Mindhunter" is a thrilling origin story of the team that studied the psychology of serial killers.
• The series includes real-life serial killers like Jerry Brudos, Ed Kemper, and Richard Speck.
• It is reminiscent of executive producer David Fincher's 2007 film "Zodiac."
• The show never shows an actual murder or crime scene.
• Within ten episodes, it successfully reinvents what a crime procedural can be.

You probably think you know what Netflix's "Mindhunter" is like — but you're wrong.

The new drama, whose executive producers include David Fincher and Charlize Theron, is set in the late 70s and follows the FBI team that studied the psychology of serial killers and murderers, and even came up with the term "serial killer." Playwright Joe Penhall adapted the series from the non-fiction book co-written by John E. Douglas, the FBI agent who helped invent modern criminal profiling.

"Mindhunter" is, probably not coincidentally, similar in tone, pacing, and look to Fincher's excellent 2007 film "Zodiac."

Essentially, "Mindhunter" is an origin story of the team who figured out that serial killers are likely to harm animals, wet the bed over the age of 12, and have terrible relationships with their mothers — and by default, hatred toward women, who are usually their victims. 

"Mindhunter," like 2016's "Stranger Things," seemingly came out of nowhere.

Screeners of the first season were not available to the press, which is quite rare especially for new shows. Besides the usual teaser trailer and full trailer, there wasn't much marketing for the show. I live in New York City, where ads for TV shows haunt me for months on my commute. Usually light marketing and no screeners is a sign that a show is really, really bad.

So I, and many TV critics, were surprised to find that "Mindhunter" is incredible.

In ten episodes, you'll never actually see a murder, and you'll barely even get a glimpse of crime scenes. You might see, for example, some episodes begin or end with The BTK killer, Dennis Rader — who wasn't caught until the early 2000s — leave or arrive at a crime scene. But you don't see him kill. The violence is depicted and evident in photos, dialogue, and the tension in every scene with one of the killers in prison. 

FBI agents Holden Ford (Jonathan Groff) and Bill Tench (Holt McCallany) travel around the country educating law enforcement about the psychology of criminals, in hopes that it can help them catch a killer or a criminal. They call this "road school." While they're on the road, Holden and Bill visit high-profile killers in prison. Holden and Bill visit Richard Speck (Jack Erdie) in one of the show's most chilling scenes at a grotesque prison in Joliet, Illinois. In 1966, Speck murdered eight nursing students in Chicago in one night. 

At first, their visits are unknown to their boss at the FBI. But after their research helps solve a few murders, their boss gets the project approved, adds Boston University professor Dr. Wendy Carr (a very excellent and underused Anna Torv) to the team, and gets them funding.

Every actor playing the real-life killers is so haunting that the performances will stay with you. And though their performances are terrifying, killers like Brudos and Kemper are so charming and empathetic when they share their troubled childhood that you might end up feeling bad for them, just like special agent Holden eventually does.

What separates "Mindhunter" from other crime dramas is the way it intertwines the agents' personal lives into the story. A lot of crime shows, particularly on network TV, have a heavy-handed approach to applying a law enforcement character's personal life in to their work life, and vice versa. "Mindhunter" is different.

Holden is a weird guy, but he's a good one — or so we think. We watch his first real relationship with grad student Debbie Mitford (Hannah Gross) blossom, and slowly unravel. As Holden continues his research and casual, explicit, and disturbing conversations with murderers, the sympathetic character established in the first episode shifts completely.

Throughout the season we learn more about Bill, who is at first reluctant to do personal interviews with killers. Bill has a wife and an adopted son, who's not adjusting well after three years — and ironically, might exhibit some of the personality traits they're finding in the killers they're studying.

Dr. Carr, who unfortunately doesn't get as much alone screen time as she deserves (she likely will in season two), establishes her past and personal life in quick scenes that don't need to explain anything to the viewer beyond what we see. 

The show's showcase (or lack thereof) of its female characters is its primary flaw, with Dr. Carr — an educated, intelligent closeted lesbian who doesn't answer to anybody — losing screen time to her partners, Holden and Bill, despite the fact that she's one of the reasons their department exists. Holden's girlfriend, Debbie, only seems to exist so we are aware that Holden has a sex life. Her only thing, really, is that she is a grad student. Bill's wife, Nancy, is arguably the most developed female character. She only appears in three episodes, usually to support her husband, and demonstrates her struggle to parent their adopted son, Brian.  

In just ten episodes, "Mindhunter" packs significant character development, mystery, subtle-yet-powerful performances, and beautiful (but creepy) cinematography, in what turns out to be a thrilling and educational psychological drama that you should be watching right now.

You can watch the trailer for "Mindhunter" below:

SEE ALSO: The 20 most notable new TV shows this fall, ranked from worst to best

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The most underrated foods — according to Anthony Bourdain and Danny Bowien

The Xbox One is a killer game console.

Not only is it a looker, but it's a powerful little box — the Xbox One "S" model you see above is the new standard for the console, replacing the original box that launched in 2013. It plays the same games but looks better, does more, and costs less.

And now, we're on the cusp of yet another new Xbox: the Xbox One X, a $500 system that boasts more horsepower than any other home game console.

You may be wondering whether it's for you. It may very well be! But there's a strong argument to be made for sticking with the far less expensive Xbox One and Xbox One S models.

SEE ALSO: 16 reasons now is the perfect time to buy an Xbox One

1. Price.

The price difference between standard models of the Xbox One and the Xbox One X is $250.

To be clear, an Xbox One X costs double the price of a standard Xbox One S.

The Xbox One X is the cost of two new Xbox One S consoles, to say nothing of refurbished models or bundles that come with free games. You could easily pay about $200 for a slightly used Xbox One.

At $500, the Xbox One X isn't a small step up in price — it's a massive leap. You're paying for a huge bump in horsepower, no doubt, but it's no small price to pay.

2. 4K and HDR look nice, but it's not worth the $250 price difference.

If you're thinking about buying an Xbox One X, you're probably aware that it's more powerful console than anything else available. That's a fact! The console, on paper, is an absolute beast.

In reality, though, using the Xbox One X is not noticeably different from using a standard Xbox One.

My standard Xbox One — a near-launch model, before the redesigned "S" model existed — operates identically. The one difference is the Xbox One X's ability to play games in 4K/HDR. To this end, it's very impressive.

I bought this TV a few weeks ago. It's the top-rated 4K/HDR set from the best reviews publication out there. I even calibrated it! I went all in on 4K without spending thousands of dollars, which I'm told looks a bit better — sorry videophiles, but I'm not shelling out for an OLED set.

Games on the Xbox One X do indeed look better in 4K with HDR lighting, but it's not that big of a graphical leap. I remember going from the original Nintendo to the Super Nintendo and being blown away. And then I remember going from 480p to 1080p — the jump from so-called standard-definition TVs to high definition. What a difference!

In my experience with the new console thus far, 4K and HDR gaming isn't that level of difference. Colors are more vibrant, and lighting is more complex, and there's more visual detail in every frame. Most important of all, the game still looks sharp even on a 55-inch TV.

But if you're expecting to be blown away, think again.

3. The Xbox One X feels exactly like an Xbox One, for better or worse.

Though the Xbox One X has significantly more powerful internals than the Xbox One S and the original Xbox One, that doesn't translate to a better user experience. The console is capable of powering gorgeous games at high frame rates, yet the basic system navigation is as muddy as ever.

To be fair, a recent update to the Xbox One dashboard made basic use far more manageable. It's quicker than ever before, but it's still not as quick as the competition from Sony and Nintendo. There's a lag to everything that makes using the Xbox One X feel old — something a brand-new, $500 console should not feel like.

It's especially stark compared with modern smartphones. I realize it's an unfair comparison, but smartphones have changed what people expect from technology. That expectation is what makes the Xbox One X feel surprisingly old, even though it looks slick and powers bleeding-edge visuals.

Since the actor Anthony Rapp last week accused Kevin Spacey of making a sexual advance when Rapp was 14, several other people have come forward to accuse the Spacey of sexual misconduct.

Most of the allegations involve Spacey inappropriately touching, or making sexual advances toward, younger male actors. The accusations start as early as the 1980s, around the beginning of Spacey's acting career, and run into the late 2000s.

Last week, Spacey's representatives responded to Business Insider's request for comment on the subsequent accusations, saying: "Kevin Spacey is taking the time necessary to seek evaluation and treatment. No other information is available at this time."

After eight people who worked on Netflix's "House of Cards" accused Spacey of sexual harassment or assault in a CNN report Thursday evening, Spacey's agency and publicist dropped the actor, according to BuzzFeed News.

Production on "House of Cards" was suspended indefinitely on October 31, and Spacey was fired from the show on Saturday.

Here are all the men who have publicly accused Spacey of sexual misconduct:

SEE ALSO: Netflix has suspended production on 'House of Cards' indefinitely, after a sexual misconduct accusation against star Kevin Spacey

READ MORE: Kevin Spacey gets dropped by his agent and publicist after 'House of Cards' employees accuse him of sexual harassment and assault

Anthony Rapp

In an article published in late October by BuzzFeed News, the "Star Trek: Discovery" actor Anthony Rapp accused Spacey of making a sexual advance toward him when Rapp was 14 and Spacey was 26.

Rapp said the incident happened in 1986, while Rapp and Spacey were cast members in a Broadway production, when Spacey invited him to a party at his Manhattan apartment. He said Spacey later found him watching TV in a bedroom and that Spacey picked him up, placed him on the bed, and lay on top of him.

"I still to this day can't wrap my head around so many aspects of it. It's just deeply confusing to me," Rapp told BuzzFeed News.

In a statement, Spacey apologized to Rapp, saying he did "not remember the encounter" but that if it happened it "would have been deeply inappropriate, drunken behavior."

His apology to Rapp sparked criticism when he chose to come out as gay in the same statement.

Roberto Cavazos

The actor Roberto Cavazos in a Facebook post accused Spacey of trying to touch him without his consent at the bar of London's Old Vic theater in 2008.

Spacey was the artistic director of the theater from 2004 to 2015, and Cavazos appeared in numerous plays there starting in 2008.

"I don't remember how many people told me the same story: Spacey would invite them to meet him to 'talk about their careers,'" Cavazos said in the post, originally written in Spanish. "When they arrived at the theatre, [Spacey] had prepared champagne on the stage, beautifully lit. Each story varied in how far the picnic went, but the technique was the same. More common was to find him at the bar of the theatre, grabbing whoever caught his attention."

"There are many of us who have a 'Kevin Spacey story,'" he continued. "It seems the only requirement was to be a male under the age of 30 for Mr Spacey to feel free to touch us. It was so common that it became a local joke (of very bad taste)."

Tony Montana

The independent filmmaker Tony Montana told Radar Online that Spacey groped him at a Los Angeles bar in 2003, when Montana was in his 30s.

"I went up to order a drink, and Kevin came up to me and put his arm around me," Montana told the outlet. "He was telling me to come with him, to leave the bar. He put his hand on my crotch forcefully and grabbed my whole package."

Montana said Spacey then told him, "This designates ownership." Montana said that after he removed Spacey's hand and walked away, Spacey, who appeared intoxicated, followed him into the bathroom.

"I backed him out the door, and I pushed him," he said. "One of his friends was in line, and I said, 'It's time to take your boy home.' They all ended up leaving."

Montana said he had post-traumatic stress disorder for six months afterward.

• Netflix released the full trailer for season two of "The Crown," out December 8.
• It teases trouble in the monarchy and in Queen Elizabeth II's marriage to Philip, Duke of Edinburgh.
• In the trailer, Philip has a new beard.

Netflix's hit series "The Crown" returns for season two on December 8, and the official trailer proves that it'll be even more dramatic than season one. And there will be even more amazing costumes, and more crowns. 

The trailer shows that Britain — and the world — are going through some changes. The British monarchy is damaged, and so is the marriage between Queen Elizabeth II (Claire Foy) and Philip, Duke of Edinburgh (Matt Smith). Also, Philip has a beard, and appears very bitter about the fact that his 8-year-old son has more power than he does. 

"There is no possibility of my forgiving you," Elizabeth says in the trailer. "The question is, 'How on earth can you forgive yourself?'"

You can binge-watch the entire first season of "The Crown" on Netflix before it returns on December 8.

Watch the full trailer for season two below:

SEE ALSO: 6 new fall TV shows that critics hate, but normal people love

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Trump says the Texas church shooting 'isn't a guns situation' — watch his full statement on the attack that killed 26 people

This story was delivered to BI Intelligence "Digital Media Briefing" subscribers. To learn more and subscribe, please click here.

Netflix's Stranger Things Season 2 averaged 8.8 million US viewers per episode within the first three days of the show’s release, according to Nielsen data cited by Variety.

Additionally, the first episode of the series averaged 15.8 million US viewers within the first three days of the series release.

The numbers from Nielsen come fewer than three weeks after it announced it would begin measuring Netflix viewership data. Nielsen is only measuring US viewership of Netflix on TV sets, and Netflix is not involved in the effort. 

The audience size of Stranger Things Season 2 measures up to some of TV’s highest-rated programs. AMC’s The Walking Dead, which draws some of the largest audiences on TV, drew 11.4 million viewers for its most recent season premiere. The NFL, which also gets some of the highest viewership on TV, averaged 15.1 million viewers per game this season through week 7. This is important because Netflix is the dominant over-the-top (OTT) player, and the viewership data can give media executives a clearer picture of current consumer behavior in the media ecosystem. 

Publicly available Netflix viewership data can help make it a more attractive destination for creators. It provides a ballpark idea of how many viewers consume its content. Creators will be able to see how Netflix's audiences stack up to programming on other TV and video platforms. As a result, they may become incentivized to create for Netflix over traditional TV networks and other subscription video-on-demand (SVOD) platforms like HBO and Hulu.

To receive stories like this one directly to your inbox every morning, sign up for the Digital Media Briefing newsletter. Click here to learn more about how you can gain risk-free access today.

Join the conversation about this story »

• "Thor: Ragnarok" pulls off a rare feat for a movie: featuring a Led Zeppelin song.
• "Immigrant Song" can be heard in two fight scenes, but it wasn't easy to get the band to sign off.
• Director Taika Waititi said it took a lot of time and a strong offer.

The latest Marvel movie, "Thor: Ragnarok," isn't just one of the most fun movies in the Marvel Cinematic Universe; it also features one of the most memorable rock songs ever created.

If you've seen the movie, you already know what we're referring to. "Immigrant Song," the classic from Led Zeppelin's "Led Zeppelin III" album, is prominently featured in two fight sequences in the movie. The song's inclusion was a long time coming for director Taika Waititi and the Marvel executives.

Waititi included the song all the way back in the sizzle reel he made for his early meetings with Marvel in late 2015.

"I remember Kevin being really excited about the song right from the early meetings," Waititi told Business Insider of Marvel Studios' president, Kevin Feige. "He was like, 'We should explore that song because it could be perfect for the film.'"

With the song's relentless guitar riff, squealing opening by lead singer Robert Plant, and mentions of Norse mythology in the lyrics, the track seemed perfect for the Thor franchise. But there was just one problem: Led Zeppelin is historically difficult when it comes to allowing songs in movies.

There has been the occasional breakthrough over the decades. Cameron Crowe (who used to cover Zeppelin for Rolling Stone) got the band to allow him to use "Kashmir" in "Fast Times at Ridgemont High." Richard Linklater had Jack Black beg on camera for the use of "Immigrant Song" while making "School of Rock" (it worked), and Adam McKay's team had to track down Jimmy Page in a pub in the English countryside to get the OK to use "When the Levee Breaks" in "The Big Short."

Waititi doesn't have firsthand knowledge of anything insane taking place to get "Immigrant Song" for "Ragnarok," as the movie's music supervisor Dave Jordan did most of the heavy lifting. But he knows it did basically take all of production for the filmmakers to get the OK to use the song.

The breakthrough finally happened early this year when Marvel sent the band the teaser trailer, which featured the song, before it went live in April.

Here is the "Thor: Ragnarok" teaser that features "Immigrant Song":

"When we had the first cut of the trailer and showed Led Zep they understood how perfect the song was for this character," Waititi said. "I think it wouldn't have happened if we didn't start the conversation with them really, really early on."

And there was something else Waititi felt was a deciding factor: Marvel Studios and the company that owns it, Disney, have some very deep pockets.

"I have a feeling if you want to entertain that idea of using their music, you have to have the money," he said. "No negotiations. Offer it to them straight up."

Waititi laughed before adding, "They are worth it!"

"Thor: Ragnarok" is now playing in theaters.

SEE ALSO: The director of "Thor: Ragnarok" says the movie is so unconventional Mark Ruffalo joked they'd both get fired

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The full 'Black Panther' trailer is here — and it's amazing

A gorgeous new "Star Wars" game, where you can fight as Yoda against Darth Maul with freakin' lightsabers? Yes, really. 

That's exactly what you can do in the upcoming game "Star Wars Battlefront 2," scheduled to launch on November 17 for Xbox One, PlayStation 4, and PC.

Here's everything we know about the game so far!

SEE ALSO: The new 'Assassin's Creed' is a return to greatness for a stagnant blockbuster

"Battlefront 2" takes place in the aftermath of "Return of the Jedi" (the final film in the original "Star Wars" trilogy).

The second Death Star has just exploded, and you're an Imperial soldier with revenge on the brain. Iden Versio's story is one of vengeance, seemingly set 30 or so years after the explosion of the aforementioned space base. 

Rather than a saber-wielding Jedi, you're a trooper. And that means guns instead of future-swords. This is a first-person shooter, first and foremost.

Since she's an Imperial soldier and not a Jedi, she has no Force powers to use on enemies. This is a game focused on shooting, and she'll apparently be shooting a lot of Rebel forces — she's "fighting for the future of the Empire," according to "Star Wars" cast member John Boyega in a recent video.

The Emperor is dead, the Death Star is gone, and she's fighting for whatever's left. 

Through her journey of revenge, Iden visits a variety of stunning locals.

• Sexual harassment doesn't just affect the Hollywood elite or major tech companies.
• Allegations of sexual harassment have impacted most industries.
• A new poll from MSN shows just how far-reaching the issue is.

Sexual harassment in the workplace isn't an industry issue. Nor is it a toxic workplace issue. It's an issue that affects literally everyone. 

A number of industries have been implicated in the wake of producer Harvey Weinstein's alleged sexual misconduct, including Hollywood, politics, and sports. Before that, sexual harassment at work made headlines with tech's "bro-culture" problem. Before that, it was the media industry with Roger Ailes and Bill O'Reilly's oustings. And the list goes on.

When pretty much every industry out there is involved, it's naive to simply point the finger at these institutions and damn them for perpetuating a systemic issue.

To be sure, toxic workplace cultures are partially to blame — companies with these values are far more susceptible to sexual harassment.

But don't let these characterizations lull you into a false sense of security. Sexual harassment is a problem that affects everyone — not just those in high-profile positions or industries.

Sexual harassment is more rampant than you want to think

Overall, about one in three people (31%) in the US admit to having been sexually harassed at work, according to a poll from Business Insider's partner, MSN.

MSN polls its readers and then uses machine learning to model how a representative sample of the US would have responded, using big data, such as the Census. It's as accurate as a traditional, scientific survey.

For women, the situation is drastically more dire.

Overall, 45% of women polled said they have been sexually harassed at work. This translates to about 33.6 million women in the US.

The group that experienced the most harassment were women between the ages 30 and 44 — almost half (49%) said they had been sexually harassed at work. Not far behind, 47% of women ages 45 to 64 said they were sexually harassed at work, followed by 41% of women ages 18 to 20, and finally 40% of women 65 or older.

Sexual harassment at work doesn't just affect women.

While 15% of men said they had been sexually harassed at work, a higher proportion of men between the ages of 30 and 44 said they had been sexually harassed in the workplace: 22%.

Speaking up rarely ends well for the victim 

Former Fox News Channel host Gretchen Carlson stunned the media world when she filed a sexual-harassment lawsuit against Fox News chairman and CEO Roger Ailes in 2016.

In her lawsuit, Carlson said Ailes repeatedly sexually harassed her, and that she was fired from her job of 11 years for turning down his sexual advances.

The lawsuit ultimately led to Ailes' resignation from the network, which he had run since its founding in 1996, and Carlson settled the suit for a reported $20 million in 2016.

But Carlson did not walk away from the accusation unscathed.

At Fortune's Most Powerful Women (MPW) Summit in October, the TV journalist said she faced concentrated backlash on social media when she came forward, and many people close to her distanced themselves. "You find out who your friends are in a big way," she said. "It can be a very alone experience."

Carlson also said that, for many people who confront sexual harassment head-on, the fallout can often be steep:

"First of all, if you do come forward, you'll be labeled a 'troublemaker' or a 'bitch.' More importantly, you won't be believed. And, some people have even suggested that you do it for money or fame."

Carlson said it takes courage to put your career on the line and report sexual harassment in the workplace.

"When you know that that's the culture that we still live in ... it's the most important decision of your life to dig deep for that courage, to know that you might torpedo everything that you've worked so hard for," she said.

It's unsurprising, then, that 73% of the women who said they had been sexually harassed at work also said that they never reported it. Of the men that said they were sexually harassed at work, 81% said they never reported it.

Sexual harassment can happen anywhere, anytime, and be perpetrated by anyone

Certain factors may make organizations or institutions more susceptible to instances of sexual harassment.

A 2015 report from researchers at Kent State University and the University of Texas at Tyler found that the "prevalence of male norms in the male-dominated environment may result in a more hostile workplace for women who are perceived by men as violators of the gender norms."

But as Adam Bear and Joshua Knobe wrote in The New York Times, when normally inappropriate or unacceptable actions continue unabated, people tend to adapt their mindset, and sexual harassment becomes normalized and seen as less worthy of outrage.

This could happen literally anywhere — and in many places, it seems that it already has.

When asked to rate their employers' efforts against sexual harassment, 42% of the people MSN polled overall said their employers have done enough, while 26% said they haven't.

But when you ask women, who are disproportionately more likely to experience sexual harassment at work, the number of people satisfied with their employers' approach to sexual harassment at work drops to 36%, while 33% of women say their employers haven't done enough.

What's more, with 31% of the American workforce reporting they've been sexually harassed at work, if you work at a company with at least three people, odds are either you or one of your coworkers has been sexually harassed at work.

While this means you may not be affected directly, you are undoubtedly affected indirectly by the financial and emotional damage sexual harassment's causes.

According to Working Woman Magazine, a typical Fortune 500 corporation blighted by sexual harassment incidents can expect to lose $14.02 million adjusted for inflation annually from absenteeism, lower productivity, increased health-care costs, poor morale, and employee turnover.

And it cannot be good for any employer's bottom line when sexual harassment settlements and legal fees themselves cost the company tens of millions of dollars.

In fact, thanks to the growing number of allegations, Business Insider's Lauren Lyons Cole reports that some companies are purchasing employee practices liability insurance to protect against the financial risk of sexual harassment.

These policies have become a multi-billion dollar industry, with companies collectively paying over $2 billion in EPLI premiums last year.

"Claims are so common now that it's more or less part of the cost of doing business," New Jersey employment lawyer Stephanie Gironda told Business Insider.

SEE ALSO: Only 3 of the 50 most-loved CEOs in America are women — and the reason why transcends the corner office

DON'T MISS: A Facebook exec says the best way to remove bias against mothers is to force men to take equal parental leave

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Here's what that square patch on your backpack is actually used for

• Actress Rose McGowan shared the cover art for her new memoir "BRAVE."
• McGowan's memoir will explore her upbringing and her time working in Hollywood, and promises to "shine a light on a multibillion-dollar business built on systemic misogyny." 
• "BRAVE" will be released on January 30, 2018.

Actress Rose McGowan shared the intense and powerful cover art for her upcoming new memoir "BRAVE" on Twitter, and it shows the actress' head being shaved with an electric razor.

According to McGowan's website, her new memoir promises to explore "the truth about the entertainment industry," "dismantle the concept of fame," and "shine a light on a multibillion-dollar business built on systemic misogyny." 

McGowan's memoir will also focus on the actress' upbringing in the Children of God cult, how she escaped it at the age of 13, and how she eventually ended up getting "discovered" in Los Angeles.  

"My life, as you will read, has taken me from one cult to another," McGowan wrote. "BRAVE is the story of how I fought my way out of these cults and reclaimed my life. I want to help you do the same."

McGowan has been outspoken about misogyny and sexism in Hollywood since the allegations against Harvey Weinstein were unearthed, and has accused Weinstein of raping her. McGowan recently gave an impassioned speech at the Women's Convention speaking on the perils of sexism and calling for change. 

"BRAVE" will be released on January 30, 2018.

Here is the cover art for McGowan's new memoir:

SEE ALSO: 23 powerful men accused of sexual misconduct in the wake of Harvey Weinstein

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The latest 'Star Wars: The Last Jedi' trailer is here and it looks epic

• Disney was recently in talks to buy most of 21st Century Fox, according to CNBC's David Faber.
• The deal would trim 21st Century Fox's assets into a more focused slate of news and sports networks to better compete in a changing media landscape, the report said.
• An acquisition would exclude Fox News because Disney cannot own two broadcast networks, the report said. Fox's sports channels would also not be combined with ESPN to avoid antitrust scrutiny.
• Disney was reportedly interested in buying networks such as National Geographic and FX, among others.

The media corporation 21st Century Fox has been in talks to sell most of itself to Disney, CNBC's David Faber reported on Monday.

An acquisition would leave 21st Century Fox with a smaller, more focused portfolio of news and sports networks to better compete in a changing media space, the report said.

A deal would exclude the Fox broadcast network because Disney could not own two broadcast networks, the report said. (Disney acquired ABC in 1996.) It would also exclude Fox's sports channels to avoid regulatory concerns that combining them with ESPN would be anticompetitive.

Disney was reportedly interested in buying Fox assets including its studio division, partial ownership of the UK telecoms company Sky, and networks such as National Geographic and FX.

Disney could benefit from 21st Century Fox's television properties as it gets ready to launch a streaming service. The company announced in August that it would end its exclusive movie deal with Netflix in 2019 and launch an ad-free, Disney-branded streaming service.

Fox was willing to discuss an acquisition with Disney because its senior management believes the way to scale its media properties is not by buying others, the report said. Both companies aren't in talks now but could resume them, according to the report.

The report did not include a price that Disney may have offered 21st Century Fox.

Shares of 21st Century Fox spiked 6%, while Disney gained 1% on the news. Other cable networks, including Viacom and Discovery Communications, rallied; Netflix fell.

SEE ALSO: Broadcom offers to buy Qualcomm in what would be the largest tech deal ever

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: SCOTT GALLOWAY: Bad behavior cost Uber $20-30 billion

• Disney has reportedly been in talks to acquire parts of 21st Century Fox.
• Netflix shares are slipping after the news.
• Disney is set to pull its content from Netflix to start its own streaming service in 2019.
• Watch shares of Netflix move in real time here.

Shares of Netflix are sliding, down 0.67% at $198.67, after a CNBC's David Faber reported that Disney has been in talks to acquire certain entertainment parts of 21st Century Fox.

The potential deal would not include Fox's broadcast network, as Disney wouldn't be able to own two broadcast networks, the report says. The talks have been about the studio divisions of Fox's business, along with National Geographic, FX Networks and the UK's BSkyB.

The talks come after Disney acquired BAMTech to help build out its standalone streaming services for the company's sports and entertainment properties. Adding Fox's entertainment assets could bolster Disney's streaming offerings when it starts offering its services in 2018 and 2019. Netflix is the current holder of the rights to much of Disney's iconic catalog of content. That deal is set to expire in 2019.

Netflix hasn't been sitting still though. The company reportedly plans to spend more than $7 billion on content next year as it develops more original content. Netflix also bought MillarWorld and poached Shonda Rhimes from her longstanding host, ABC.

Disney is up 1.27% after the news but is down 5.79% this year.

Netflix is up 56.38% this year.

Read more about Disney's streaming plans here.

SEE ALSO: UBS: Disney has one big advantage that'll make its streaming movie service succeed

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: THE BOTTOM LINE: Chipotle's earnings disaster, Amazon's new headquarters, and the unstoppable stock market