I thought it was fun at the time. I remember reading years ago that a producer was actually considering creating a “Star Trek” Broadway musical (I might’ve read that in Entertainment Weekly).
The folks behind “Strange New Worlds” have just launched another “novelty episode” of the space series.
I had to check it out (even though I was skipping ahead from where I left off).
The episode is titled “Level-Five Transporter Accident,” and a mechanical issue with the Enterprise’s transporter system turns the crew into Muppets (while Mr. Scott is doing some convoluted-sounding experiment to expand long-range transportation).
All of them were transformed into puppets except for Mr. Spock (Ethan Peck), who was piloting a shuttlecraft at the time.
And yes, the puppets are essentially Muppets. The fuzzy puppets were created (and puppeteered) by Jim Henson’s Creature Shop.
This episode of SNW has created a firestorm of debate among “Star Trek” fans online (some the posts made me miss the days when the biggest debate fans had was whether or not they should be referred to as “Trekkies” or “Trekkers”).
Modern “Star Trek” (content that has been released since J.J. Abrams’ 2009 “Star Trek” movie) has elicited considerable debate among stalwart fans online.
There has been a considerable amount of discussion about how the franchise has strayed from the original vision creator Gene Roddenberry had in the 1960s.
Some fans think that the current showrunners aren’t taking the franchise seriously anymore.
Anson Mount (who plays Pike on the series) told SYFY Wire, “The puppet thing just existed out there as a joke. Every season would be ‘The puppet episode, right?’”
As you might imagine, the “puppet episode” has quickly become the “poster child” for fans’ perceived shortcomings with modern “Star Trek.”
I mentioned earlier in this post that I enjoyed the musical episode in season 2 of SNW. Sure, it was silly, but it was executed well and I thought it was fun.
I was hopeful the puppet-based “Level-Five Transporter Accident” episode would work in a similar fashion.
At times, modern “Star Trek” properties have been pretty dreary in nature (see “Star Trek: Discovery” as an example). So I don’t mind these moments of levity.
Unfortunately, this episode sort of felt flat for me.
Sure, it was cute to see the crew as puppets, but the novelty wore off pretty quickly.
You could tell that the writers didn’t know what to do with the gimmick. Moreover, they wrapped up the episode with the “laziest” solution to the problem, ever.
Considering the work it took to create the puppets and configure the sets to accommodate them, it is a shame they didn’t have a good story to tie it all together.
It could have been much, much better.
While “Star Trek: Strange New Worlds” is no stranger to “jumping the shark,” jumping the Muppet wasn’t the creative flex they were hoping for.
As video projectors have become more affordable for your average consumer, the idea of watching movies outside has lost some of its novelty for people.
At least, that has been my impression.
We used to do two “Dive-In Movie Nights” at our neighborhood pool during the summer. I was in charge of them for nearly a decade. Members used to enjoy them. Then, they started complaining about the movie selection (this isn’t the Sundance Film Festival, people!!).
Maybe it is because we live in a world where people can watch whatever movie they want, whenever they want. I dunno…
The Aksarben Village location has been open since 2022 and we have attended a number of events there. The Builders District location opened on June 12, 2026, and is located at 724 N. 16th Street.
The “Builders District” is the moniker given to the properties being redeveloped in the northern section of downtown between the Charles Schwab Field and Creighton University. The area is anchored by the Kiewit Headquarters and the company’s Innovation and Training building.
It had been a bit since I had explored that area in downtown Omaha. Film Streams’ screening of “Legally Blonde” at Sonny’s gave me an opportunity to see the progress.
The screening started at 7 p.m. on Aug. 17. It was in the low 80s (and the humidity was pleasant) when we arrived at the site and found our parking spot along 16th Street.
When the movie was released in 2001, we saw it seven times in the theater. Bridget was “test shopping” a new AMC MovieWatcher membership (for a theatrical research company) that allowed you to see unlimited movies for a monthly fee. I purchased a membership as well, and we definitely put it to the test with “Legally Blonde” that summer.
Film Streams had an information table set up near Sonny’s entrance. They had bags of theater popcorn set up on a table for attendees to snack on.
There are tables and chairs set up under the pergola for patrons. We set up camp there because we were planning to get dinner from the Alley Taco 402 food truck that was on hand for the evening.
In addition, there were a limited number of “low slung” seats set up on the lawn in front of the screen for attendees. There was ample space on the lawn for people bringing blankets and lawn chairs.
I had a steak taco and Bridget had a cheese quesadilla from the food truck. (Bridget definitely got the better deal — I should have known that a $3.50 taco was a street taco, but it didn’t dawn on me at the time.) Both items were tasty and they were a nice snack to have before the movie started.
In addition to the food, we purchased drinks from Sonny’s bar. The downtown Sonny’s features a bar built out of a retro camper (the Aksarben location features a bar built out of an old Airstream). I’d imagine this will become a popular spot during the College World Series.
We both had Sonny’s Limeade mocktails ($7 each). Mine had mango and Bridget’s had blueberry. We had a second round later in the evening.
There is a permanent LED wall that was used to show the movie. Before the movie, the screen was showing information about Sonny’s and the upcoming movie screenings. I would imagine they'll also have things like Husker Football games on there this fall.
There are fixed restrooms on the property for attendees. (That was one of my first questions before we went down there.) Two of the restrooms are in a permanent shipping container (very nice) and two additional restrooms are in a trailer.
Film Streams had a pre-movie contest tied to “Legally Blonde” trivia (done via phone) and offered some information on the theater and future screenings.
Film Streams features two locations in Omaha — its original location in downtown (Ruth Sokolof Theater) and its second location in Dundee. Oddly enough, the only movie we’ve seen at Film Streams was the terrific documentary “Page One: Inside the New York Times” (back in 2012).
I’m not sure why we haven’t been back (we saw several things at the old Dundee Theater back in the day).
It was a lot of fun to watch “Legally Blonde” with a group of enthusiastic fans. It had been 25 years since we’d watched the movie with other attendees, and it was neat to experience that again.
It also turned out to be a mild evening. It was a good night to watch a movie outdoors. Omaha’s weather lately has been “humidity soup,” so it was nice that it didn’t feel like a swamp.
As I mentioned earlier, “Film Streams on the Green” runs through Oct. 26. If you get a chance, check it out. It is a fun way to spend an evening and an opportunity to get to experience some of the new developments going on in Downtown Omaha.
People are already saying, “What the heck is a mass market paperback, Jon?”
I’m going to explain, and talk about why the discontinuation of the format (which happened at the end of 2025) is kind of a big deal for the publishing industry.
The mass market paperback format (first introduced by Pocket Books in the late 1930s) became synonymous with “paperback books” for more than 80 years.
The size of these books (typically measuring 4.25 inches x 6.8 inches) featured smaller print (similar to the font size found in newspapers) and a cheaper paper stock (than that found in hardcovers).
They were also much less expensive than their hardcover counterparts. As such, mass market paperbacks became the top selling book format for decades.
Mass market paperbacks have been credited with democratizing reading. In addition to the their reasonable price, you could also find these books in places like grocery stores, discount stores, and gas stations.
I took a chance on a number of writers while browsing newsstands at grocery stores.
One such author was western scribe Louis L’Amour.
I picked up one of L’Amour’s novels when Bridget and I were shopping for Fourth of July snacks one summer back in the 1990s. He quickly became one of my favorite writers.
From a construction standpoint, mass market paperbacks never held up particularly well.
The binding would crease and crack. The cardstock cover and pages would become “dog-eared” pretty easily. The pages yellowed in no time flat.
But those books were accessible. They were smaller in size (originally designed to fit in your pocket) which made them easier to tote around in a purse or a backpack.
Filmmaker Quentin Tarantino is so enamored with the format (having been an avid reader in his youth) that he released the 2021 novelization of his movie “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood” (read my review) as a mass market paperback.
This is where some smarty pants says, “I was just at a bookstore last week and saw all kinds of paperbacks. Why are you even talking about this?”
To be sure, the “trade paperback” format is alive and well (and has been steadily supplanting the mass market paperback format over the past 20 years).
Trade paperbacks are bigger in size than mass market paperbacks (generally 6 inches x 9 inches).
This photo will give you an idea of the size difference, relatively speaking. The book on the left is the mass market paperback. The book on the right is the trade paperback:
(At this point, Bridget is wondering why I own both the mass market AND trade paperback editions of Brad Thor’s Blowback…)
Trade paperbacks often feature a better paper stock and a bigger print size (similar to the hardcover editions).
They are also pricier. Trade paperbacks currently sell for ~$20 or more, compared to a ~$10 price tag for a mass market paperback.
Digital options the past two decades (such as Amazon’s Kindle format) have contributed to the erosion of both hardcover and paperback sales.
But an overall decline in daily reading has also had a stifling effect on the entire industry. According to recent research, daily reading has declined 40 percent the past two decades.
Grisham suggests that the popularity of streaming TV shows is one contributing factor. He says we talk about popular TV shows more than books.
“We don’t read as much as we used to,” admits Grisham, regarding his household’s reading habits. “If we have an hour or two at night, we’re probably going to watch a TV show that we’re hooked on.”
“I sold twice as many books before the Internet,” he says. “People were reading more. There were many more bookstores — 3000 more bookstores — in the U.S. before the Internet.”
We’re obviously not going to be putting the Internet in a bottle anytime soon.
We’re all guilty of scrolling social media when we could be doing something more intellectually stimulating, like reading a book.
I’ll admit, it has become harder for me to concentrate on long-form content (like a novel) the past few years.
It brings into question how you get the next generation interested in books when what they interact with on their phones and tablets seems far more immediate and stimulating to their developing brains.
Maybe there is a solution. Then again, maybe there isn’t.
Some thought the solution would be digital books.
I’ve purchased and read a handful of novels on my iPad over the years. I’ve just had a hard time getting into “e-books” in the same why I have “physical” books.
One of the things I’ve found irritating about digital books is when a publisher “updates” one of the books I have in my iPad library.
Sometimes the update brings new cover art (which sucks if I preferred the older cover art). Other times the changes are much less “apparent.”
For me, seeing books updated like they are an “app” sort of sucks the joy out of the reading experience.
It sort of goes something like this:
Friend: “Hey Jon, have you ever read ‘Lord of the Flies?’”
Me: “I have. As a matter of fact, I just downloaded version 3.7.1 of the book on my iPad last night.”
The fundamental issue with e-books is the fact that it requires you have a digital device to read the books on. Some screens are more conducive to the experience than others. You’ll also need an Internet connection available to download books.
You generally have to set up an account “somewhere” to get books — with either a paid or a free distribution service.
There might be some troubleshooting involved in the process, depending on the device and the software used.
While jumping through those hoops might seem ubiquitous in today’s society (“That’s just life in the 21st century, Jon!”), it takes away from the “analog experience” that makes reading a book such a pure endeavor.
And let’s face it, there are a million things that seem far more interesting and immediate to do on a phone or a tablet than reading a book.
In addition, the serendipitous experience of a book jacket catching your eye as you wander through a store (or browse the shelves at your local library branch) is essentially lost.
The ability to pick up a book, flip through the pages, and see if it is something you’d enjoy is boiled down to an excerpt and a synopsis on a website.
Maybe the algorithm will let you discover it; maybe it won’t.
This doesn’t even begin to tackle the fact that the way I’ve discovered a number of new books and authors has been friends and family members loaning or gifting me copies of books they’ve enjoyed.
All of this might seem like I’m howling at the moon, but something is obviously lost when the most accessible book formats of the past century is ushered away. Can the other print formats be far behind?
I want more people to read.
The process of turning symbols on a page into a visual picture stimulates the mind, develops cognitive abilities, enhances critical thinking, and cultivates creativity.
“Sometimes, Spider-Man has to do the hard thing. Even if it breaks Peter Parker’s heart.” — Peter Parker in “Spider-Man: Brand New Day”
As I was standing in the restroom, waiting for an open urinal after watching “Spider-Man: Brand New Day,” one of my fellow viewers was rattling off all the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) movies he hadn’t watched since 2019’s “Avengers: Endgame” (read my review).
It’s a pretty common affliction.
One of the challenges in the “post-Thanos” era of the MCU is the fact that a number of the movies haven’t been nearly as compelling.
Sure, there have been some gems like “Shang-Chi” (read my review) and “Spider-Man: No Way Home” (read my review), but many of the characters that moviegoers had grown to love (like Tony Stark and Steve Rogers) are no longer the beating heart of the series.
I’ll admit that I have found myself less motivated in recent years to head to a multiplex to see the latest Marvel movie. I haven’t yet seen “Fantastic Four: First Steps,” “Captain America: Brave New World,” or “Thunderbolts” (but plan to view them on Disney+ at some point).
So it was with a bit of trepidation that I sat down to watch “Spider-Man: Brand New Day.”
My Spidey senses were tingling as I took my seat.
Since the Marvel movies have been intertwined like a soapy TV series, I was wondering if I had missed something pertinent along the way.
I’m sure other viewers have felt the same way.
One thing I can say up front is that “Spider Man: Brand New Day” continues the Tom Holland-led franchise with all the wit, charm, and excitement that fans have grown to love in this series.
SPIDEY’S MOVIE JOURNEY HAS BEEN FASCINATING
Spider-Man’s theatrical history has been an interesting one. Creative choices haven't always come easy due to the fact that multiple entities have been involved with the property.
This came as a result of financial troubles at Marvel Entertainment Group during that decade (prior to Disney acquiring the company in 2009).
At that time, the theatrical rights to other Marvel characters like the Hulk (purchased by Universal) and the X-Men and the Fantastic Four (both controlled by 20th Century Fox until Disney bought the studio) were sold for “peanuts” to generate quick cash.
This is why it took awhile for the Spider-Man character to be integrated into Disney’s Marvel Cinematic Universe. Creative decisions have been a continual negotiation between Sony and Disney.
Despite all the legal hangups, it has been pretty remarkable how well the “collaboration” has worked as it regards the Spider-Man franchise.
WORKIN’ FOR A LIVIN’
In the early stages of “Brand New Day” we find Spider-Man (Tom Holland) working on his own, fighting crime in New York City.
A spell was cast by Doctor Strange at the end of 2021’s “Spider-Man: No Way Home” that resulted in the world forgetting who Peter Parker is (done in order to save the world from a “multiverse” of problems).
That meant girlfriend Michelle “MJ” Jones-Watson (Holland’s real-life wife Zendaya) and his buddy Ned Leeds (Jacob Batalon) are no longer in Parker’s life.
The events in “No Way Home” were set into motion due to a disgraced Parker (who was publicly outed as Spider-Man by the Daily Bugle’s J. Jonah Jameson) trying to find a way for his two friends to get into MIT (all three were rejected by the school as a result of Parker’s alleged exploits).
MJ and Ned were ultimately able to attend MIT, but our hero (whose alter-ego is no longer known to the world) has abandoned his academic endeavors.
“Brand New Day” starts off with Spider-Man stopping various crimes around the city. Our hero is no longer a heretic. In fact, he’s a local hero.
The character is evolving. As the movie progresses, we see emotional and physical changes in Parker.
As much as I love Holland’s Spider-Man films, the character sometimes felt like a mere cog in the Avengers engine.
Being Tony Stark’s protege was a cool hook for Parker. But being the “Iron Spider” kept the character from fully realizing his full potential.
It’s readily apparent that the folks running Marvel Studios wanted to make the character’s powers less “gadget-based” and more “organic” in nature (similar to Tobey Maguire’s version of Spider-Man featured in the Sam Raimi movies).
Like a teenager going through puberty, Parker’s “inner arachnid” is coming to the surface. For example, he develops organic web slingers (and has to ditch the mechanical version he’s been using), but the issues facing our hero go further than that.
I have a theory on why this is taking place, and I will get to that in a little bit…
Anyhow, our hero comes across a new threat as he is chasing down ne’er-do-wells in the form of a mysterious individual (known only as V-Max) who is able to perform a “mind-control-possession” thing on unsuspecting victims.
For some reason, this new “villain” isn’t able to control Parker’s mind, but he also can’t trust the words and actions of those around him.
As a result, Spider-Man has to play a game of “who do you trust” as the narrative unfolds.
WHERE IS SPIDER-MAN HEADED?
Parker also has to come to terms with how he is going to control his own biological changes… and how he is going to thwart the mind-control abilities of his antagonist.
This becomes the crux of “Spider-Man: Brand New Day’s” second and third acts.
We find Parker reaching out to Bruce Banner (Mark Ruffalo), a man who has considerable experience concocting methods to “hamper” his inner Hulk.
This eventually leads Parker to a moral dilemma, questioning whether or not these unique biological abilities should be controlled.
The fundamental question is this: “Where is all of this leading?”
It is apparent that Marvel Studios honcho Kevin Feige is laying the groundwork for a new X-Men movie.
The mysterious V-Max (played by “Stranger Things” actress Sadie Sink) is revealed to be a character with “unique abilities”… a character that keen Marvel observers should be very familiar with.
But how does Peter Parker/Spider-Man fit into all of this? There has to be a salient reason his metamorphosis is taking place.
My theory is that the genetically evolving Parker will be part of the new-look X-Men group. Yes, I know that sounds bizarre, but the possibility is there.
Including Spider-Man in an upcoming X-Men reboot would be a smart way to spur interest. Moreover, it would pave the way for better box office potential.
We’ve seen a lot of attempts to revitalize the X-Men movie franchise in the past. They need a new hook to get wary (and weary) viewers interested again.
Practical considerations like this have to be considered in the current theatrical climate.
I could be wrong, but that’s how I’m reading the tea leaves at the moment.
SOME THINGS I LIKED
One of the stronger characters featured in “Spider-Man: Brand New Day” is Frank Castle/Punisher (Jon Bernthal).
This incarnation of the character is pulled from Marvel’s “The Punisher” TV series (that also starred Bernthal).
I haven’t watched the series, but I think I might check it out after seeing Castle in action in “Brand New Day.”
Castle provides a rough-and-tumble “blue collar” sensibility to the movie. The character ends up aiding and working alongside Spider-Man. The odd-couple dynamic between the two is pretty entertaining. Overall, Castle was a nice addition to the lineup.
It was also nice to see “red-hot” actor Tramell Tillman in the film playing Bill Metzger (who is head of the Department of Damage Control).
Tillman is best known for playing Seth Milchick in the Apple TV series “Severance” (a terrific show, by the way). He also played a naval officer in last year’s “Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning.”
Even though it isn’t the biggest role, Tillman gives you a lot with what little he has to work with.
In addition to the new characters, “Spider-Man: Brand New Day” has a new director on board.
The previous head of the “current era” Spider-Man franchise was Jon Watts.
This time out, Destin Daniel Cretton was tasked with the directing duties.
Cretton previously directed the 2018 Marvel movie “Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings” (read my review).
In my review of “Shang-Chi” I wrote, “the likable vibe of [“Shang-Chi”] makes for a surprisingly strong viewing experience.”
I think he was an effective choice to lead this entry in the “Spider-Man” series.
The overall look and feel of “Spider-Man: Brand New Day” is different than the past films in the series. I liked the new vibe.
I am hoping he directs more Marvel movies down the road.
FRIENDS FOREVER, RIGHT?
A key theme winding its way through “Spider-Man: Brand New Day” is the future of Peter’s relationship with MJ and Ned.
The three were a capable trio in the previous Spider-Man movies. More than that, there was a likable dynamic between the characters.
I think one of the reasons “Spider-Man: Brand New Day” is doing as well as it is at the box office has to do with Peter’s inner-turmoil as he lives a life without them, while yearning to be reunited with them.
It has been a difficult four years for Parker.
All of this makes Spider-Man a very relatable hero for the moviegoing audience.
In my opinion, that is what ranks him among the best in the current crop of Marvel Cinematic Universe characters.
FINAL THOUGHTS
For more than a decade, Marvel movies largely shaped the theater-going experience. They stood as stalwart tentpoles annually at the box office.
It has been a rocky road for the Marvel Cinematic Universe the past five years, but there are hopeful signs on the horizon.
“Spider-Man: Brand New Day” is a step in the right direction. It is an exciting movie with great visual effects and some terrific action sequences (although, my littlest nephew said he wished there was MORE action in the movie 😉).
All that said, the key selling point of “Spider-Man: Brand New Day” is the human side of the story. We feel for Peter Parker as he deals with the emotional turmoil brought on by the decisions he has made.
We sense his inner struggle as he attempts to reconcile an existential crisis brought on by factors outside of his control.
The Marvel Cinematic Universe is at its best when the human dynamic is at its strongest.
This is one of the strongest superhero movies in recent memory.
