When most people think of "next-generation" gaming graphics, they envision crisper textures, added realism, detailed environments, and a sharper resolution.

Resolution plays a huge role in the overall gameplay experience, and it's fast becoming a low-hanging ceiling that effectively limits the "next-generation" Xbox One and PlayStation 4 consoles.

Here's an example.

"Titanfall," the parkour shooter with large mechs thrown into the mix, is arguably the biggest debut yet for Microsoft's Xbox One. But did you know that when it debuted, there were regular old Xbox 360 games running at a higher 1080p resolution? Keep in mind, the Xbox 360 launched back in 2005 — some eight years before the Xbox One.

"Titanfall" ran at only 792p when it shipped, which is a significant drop compared to the 1080p HD quality most people are accustomed to by now.

In an age where we're beginning to see a push for 4K "Ultra HD" displays, which promise four times the resolution of 1080p HD TVs, it's tough to call anything "next-generation" when it's pumping out games at a lower resolution than the mobile games in people's pockets.

It's not just the Xbox One that's hampered by too little horsepower. While Sony's PlayStation 4 does have beefier hardware, it's still running into similar issues, just less frequently.

One of the biggest games at this year's gaming expo, E3, was the medieval roleplaying game, "The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt." The game will be released in 2015, but even a full year and some change after the Xbox One's release, the development team still can't promise 1080p HD graphics.

"We will hit 900p no problem," executive producer John Mamais said in an interview with Cinameblend. "We'd like to get it up to 1080p on Xbox One. That's our goal. Whether we can do it or not I don't know. We've got to squeeze everything we can out of the hardware."

The graphics bottleneck stems from the graphics cards nestled within the Xbox One and PlayStation 4. The graphics card inside the PlayStation 4 is more powerful than the graphics card inside the Xbox One, but they're both vastly underpowered when compared to even mid-grade gaming PCs of the last couple of years.

A lot of that has to do with cost; Sony and Microsoft have to ship gaming consoles that people can afford, and people have gotten used to spending around $400 for a gaming console.

But that creates a tradeoff for the PS4 and Xbox One.

It's a bit like a three-legged chair. If you forego one of the three important gaming pillars (resolution, game detail, frame rate), the remaining experience is far from what people have come to expect in next-generation gaming.

Game developers are itching to cram more textures and polygons into their games to up the level of detail, but the more detail involved, the more taxing it is to output the game in a higher resolution.

So if game developers want their games to have higher resolutions and higher levels of details, they often do so at the expense of the game's frame rate, or how smooth it is when you look around the environment. Ever try a game with a lot of choppiness and screen stuttering? That's what a low frame rate looks like. For ideal smoothness, most people say the minimum required frame rate is 60 frames per second (fps).

To combat these limitations, game developers, such as those working on "The Witcher 3" and "Titanfall," have attempted to compromise on all three aspects. They've lowered the resolution on their games, compromised on the level of detail people can see in their game environments, and chosen the below bare-minimum frame rate of only 30fps ("The Witcher 3" team is targeting a PS4 experience of 1080p HD, but with only 30fps).

For many, these are small details an inexperienced eye can often overlook.

But while the PS4 and Xbox One are both selling huge numbers, the hardware's limitations will quickly become more apparent as the level of detail in games outgrows the constraints of the game consoles they're designed for.

Microsoft has attempted to mitigate the graphics bottleneck by freeing up graphics power reserved for its Kinect sensor. The move will certainly help, but Microsoft said it expects the Xbox One to be around for "conservatively 10 years," a lifespan that could begin to feel stale and "standard-definition" within the next two.

Thankfully, game developers do have an ace up their sleeve: optimization.

One of the nice things about selling millions of the same device, all with the same hardware specifications, is that game developers can devote the entirety of their time to tweaking and squeezing every last ounce of horsepower from the machine.

Since developers know for certain that everyone will have the same device, it allows for a more laser-focused optimization process, compared to the wider scope of optimizing for PC users, where everyone has a slightly different build.

Optimization is the only thing allowing game consoles to get away with offering games at such a low resolution and frame rate, but the problem is only going to get worse with age. Chances are, Microsoft and Sony will need to revisit their respective product cycles, perhaps aiming for a new generation of game consoles every 5-7 years instead of 10. Otherwise, the games we'll see might just be more of the same. 

Join the conversation about this story »

ABC News has created an app for Apple TV that will include a 24-hour live feed of video content and on-demand offerings, Capital New York reports.

For those unfamiliar, Apple TV is an internet-connected device that allows users to watch on-demand video content on their televisions. While HBO, this History Channel, and PBS have apps of their own, ABC's around-the-clock channel would be the most ambitious play yet for Apple's set-top box — and it's from a traditional broadcast news outlet.

According to Capital New York, the app will have live video for about eight hours a day, as well as segments aired on television and original content created either for ABC's web properties or exclusively for the app.

The app will also air live feeds of events like speeches and press conferences, as well as a shot of earth from the International Space Station and other fixed camera feeds.

It will also provide viewers with a local option that will include content created by ABC affiliate stations in nine major markets.

"We are taking the best of everything, so if you want to have that more traditional experience, where you sit and watch something, we can do that, but we want to enhance that with all of these other pieces," Joe Ruffalo, senior vice president of ABC News Digital told Capital New York. "So if you want to switch to just Iraq coverage, you can go to just Iraq, if you want to hear about the World Cup you can do that, if you want just entertainment news, you can have that experience as well."

ABC plans to begin marketing its new app this week.

SEE ALSO:  How Vice Media Will Make $500 Million This Year

Join the conversation about this story »

Sunday night, when Matthew McConaughey accepted the award for Best Actor in a Drama Series at the Critics' Choice Awards for his role in "True Dectective," he addressed a question he — and probably many other big actors — get asked all the time: "Why did you make the move from film to TV?"

McConaughey said it was an easy answer. 

"Quality. Not only quality that specifically came out of ‘True Detective’ which was quality of the highest, but I’m talking about quality of television today," said McConaughey. "Television is raising the bar on the character-driven drama series. It just is."

"What other medium do you get to have that as actors and writers — that tasty act one which is all that character development that we love?" he continued. "You don’t get that anywhere else. Where else do you get to see that introduction to character so patiently unfold on the screen? ... Plus, you’ve got the weekly episodes. You’ve got the Monday-morning watercooler talk. You’ve got the Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday, whatever those days are, anticipation of seeing the next episode and I can’t wait to see it. That’s what television has given us as artists and that’s also what television has given us as audiences. I’d say thank you to that."

McConaughey joins a long list of actors who have boarded a television series in the past few years whether in a miniseries or a network series. Kevin Costner and Bill Paxton were a part of History's record-breaking 2012 miniseries, "Hatfields & McCoys," Ashton Kutcher boarded CBS' "Two and a Half Men," and Claire Danes leads Showtime's "Homeland." 

This summer, Halle Berry will appear as an astronaut on CBS' "Extant."

Watch McConaughey's speech below:

SEE ALSO: Why Sony Keeps Making Adam Sandler Movies

Join the conversation about this story »

You won’t find Jennifer Lawrence or Josh Hutcherson in Lionsgate’s new promotional posters for the third Hunger Games movie "The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 1." 

Instead, these strange new posters feature the unknown faces of “District Heroes” from each of the 12 districts from the movie. District 12, the mining district, shows a little girl covered in dirt, wearing tattered clothes with a mining helmet by her side and a gas mask in her lap.

The poster for District 6, the transportation district, features a young man wearing uncomfortable looking pants made entirely our of tires. He holds a massive tire over his left shoulder as he looks off into the distance. 

The hero in the lumber district (District 7) poster sits exposed, showing off his tattoos and his wooden leg, which he presumably crafted himself. 

The striking images look like they would be better suited for the pages of a fashion magazine, but they also look and feel like propaganda posters with slogans like “The Capitol salutes its citizens in the lumber district,” and "Panem today, Panem tomorrow, Panem forever."   

It’s an interesting move to create a promotional campaign for a film and not feature the stars of the cast, especially when the franchise has such a cult-like following. Plus the world can’t get enough Jennifer Lawrence. 

The posters are bold though. Bold enough to get people buzzing about the film, which won’t hit theaters until November 21. The ads are also bold enough for people to remember that this eerie campaign was made for a movie where teenagers fight to the death to please a deranged, power-hungry leader.

Not every district has a poster yet, but hopefully more will come out as the release date gets closer. 

Here are the rest of the posters:

You can find all of the new posters on the film’s website. 

Join the conversation about this story »

Friday afternoon we headed over to Buzzfeed headquarters to hear Daniel Radcliffe speak about his Broadway show “The Cripple of Inishmann” and reminisce about the decade he spent filming the "Harry Potter" movies. 

While the book series by J.K. Rowling has sold more 450 million copies, the actor, who went on to play lead character Harry, said he wasn’t always a big fan of the books. 

“I only read the first two and I wasn't really as into it as everyone else in my class was just because I wasn't really a reader,” said Radcilffe. “I was like oh books, I'm not ready.” 

Radcliffe said his first experience with the books, which first came out in 1997, was with his father reading them to him.  

“I remember he did an excellent voice of the basilisk which used to terrify me,” said Radcliffe. 

That didn’t last long. 

After he landed the part of the young wizard, Radcliffe said he was engulfed in the series. 

He was so into the books, that Radcliffe recalled he used to act out the books in his bedroom pretending he was Harry Potter. 

“I kind of got into it later. And then when I got the part what was interesting …  was that I was reading the fourth book when we started making the first movie and I remember being in my hotel room in Newcastle when we were about to go out and shoot the first scenes on the platform at 9 and three quarters and everything. And I remember being in my room reading passages of the book and getting really excited and pretending to be Harry in character in the books, jumping around my room acting out bits of what I would then be acting out for real like six years later."

Warner Bros. is now working on a new trilogy of "Harry Potter"-related movies based off the book “Fantastic Beasts & Where to Find Them,” one of Harry's school books.

Radcliffe will not be involved in the films, but he said that's okay after having worked 10 years on his own series of Potter movies.

"I can enjoy watching it grow and go on without feeling like, 'Oh I wish I was there,'" added Radcliffe.

SEE ALSO: Daniel Radcliffe says he'd be 'perfect' to play Robin in new Batman movie

Join the conversation about this story »

Next summer, the dinosaurs of Jurassic Park will return to the big screen in a new sequel, "Jurassic World."

While we've known about the movie for a while now, we didn't have a good idea of what the film will entail until now.

Tuesday morning on "Today," star Chris Pratt, who has been making a splash this year in "The LEGO Movie" and this summer's future release "Guardians of the Galaxy," revealed the plot for the film. 

"Jurassic World" will take place 22 years after the first film where people are actually visiting a dinosaur theme park.

"Where we're shooting right now is Jurassic World, people from around the world — 20,000 visitors a day — come to see the dinosaurs and see the several attractions," explained Pratt.

"It's been along long enough to where attendance starts to fall off a little bit so they decided to come up with a new attraction to bring even more people in. And, you're never going to believe it, but it doesn't go well," joked Pratt.

Pratt stars in the film out next summer alongside Bryce Dallas Howard and Ty Simpkins, the scene-stealing kid from "Iron Man 3." 

The movie will be directed by Colin Trevorrow ("Safety Not Guaranteed"). 

First check out a few photos from the set seen on "Today."

Here's director Trevorrow on set with Pratt.

And here's Pratt hanging on set.

Watch the interview below:

SEE ALSO: The 30 most expensive movies ever made

Join the conversation about this story »

Call for nominations!

Behind every executive is an assistant who makes stuff happen.

We're not talking about low-on-the-totem-pole employees who get coffee and dig up unpublished "Harry Potter" manuscripts for their bosses.

For our list of Most Powerful Executive Assistants In America, we want to acknowledge the behind-the-scenes operators who carry decision-making power at their companies, and make an impact in the lives of their employers, co-workers, and clients. We're looking to include assistants in all industries, from finance to tech to entertainment.

Nominate a powerful executive assistant by sending an email to lists@businessinsider.com, including the executive assistant's name, email address, a brief description of their role and impressive feats, and any relevant website links.

To be eligible, candidates must work in the United States.

We'll be accepting nominations through Friday, July 4.

Thanks!

SEE ALSO: 11 Assistants Who Run Hollywood

Join the conversation about this story »

Jerry Seinfeld is offering some tips on social media etiquette in the latest issue of Wired.

"Since I'm a cutting edge technology guy, I get asked a lot of technical questions," the 60-year-old comedian said sarcastically in a video for Wired. "So, I'm going to answer a few of them now."

1. Fan Question: "I think my neighbor is feeding my cat. Is it cool to use a drone to spy on him?"

Jerry's Answer: "What's wrong with someone feeding your cat? They're doing you a favor, leave them alone."

2. Q: "If someone posts about a death in their family, is it appropriate to 'like' the post?"

A: "Yes, death is not 100% bad — we need the room."

3. Q: "Is it okay to video a concert with my iPad?"

A: "Sure, sure go ahead. So you won't enjoy the concert and you won't enjoy the video, you will have negated everything."

4. Q: "Our human resources director just posted a nude photo of herself on Facebook. Is it okay to like it?"

A: "I've never had a job, not interested."

5. Q: "Is it hazardous to tweet on Ambien?"

A:"I don't think so, I don't think there's anything that can go wrong with a tweet. I think it's interesting we invented tweeting because we so admired birds, we thought, 'Oh my god we gotta be doing this — we also must drop an annoying series of small daily turds on the earth!'"

To read more social media etiquette tips from Wired, click here.

Watch more of Seinfeld's answers below in the full, funny video:

SEE ALSO: Jon Stewart and Sarah Jessica Parker Ride With Seinfeld In New Season Of 'Comedians In Cars Getting Coffee'

Join the conversation about this story »

Cindy Holland, Netflix's head of original content, recently gave a rare interview to The Hollywood Reporter to discuss how her small team helps new series come to fruition.

Holland, who oversees 16 employees and a growing portion of Netflix's $3 billion programming budget, "has been tasked with building the company's original series business, which began in 2011 with a $100 million, 26-episode bet on 'House of Cards,'" according to THR.

After an "Arrested Development" revival and the critically acclaimed "Orange Is the New Black" followed, Holland hasn't looked back.

Once Holland's team helps Netflix choose and purchase a show, the exec says it's "a balancing act" trying to help guide production while also granting plenty of creative freedom. Holland explains to THR:

"We view our job as helping support the creators to fulfill their vision, not ours. We view ourselves as the objective outsider. Sometimes in a writers room the mood will shift a certain way, and we'll start to remind people: 'Hey, early on you talked about wanting to explore this dynamic or these characters. Are you still intending to do that?' It's about being supportive and helping to point out things that from the outset the storytellers have expressed a desire to do."

As for advice Holland gives show creators, she says:

"We'll talk to them very early on about how series are consumed on Netflix. I think you can take the time to really develop characters and storylines, and you can go on some pretty interesting tangents and not be too concerned because the viewer will be right back with you in that story in the next hour to two hours. Jenji has commented that with Orange, it gives her the freedom to not have to service all of these characters in every episode, which would be daunting. Another thing we've learned is that if a viewer is going to watch, on average, 2 ½ episodes a night, if you're using similar source music or a lot of music, it can get repetitive."

Holland explains that next up on Netflix's agenda is broadening its comedy content.

"Comedies of varying types are an area of extreme interest to us," Holland revealed. "We're just starting in the comedy space outside of 'Arrested,' and comedies have a more territory-by-territory appeal. So we're doing some experimentation in comedy to see what kind of tailoring we might need to do for different markets."

One person Netflix is hoping will translate? Chelsea Handler, who just signed a deal for a stand-up special in October, followed by four "docucomedies" in 2015 and a talk show in 2016.

To read the rest of Holland's interview with The Hollywood Reporter, click here >

SEE ALSO: Netflix Signs Chelsea Handler To Beat Television At Its Own Game

Join the conversation about this story »

In a major decision regarding copyright law, the Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday against Aereo, a streaming service, and in favor of TV broadcasters.

In its 6-3 decision, the court reversed a lower-court decision that had ruled in favor of Aereo, which lets you stream live network TV on the internet.

The Supreme Court justices found that Aereo had violated copyrights owned by TV broadcasters, marketers, and distributors whose programs the company streamed.

"This ruling appears sweeping and definitive, determining that Aereo is illegal," the lawyer, Tom Goldstein, wrote on SCOTUSblog.

The case will have implications for the way content is delivered online.

Aereo's technology uses special high-definition antennas, about the size of a thumbnail, to pull in broadcast TV from the airwaves. The signal is transferred over the internet to your device. Aereo argued that it was legal because its service was no different from a company that rents HD antennas and DVR equipment to customers.

As Goldstein wrote on SCOTUSblog, "The essence of the Aereo ruling is that Aereo is equivalent to a cable company, not merely an equipment provider."

Copyright law generally requires you to seek permission before broadcasting a "public performance." Aereo said that it was legal and did not need to pay broadcasters as cable companies do because it streams programs through individual antennas into people's homes and is therefore a "private performance." The court's majority did not buy that argument. From its decision:

Viewed in terms of Congress’ regulatory objectives, these behind-the-scenes technological differences do not distinguish Aereo’s system from cable systems, which do perform publicly. Congress would as much have intended to protect a copyright holder from the unlicensed activities of Aereo as from those of cable companies.

Addressing concerns that ruling against Aereo could stifle technology, the court ruled that it didn't believe its decision would "discourage the emergence or use of different kinds of technologies."

The liberal Justice Stephen Breyer wrote the majority opinion and was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts as well as Justices Anthony Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan. Justice Antonin Scalia filed the dissenting opinion and was joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.

In his dissent, Scalia wrote that Aereo shouldn't be held liable for copyright infringement because users are the ones who select the programs they want to watch. Aereo is essentially a "copy shop," Scalia argued, a degree of involvement that isn't sufficient to make it liable for copyright infringement.

Aereo is different from other video-on-demand services that pay licensing fees, Scalia said. From the dissent:

Unlike video-on-demand services, Aereo does not provide a prearranged assortment of movies and television shows. Rather, it assigns each subscriber an antenna that — like a library card — can be used to obtain whatever broadcasts are freely available. Some of those broadcasts are copyrighted; others are in the public domain. The key point is that subscribers call all the shots: Aereo’s automated system does not relay any program, copyrighted or not, until a subscriber selects the program and tells Aereo to relay it.

Here's Aereo's full statement on the decision:

Today’s decision by the United States Supreme Court is a massive setback for the American consumer. We’ve said all along that we worked diligently to create a technology that complies with the law, but today’s decision clearly states that how the technology works does not matter. This sends a chilling message to the technology industry.  It is troubling that the Court states in its decision that, ‘to the extent commercial actors or other interested entities may be concerned with the relationship between the development and use of such technologies and the Copyright Act, they are of course free to seek action from Congress.’ (Majority, page 17) That begs the question: Are we moving towards a permission-based system for technology innovation?

Consumer access to free-to-air broadcast television is an essential part of our country’s fabric. Using an antenna to access free-to-air broadcast television is still meaningful for more than 60 million Americans across the United States.  And when new technology enables consumers to use a smarter, easier to use antenna, consumers and the marketplace win. Free-to-air broadcast television should not be available only to those who can afford to pay for the cable or satellite bundle.

Justice Scalia’s dissent gets its right. He calls out the majority’s opinion as ‘built on the shakiest of foundations.’ (Dissent, page 7)  Justice Scalia goes on to say that ‘The Court vows that its ruling will not affect cloud-storage providers and cable television systems, see ante, at 16-17, but it cannot deliver on that promise given the imprecision of its results-driven rule.’ (Dissent, page 11)”

We are disappointed in the outcome, but our work is not done.  We will continue to fight for our consumers and fight to create innovative technologies that have a meaningful and positive impact on our world.

SEE ALSO: The Supreme Court Is Going To Make A Decision This Week That Could Change The Future Of The TV Industry

Join the conversation about this story »

The U.S. Supreme Court declared that Aereo, the company that redirects broadcast TV signals over the internet to your laptop, tablet, or phone, is illegal.

As a result, the company is toast. Its CEO, Chet Kanojia, has said there is no plan B if Aereo loses. The company will likely have to shut down.

This is a shame. It's a huge loss for consumers. And in the long run, perhaps also a huge loss for the traditional TV business that wanted to kill Aereo.

And it could chill innovation in the cloud media industry, in much the same way that putting Napster out of business largely managed to relegate peer-to-peer media sharing apps to the margin of criminality (even though the justices tried to limit their ruling). There is just something wrong about the judicial branch ruling that new uses for old technologies are illegal.

Here is how Aereo works: The law allows anyone with a TV antenna (rabbit ears, as your parents used to call them) to watch broadcast TV for free. The broadcasters sell ads on TV to pay for that, and make a profit doing so. Because more and more people are turning away from their TV sets in order to watch video on demand on their phones, tablets or laptops, free broadcast TV is under threat as a business. It survives mostly because cable companies bundle it with cable channels and pay the broadcasters retransmission fees to do so. And most people are happy to watch it as long as it comes alongside ESPN and HBO.

Aereo is one of those devices that's so simple it's brilliant: The company owns thousands of individual TV antennas which it stores centrally, one for each viewer, per the law. Aereo restricts you to watching within the market you subscribe to as well. For example, a New York City Aereo subscriber can't access her account if she's in Los Angeles.

You'd think that the TV companies would be cheering for this new device. Somehow, after years of audience declines, Aereo has found a new audience of viewers who love free broadcast TV so much they're willing to pay Aereo's monthly subscription fee to watch it. These people aren't just TV viewers, they're super-TV viewers and — arguably — much more valuable to the advertisers who fill CBS and Fox's coffers.

But no, all Fox, CBS et al. can see is a company that takes a fee for displaying something they were previously giving away for free. They regard Aereo's retransmission of their signal as being identical to a cable company retransmitting the signal without paying for it.

But to Aereo's credit, that's not how it's acting. Because Aero has an antenna for every viewer, the only change the company has made in broadcast consumption is to separate the viewer from the antenna. The monthly fee, arguably, is not for the TV shows themselves but for the viewer's ability to record and store them on the equivalent of a DVR, which is also stored remotely on Aereo's cloud servers. Again, this is exactly what free TV viewers do already — it's just that the antenna and the DVR are in their homes instead of a remote server.

What's frustrating about the Aereo litigation is that in an alternative universe, the TV networks would have asked Aereo for its audience data and then sold those super-TV viewers at a premium to advertisers. This, in fact, is what has happened to regular DVR viewers. Initially, advertisers declined to pay for them because they weren't watching live. It took years before advertisers and broadcasters realized that someone who records a whole season of shows and then binge-watches them in a single weekend is a more attentive viewer than someone watching live. (And if you don't believe me, consider how attractive a Viking river cruise in Europe now seems after four seasons of "Downton Abbey.")

Rather than embracing this new media for old TV, the networks threatened to end free TV altogether. CBS and Fox both said they would restrict their "broadcast" signal to cable providers if they had lost the case. (Ironically, this would make them even more dependent on the business model that was so dysfunctional it spawned Aereo in the first place.)

Make no mistake, large media companies hate technical innovation. TV and movie studios also believed that DVRs and VHS cassettes would kill their businesses. In fact, they enhanced them. Aereo is simply a remote personal video recorder.

The justices should have let it live.

SEE ALSO: TV Networks Are So Scared About This App, They're Taking It All The Way To The Supreme Court

Join the conversation about this story »

Lupita Nyong’o always looks flawless and her new ad for Lancôme is no exception. 

The Oscar-winning actress announced in April that she would be a new face for the company in a short YouTube video. Finally, the day has come and Nyong'o's first ad for Lancôme's Tient Idole Ultra 24H foundation is out. 

The "12 Years a Slave" star posted a photo of her first campaign to her Instagram account Tuesday night writing, "The secret I never intended to keep."

On Lancôme's website she says, "I am proud to represent Lancôme's unique vision for women and the idea that beauty should not be dictated, but should instead be an expression of a woman's freedom to be herself." 

Nyong'o is clearly excited about her future with the makeup and skincare brand. With a face like that, the next ad is bound to be just as flawless as the last and sell some serious Lancôme products.  

SEE ALSO: The Hunger Games Released These Haunting Movie Posters Without Jennifer Lawrence

Join the conversation about this story »

The first teaser trailer for "The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part I" is here, and fans of the series will be left reeling for more.

The teaser opens as an address by President Snow (Donald Sutherland) to the people of Panem; however, it's clear the intent of the video is a huge warning shot directly at Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence).

The final shots of the trailer hit like a punch to the gut. 

"If you resist the system, you starve yourself," says Snow. "If you fight against it, it is you who will bleed. I know you will stand with me, with us, with all of us, together as one."

As President Snow utters the following words, the video slowly pans out to show the fate of Peeta Mellark (Josh Hutcherson) who was captured by the Capitol at the end of the last film.

Those who watched "The Hunger Games: Catching Fire" were left to wonder what became of Katniss' onscreen "boyfriend." Fans of the books know this is the setup for a huge turn in Peeta's character *spoilers* as he becomes a brainwashed pawn of the Capitol *spoilers.*

"The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part I" is in theaters November 21.

SEE ALSO: See the first trailer for Brad Pitt's next movie "Fury"

Join the conversation about this story »

Caleb Bankston, who competed on 2013's season 27 of "Survivor: Blood vs. Water," died Tuesday after the train he was on derailed, People magazine confirmed

Bankston, 26, worked at the Alabama Warrior Railway in Birmingham. While details of the incident are not yet clear, Watco Companies L.L.C. officials confirmed to AP that a worker died in an accident.

According to his Facebook page, Bankston was a Locomotive Engineer/Conductor at Alabama Warrior Railway.

Bankston competed on the show last year with his fiancé, Colton Cumbie, and the couple finished ninth. 

The two were planning on getting married this fall, Bankston told Zap2it in his "Survivor" exit interview in December. 

"Colton and I ... are planning our wedding for Oct. 11, 2014 in Connecticut and then comes the starting of the house build and then we will be looking into surrogacy as soon as he finishes his student teaching and graduates school in May 2015," said Bankston at the time. 

SEE ALSO: The 20 TV Shows People Search For Most On Google, Ranked

Join the conversation about this story »

It’s hard to look back on Skyfall and not consider the film a raging success. The reviews were among the best the James Bond series has ever received. The box office netted more than one billion dollars in worldwide grosses, and the majority of fans seem to think the franchise is in better shape now than at any point since Sean Connery was leading the charge in the early to mid 1960s. The majority of fans, however, does not include everyone, and for a reminder of that, I now bring you Monty Python co-founder and beloved actor John Cleese. 

The seventy-four-year-old Englishman famously worked with 007 on The World Is Not Enough and Die Another Day, first as the assistant to Desmond Llewelyn’s Q and later as Q himself. When the series rebooted with Daniel Craig as James Bond, however, he was not asked to return, and if John Cleese himself is to be believed, it’s because Asian people don’t understand the British sense of humor. Maybe that’s true. Maybe it’s not. Either way, the comedian thinks the new tone is dragging the franchise down. 

Speaking on the Radio Times, he called the decrease in jokes a "fundamental flaw". Here’s an excerpt, courtesy of The Telegraph… 

"I believe that they decided that the tone they needed was that of the Bourne action movies, which are very gritty and humourless. Also, the big money was coming from Asia, from the Philippines, Vietnam, Indonesia, where the audiences go to watch the action sequences, and that’s why in my opinion the action sequences go on for too long."

Skyfall has a few jokes that really work, but the cheesy one-liner James Bond who is effortlessly in control at all times and excited about making little cracks here or there is definitely gone. In a way, that is sad for hardcore 007 fans too. The Roger Moore era might have its share of detractors, but all of those films are fun, breezy watches. They’re the type of things to put on during a relaxing Sunday afternoon with family members. Say what you will about Skyfall, but it’s not that type of movie. 

It all comes down to expectations. If the goal here is to make the most emotionally affecting and dramatic movie possible, then the franchise is on the right track. If the idea is to evolve with the times and keep James Bond modern, we’re all good. If the idea is to keep the secret agent with his classic tone as a throwback relic, then John Cleese is right. 

SEE ALSO: James Bond Drank About Six Cocktails A Day

Join the conversation about this story »

"I started this war killing Germans in Africa, now I'm killing Germans in Germany."

After 2009's "Inglourious Basterds," Brad Pitt is back to killing Nazis in new movie "Fury," except this time it's a much more serious film in tone.

Here's the official synopsis from Sony Pictures: 

"April, 1945. As the Allies make their final push in the European Theatre, a battle-hardened army sergeant named Wardaddy (Brad Pitt) commands a Sherman tank and her five-man crew on a deadly mission behind enemy lines. Outnumbered and outgunned, and with a rookie soldier thrust into their platoon, Wardaddy and his men face overwhelming odds in their heroic attempts to strike at the heart of Nazi Germany."

Don't expect Pitt to necessarily be the main star of the film. Director David Ayer ("End of Watch") previously told People Magazine he "set out to make the ultimate tank movie."

Ayer told People an authentic German Tiger tank was loaned from a museum for use in the film.

Here's an idea of what one of those looks like:

The film also stars Shia LaBeouf, Michael Peña, Jon Bernthal ("The Walking Dead"), and Scott Eastwood.

"Fury" is in theaters November 14.

SEE ALSO: Chris Pratt reveals the plot for "Jurassic World"

Join the conversation about this story »

Cindy Holland, Netflix's head of original content, recently revealed why the on-demand Internet streaming service responsible for hits like "House of Cards" and "Orange Is The New Black" decided to produce shows with a straight-to-series model, forgoing networks' traditional pilot seasons.

Holland explains to The Hollywood Reporter that the straight-to-series strategy was the result of three key things:

1. "Being necessity because I was a dep­artment of one when we licensed 'House of Cards.'" [Holland now oversees 16 employees.]

2. "Out of wanting to show our commitment to being serious about this business."

3. "When we had the opportunity as outsiders coming into a new business to take a look at what the best practices are at different networks, we were able to try on what works for us and what doesn't. We talked early on about not wanting to develop projects and not wanting to sink money into pilots because even if it's less perfect than you might want it to be, at least you have a full season that you can put in front of your subscribers and there will be people who will enjoy it. I expect that we'll mostly continue that."

Holland explains the only reason Netflix wouldn't continue with a straight-to-series model:

"We've been licensing series from third parties; as we start to get into developing and owning some of our own series, I expect that we'll spend a little bit of money on development. But we, as a group, want to keep a firm mantra of only putting things into the pipeline that we believe we'll actually make. I don't anticipate that we will spend money on pilots; it doesn't seem like an efficient thing for us to do.

It makes complete sense for networks to do it when you're talking about maximizing eyeballs for an hour's worth of time on a given day — there, you need to have a full bench that you can draw from. For us, it's quite a different proposition."

To read the rest of Holland's interview with The Hollywood Reporter, click here >

SEE ALSO: Here's How Involved Netflix Is In The Production Of Its Series'

Join the conversation about this story »

If you ever wanted to see your favorite "Game of Thrones" character as a pug, now is your chance. 

A UK-based video-on-demand service called Blinkbox transformed some of the show's popular characters into adorable, well-dressed pugs. The video was made to celebrate the release of season four of the HBO show on the company's on-demand service. 

Pugs seem to be the perfect choice to play some of the more intense characters like Jon Snow and King Joffrey, with their wrinkly faces and furrowed brows. 

Here's a side by side comparison of each pug and his or her respective GOT character.

Pug Tyrion Lannister vs. Real Tyrion Lannister: 

Pug Jon Snow vs. Real Jon Snow: 

Pug Daenerys Targaryen vs. Real Daenerys Targaryen: 

Pug Ned Stark vs. Real Ned Stark: 

Pug Robert Baratheon vs. Real Robert Baratheon: 

Pug Oberyn Martell vs. Real Oberyn Martell:

Pug Joffrey Baratheon vs. Real Joffrey Baratheon: 

The 90-second ad called “The Pugs of Westeros” features three different pugs (named Roxy, Blue, and Bono) who play all of the different characters, according to the company’s YouTube page. The three dogs are decked out in extremely authentic and very detailed GOT costumes while the show's original score plays in the background.  

Here's the full ad:

SEE ALSO: 'Game of Thrones' Finale Leaves Out A Huge Storyline From The Book

Join the conversation about this story »

In the last few years, Brooklyn has become Manhattan's cooler, younger brother.

New shops and restaurants are popping up every day, celebrities are moving there, and some of the best bars in all of New York City appear in Brooklyn's numerous and diverse neighborhoods.

Tonight, Esquire Network will be premiering its new show, "Best Bars in America." The TV show will look at the best bars around the U.S., including a number of hip hangouts here in Brooklyn.

Equire shared its picks for the best bars in Brooklyn, curated by Esquire's cocktails expert and author David Wondrich, who is featured in the new show.

Maison Premiere

298 Bedford Ave.

Paying homage to the good old days of romantic Paris, Maison Premiere features oyster and absinthe pairings, and is home to "the world's most accurate working replica" of the absinthe fountain from the famous Olde Absinthe House in New Orleans. Maison Premiere is a great place to enjoy a well-crafted cocktail with friends, but if you find yourself arriving solo at this Williamsburg establishment, you can always drink with the green fairy.

Tooker Alley

793 Washington Ave.

Tooker Alley was inspired by Chicago's historic "Dil Pickle Club," a semi-secret cultural melting pot hangout that went way beyond your typical speakeasy of the '20s. With its classic cocktails that nod to the founding members of the Dil Pickle Club, Crown Heights' Tooker Alley reproduces the community and brotherly love originally found in Chicago's DPC.

Radegast Hall & Biergarten

113 North Third St.

In traditional, German biergarten fashion, Radegast serves food and drink Hofbrauhaus-style, in large pint glasses along communal wooden tables. The smell of charred bratwursts and hot, soft pretzels with mustard, wafting out onto the streets of Williamsburg, is so tantalizing that it's nearly impossible not to order some noshes.

"Transformers: Age of Extinction" is in theaters Friday, but how does the sequel pull off all of its action intensive scenes?

Well, it helps to have a great stuntman like Dan Mast.

The 26-year-old, based in California, has been doing stunt work for the past five years on films including "Battleship," "After Earth," and "Divergent."

His latest film will be the fourth installment of the popular "Transformers" series, "Transformers: Age of Extinction," in which Mast will double for the film's star, Mark Wahlberg.

Business Insider recently spoke with Mast about his experiences on the film.

Mast says one of his first issues on the movie wasn't leaping off a tall building or doing an intricate stunt, but rather finding a place to work out.

"It was hard finding a gym close enough because we were living out of hotels," said Mast. "And hotel gyms are awful."

Once Mast found a location to bulk up, his regime included following strict workouts of intense weight lifting (his goal was an hour a day, 5-6 days a week) and a steady diet of protein shakes.

Capturing Wahlberg's look, on the other hand, didn't require the same effort.

"All we had to do was match the hair color and after that, that was it," said Mast. "There was no wigs, no prosthetics, and no makeup other than the occasional dirty blood."

For Mast, working on "Transformers" was very different from anything he had done before because of the fast pace of the film's director, Michael Bay.

"It was very fast paced," Mast explained about the film's production. "From the minute Bay walks on set to the minute he walks off we're going, going, going 100 miles per hour. Personally I like it like that."

The film's lack of down time did keep Mast on his toes, but it also didn't give him a lot of time to get to know the man he doubled for on set.

"We didn't have a lot of hanging out ... but he was very cool," Mast said of Wahlberg.

When there were breaks, Wahlberg took the time to say hello and was very humble, which is something that isn't always a standard in the industry.

"I hear stories of other actors that just show up to set and leave, sometimes their doubles don't even get to interact with them," Mast added. "It was nice to work with someone who wasn't like that."

While many will head out to see "Transformers" this weekend for the special effects and CGI Autobots, Mast hopes audiences don't lose sight of how much realistic stunt work went into the making of the film.

"The great thing about working with Michael Bay is that if he wants to blow something up, he's going to blow it up," said Mast. "We're not pretending to run away from things. We're not faking reactions... a lot of this is very real, the only thing they're adding in later are the robots."

For example, many of the Michael Bay signature pyrotechnics that Mast had to flee from on set weren't put together in the editing room. 

"I hope they [the audience] don't think that a lot of these explosions were just computer graphics because they weren't," Mast added. "I hope people realize the reality of it."

SEE ALSO: The 12 Most Sought-After Stunt Doubles In Hollywood

Join the conversation about this story »