Latest news with #rebellion
Gizmodo
2 hours ago
- Entertainment
- Gizmodo
5 Big Things to Remember About ‘Squid Game' Season 2
Squid Game is about to reveal its endgame, with the third and final season of Netflix's global smash arriving June 27. But before we see who ends up living, dying, walking away with the 45.6 billion won, or any of the other prospective fates we can imagine, it's time to take a quick peek back at season two. Here's the refresher you need before the new episodes arrive. The Fight Became a Rebellion… Season two's final episode, 'Friend or Foe,' saw a massive fight that sparked in the men's bathroom between player factions—the 'X' voters, who wanted the game to end, versus the 'O' voters, who wanted to keep playing—turn into a vicious after-hours brawl. The 'O' voters, driven more by greed than the desire to survive, realized that if they killed off other players, the prize money would still increase; that element of the Squid Game wasn't limited to who died during the actual competitions. Amid the chaos, Gi-hun—Player 456, who returned after his victory in Squid Game season one aiming to dismantle the games forever—and his allies decided to hide under the bunks and avoid the player-on-player violence. They knew the pink-clad, gun-toting guards would eventually come in to break up the battle—and they seized the chaotic moment to overpower several of them and take their weapons. …But the Rebellion Failed The audience, of course, knew another season of Squid Game was coming, so the rebellion failing wasn't a total surprise for viewers. For Gi-hun and his crew, however, it was devastating. Almost all of the 'O' voters who helped Gi-hun escape the player area and attempt to break into the control room paid with their lives. Gi-hun—still not aware that his new pal, Player 001, is actually the Front Man masquerading not just as a player, but as a loyal friend—thinks he overhears the man draw his last breath over a deceptive a walkie-talkie transmission. And Gi-hun has no idea that the extra ammo he gave 001 when they parted ways mid-battle is what the Front Man, back under his mask, uses to kill Gi-hun's best friend, Player 390. Who's Still Alive in the Game? Other than Gi-hun and the Front Man, aka Player 001, here are the key players who are still standing as part of a very diminished group: Player 333, the failed crypto schemer. He killed Thanos, which we both love and hate him for. Player 222, his very pregnant ex-girlfriend. The marketing for season three has featured a baby crying, which feels ominous. Player 388, the former marine. His mental freakout during the rebellion came at a crucial moment—when he was racing back to collect more ammunition—and surely made a difference in who emerged victorious, and who got mowed down by tons of bullets. Player 120, the ex-special forces soldier. She was a crucial part of the rebellion, helping everyone learn how to operate their newly acquired high-powered firearms. She didn't want to back down, but Player 149 urged her to surrender. Players 149 and 007, the mother and son team. He's a gambler who entered the games trying to set things right; she's become sort of a de facto mother figure for all the 'X' voters. Player 125, the timid guy. He saw his closest friend killed during the player-on-player fight, so he'll have some scores to settle that may snap him out of his meek shell. Player 124, Thanos' bestie. We'll miss the cocky rapper Thanos—a casualty of the bathroom battle—and so will 124, especially when he finishes going through all the drugs Thanos left behind. Player 044, the self-proclaimed shaman. She was a big part of season two's earlier episodes, but sort of faded from the spotlight after that. If you look closely, though, you can see her avoiding the player-on-player fight and the rebellion on one of the very tall top bunks. What's Going on With No-eul, the Rebellious Pink Guard? The Masked Officer—the guy in charge when the Front Man is in player mode—knows No-eul from her North Korean soldier days. A talented sniper, she has a daughter back in North Korea, and took the Squid Game job seemingly out of desperation. But she's not supportive of the organ-harvesting operation that secretly preys on the fallen players, to the point of sabotaging it. That further puts her on her boss' radar. No-eul doesn't play a role in the 'Friend or Foe' rebellion, but there's still some bad blood to wade through in this behind-the-scenes storyline. What about the Detective and His Search? In season one, police detective Jun-ho went undercover as a Squid Game guard, hoping to find his missing brother. At the end of the season, Jun-ho realized his brother—who he knows as In-ho—is actually the Front Man himself, a gig In-ho ascended to after winning the games prior to Gi-hun's victory. Though Jun-ho keeps this bit of knowledge to himself, in season two he joins forces with Gi-hun to hopefully bring down the games. When Gi-hun gets whisked away to the seemingly untraceable island where the games are played, Jun-ho keeps searching with a crew that includes several gangsters—Gi-hun's former foes, now on his payroll—as well as the seemingly sympathetic Captain Park, who lends his boat to the cause. At the end of season two we learned that Captain Park is in fact working against this group—the Squid Game has deep pockets and a long reach!—but nobody still alive is aware that he's on the bad guys' side. They also don't know he won't hesitate to kill to protect that secret. Squid Game season three arrives June 27 on Netflix.
Yahoo
12 hours ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Ministers step up efforts to quell growing rebellion over UK welfare bill
The government is intensifying efforts to quell a growing rebellion over welfare cuts, with whips stepping up contact with MPs and strategists drawing up plans for a cabinet reshuffle in case of resignations. Ministers are taking a carrot-and-stick approach by laying out extra support for people who face losing their benefits, while also warning mutinous MPs of the consequences of voting against the plans. Several MPs said that whips were strengthening efforts to bring them into line after Liz Kendall, the work and pensions secretary, sought to ease concerns by promising extra protections for vulnerable people. Some MPs say there have been suggestions that the vote on cuts could be treated as a confidence issue, with those rebelling facing suspension from the whip or even deselection. No 10 and government sources strongly denied this. A senior government source said plans were being drawn up for new ministerial appointments in case any frontbenchers resign to vote against the cuts. No 10 is said to be keen on rewarding new MPs who have made an impression since the general election a year ago. The government plans to introduce a bill next week that will contain its welfare changes – including controversial cuts to disability benefits. Government figures say that concessions by Kendall this week have won over some would-be rebels. The Guardian reported Kendall would put 'non-negotiable' protections for the most vulnerable benefits recipients in the legislation. Under the changes, people with less than 12 months to live and those with lifelong conditions would automatically get a higher rate of universal credit and would be exempt from reassessments, which usually take place every three years. Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of people who will no longer qualify for personal independence payments (Pip) under the changes will continue to receive payments for 13 weeks, instead of the usual four. But some MPs are unmoved by the changes. One senior Labour backbencher said: 'This so-called olive branch is completely meaningless and won't have persuaded a single Labour MP, many of whom are really concerned for the impact on disabled people in their constituencies. These reforms were rushed through with no proper impact assessment and the government has to go back to the drawing board.' The government's proposed cuts to Pip, a benefit intended to help disabled people with their quality of life and unconnected to employment, have caused uproar in the parliamentary Labour party. About 170 Labour MPs are said to have communicated their concerns to the government. Government sources say the number of prospective rebels has fallen as a result of Kendall's concessions as well as ministers' openness to scrapping the two-child benefit cap and the Conservatives' decision to vote against the bill. Under the proposed changes, claimants would qualify for Pip only if they score a minimum of four points on a single daily living activity. Assessments score from 0 to 12 the difficulty that claimants face in a range of living activities such as preparing and eating food, communicating, washing and getting dressed. More than 370,000 people stand to lose their payments, while another 430,000 who would have qualified would no longer be eligible. On average these people will lose £4,500 a year. The government has argued the welfare system needs dramatic reform, with 1,000 new people a day making claims. Even with the cuts, Pip payments will continue to rise: an extra 750,000 people will receive payments by the end of this parliament.
Telegraph
2 days ago
- Politics
- Telegraph
Will the greedy Labour Left stop welfare cuts again?
The figure regularly quoted in the media is 170. That's the number of Labour MPs who might be prepared to withhold their support for the Government's welfare reform plans. Spoiler alert: the final toll of rebels voting against Liz Kendall's proposed welfare reforms will be nowhere near that number. There is always a degree of performative principle whenever any government unveils unpopular measures that incur the ire of local constituency associations. In the early days of the debate, shortly after the plans are publicly unveiled, local party members voice their displeasure and the MP, especially if he or she is only recently elected, takes care not to get on the wrong side of people who will have a say in whether he is allowed to stand as the Labour candidate next time round. Round robins are drafted, circulated and signed; Early Day Motions, the single-use wrapping paper of parliamentary procedure, are duly tabled; and MPs, often under pressure from constituents and activists, add their names. The press gleefully reports the names of those who may rebel, including those who, metaphorically, did no more than raise a quizzical eyebrow at the Government's plans as if to say: 'Well? Convince me!' Phase two involves military-precision strategy by the Government whips. There are no attempts at blackmail – disappointingly, there are no secret dossiers containing details of individual MPs' sexual or financial indiscretions that can be used to extort a potential rebel to support the Government. If Kendall's Bill is to make it through to subsequent parliamentary stages, and if her courageous – and for the most part, necessary – measures to cut the cost of welfare are to see the light of day, she must either face down the rebels or capitulate to their demands to water down her plans. The crisis needs to be addressed. The costs of Personal Independence Payments (PIP) are already on course to more than double from £15 billion in 2019-20 to £36 billion in real terms by the end of the current parliament. Mental health conditions have driven a substantial share of the increase in claims since lockdown, with one in four working age Britons now classed as disabled. That is a staggering, unbelievable (literally) level of incapacity, which, if accurate, stands as a damning indictment of the effectiveness of the NHS. After 80 years of publicly-funded health care, free at the point of use, shouldn't the number of people unable to do a day's work be going downwards rather than up? Easing up on her reforming zeal might win Kendall friends in the Parliamentary Labour Party and might even see her Bill pass into law, but it would do little to address the perverse incentives and underlying weaknesses of Britain's welfare system. The only proper course is to face down her opponents and win the argument. The problem is that to too many MPs, benefit claimants are seen as Labour's core vote. The word 'labour' in the party's title did used to mean something, but a reading and understanding of history is not as essential as it might once have been to our parliamentarians. Kendall could start by reminding her colleagues why the party was founded and for whose interests it was founded: people who work. With so much else going wrong for the Government, Keir Starmer badly needs a win on this most high profile of issues. Capitulating to the usual suspects, those who would threaten rebellion at the drop of a hat or the hint of a budget cut, is hardly worth it. Rebels are gonna rebel. But if there truly exists a large proportion of normally well-behaved and loyal MPs who genuinely cannot bring themselves to support the Bill in its current form, it would be better to lose the legislation altogether than to water down measures that, even in their current form, will not be radical enough to fix Britain's broken welfare system.
Geek Tyrant
13-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Geek Tyrant
ANDOR Creator Tony Gilroy Explains Why the Ghorman Massacre Had to Hit Hard — GeekTyrant
When Andor set its sights on the Ghorman Massacre in Season 2, the goal wasn't to check off a box in Star Wars lore. It was about making viewers sit in the fear, chaos, and brutality that fueled rebellion. In a recent scene breakdown for Variety, series creator Tony Gilroy explained that the Ghorman storyline wasn't treated as just another chapter in the rebellion, it was the centerpiece. 'We knew we were going to be investing very heavily in Ghorman to build a world, a planet, a city like that, at that scale, you have to really use it. We knew that it would be a centerpiece of the show. It's a centerpiece in canon. 'In the five years that I get to curate, it's a critical moment in the history of the rebellion. And yet it's very un-described. There was a mandate and a demand to do it, but there was no information about what it was, which is kind of the best thing for us.' The creative freedom allowed Gilroy and his team to imagine Ghorman as a fully realized society, with its own culture and infrastructure. The massacre unfolds in Palmo Square, a bustling, prosperous plaza built from the ground up by production designer Luke Hull. Everything here was made to serve the story. Gilroy said: 'It's not even just the architecture and the construction. It's designing a place for the story and for what the directors are going to be able to make... Luke Hull gives us this absolutely astonishing little stadium to play in. He fits it into the aesthetic of what we've already built... this is a year-long project.' The episode doesn't rely on spectacle. It's built for immersion. The camera doesn't flinch from the violence, there's no cutaway from the consequences, and it gives you someone to follow through the madness with Cassian. 'We knew that the massacre would be taking place in a town square. We also knew that we didn't want to do anything that looked or felt like anything that we had done before. We also wanted a prosperous planet. We wanted a place that was well off, politically connected, not an easy place for the Empire to take down.' For Diego Luna, that grounded brutality is part of what sets Andor apart from other Star Wars stories. The action has weight. The characters bleed sndf die, snd even something as intimate as a fistfight carries months of preparation. Luna explained: 'Just the fight with Syril was two days and a half. We worked on that fight for, I would say, months. There was many different choreographies we did before. We all agreed on one [version of the scene] that Tony was really happy about and that explained the whole story, that the fight has to tell.' And when it all comes together, Andor doesn't feel like a space opera. It feels like history, or, more accurately, like history repeating itself. 'The beauty of Andor is that you can get so deep that you might forget you're in this galaxy far, far away. You are just in a place that actually exists.' 'That's the strength of that episode, that it's a massacre that feels like personal, it's happening. You're looking at it, and you go like, 'Shit, those are people suffering. Those are people being hurt' You know, that destruction is actually happening.' Andor never wanted the Ghorman Massacre to be a reference, it wanted it to be a reckoning. One that doesn't just build the Rebellion's timeline, but earns it.
The Guardian
13-06-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
Ministers step up efforts to quell growing rebellion over UK welfare bill
The government is intensifying efforts to quell a growing rebellion over welfare cuts, with whips stepping up contact with MPs and strategists drawing up plans for a mini-reshuffle in case of resignations. Ministers are taking a carrot-and-stick approach by laying out extra support for people who face losing their benefits, while also warning mutinous MPs of the consequences of voting against the plans. Several MPs said that whips were strengthening efforts to bring them into line after Liz Kendall, the welfare secretary, sought to ease concerns by promising extra protections for vulnerable people. Some MPs say there have been suggestions that the vote on cuts could be treated as a confidence issue, with those rebelling facing suspension from the whip or even deselection. No 10 and government sources strongly denied this. A senior government source said plans were being drawn up for new ministerial appointments, in case any frontbenchers resign to vote. No 10 is said to be keen on rewarding new MPs who have made an impression since the general election a year ago. The government plans to introduce a bill next week that will contain its welfare reforms – including controversial cuts to disability benefits. Government figures say that concessions by Kendall this week have won over some would-be rebels. The Guardian reported Kendall would put 'non-negotiable' protections for the most vulnerable benefits recipients in the legislation. Under the changes, people with less than 12 months to live and those with lifelong conditions would automatically get a higher rate of universal credit and would be exempt from reassessments, which usually take place every three years. Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of people who will no longer qualify for personal independence payments (Pip) under the reforms will continue to receive payments for 13 weeks, instead of the usual four. But some MPs are unmoved by the changes. One senior Labour backbencher said: 'This so-called olive branch is completely meaningless and won't have persuaded a single Labour MP, many of whom are really concerned for the impact on disabled people in their constituencies. These reforms were rushed through with no proper impact assessment and the government has to go back to the drawing board.' The government's proposed cuts to Pip, a benefit which is intended to help disabled people with their quality of life and is not connected to employment, have sparked uproar in the Labour parliamentary party. About 170 Labour MPs are said to have communicated their concerns to the government. Government sources say the number of prospective rebels has fallen as a result of Kendall's concessions, along with ministers signalling an openness to scrapping the two-child benefit cap and the Conservatives' decision to vote against the reforms. Under the proposed reforms, claimants would not qualify for Pip unless they score a minimum of four points on a single daily living activity. Assessments score from 0 to 12 the difficulty that claimants face in a range of living activities such as preparing and eating food, communicating, washing and getting dressed. More than 370,000 people stand to lose their payments, while another 430,000 who would have qualified would no longer be eligible. On average these people will lose £4,500 a year. The government has argued the welfare system needs dramatic reform, with 1,000 new people a day making claims. Even with the cuts, Pip payments will continue to rise, with an extra 750,000 people receiving payments by the end of this parliament.
