For fans of the TV series, for fans of the great visual stylist M. Night Shyamalan, it’s the movie we’ve been waiting years for.
Even those who have been disappointed by recent Shyamalan projects must concede that the guy knows how to put iconic images on the television screen. The terrified little boy seeing ghosts, the superheroes in plain sight, the alien invasion in the cornfield, the red-suited rural village invaders.
Now the filmmaker has an avatar who can master the elements – bending the air, arcing the water, and bundling the fire. Here’s betting that “The Last Airbender” is one of the most visually stunning works of the year.
Paramount was kind enough to give us an exclusive bundle of Shyamalan compositions from the film – all shots that reaffirm: This is one going to be one memorable war.
All photos courtesy Paramount Pictures. Click on the photo to enlarge.
In an effort to increase substance abuse awareness, Recovery.org decided to compile 100 mugshots from marijuana, DUI, and methamphetamine arrestsIn an effort to increase substance abuse awareness, <a href="http://Recovery.org">Recovery.org</a> decided to compile 100 mugshots from marijuana, DUI, and methamphetamine arrests to see what the average face looks like on drugs.rnrn"While it is unlikely that a user's basic facial structure depends on the substance they were arrested for, the goal of this project is to expose the effects certain substances might have on a user's appearance," <a href="http://www.recovery.org/learn/average-faces-of-drug-abuse/#.Uyr1bP0aCDo" target="_blank">the website reads.</a> And what better way to illustrate that than through gifs?rnrnrnrnAccording to <a href="http://Recovery.org">Recovery.org</a>, marijuana users tend to have rounder features and a full face, meth users appear gaunt with sagging skin and sunken eyes, and DUI arrestees look … pretty normal.rnrnHere's a larger version of the final results:The Turkish PM blocks Twitter and threatens to do the same for Facebook and YouTube. Social media has been a key tool for protestors in Turkey.The Turkish Prime Minister has <a href="http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/well-eradicate-twitter-vows-turkish-prime-minister-erdogan.aspx?pageID=238&nID=63884&NewsCatID=338" target="_blank">banned Twitter</a> across the country. Twitter was blocked just after midnight in Turkey Thursday, <a href="http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/03/20/turkey-twitter-idUKL6N0MH5KQ20140320" target="_blank">according to Reuters</a>.rnrnPrime Minister Tayyip Erdoğan stated his intention to block the social media platform—which has been an essential means of communication and organization in Turkey—12 hours before actually cutting if off, <a href="http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/well-eradicate-twitter-vows-turkish-prime-minister-erdogan.aspx?pageID=238&nID=63884&NewsCatID=338" target="_blank">according to</a> the Turkish newspaper Hurriyet Daily News. “We now have a court order. We’ll eradicate Twitter. I don’t care what the international community says. Everyone will witness the power of the Turkish Republic,” Erdoğan said at a campaign rally in Bursa on March 20.rnrnThose who tried to access Twitter were taken to a statement from Turkey's telecommunications regulator that cites court orders allowing the government to ban Twitter.rnrnIn 2013 during the Occupy Gezi protests, Erdoğan called all of social media "the worst menace to society." This ban comes just before the local elections in Istanbul on March 30 and shortly after the February protests in Taksim Square in Istanbul against a controversial Internet law. The new law makes bans such as this illegal.rnrn“The ban started after midnight and got into effect gradually depending which internet providers they used, but it's a court order (actually four different courts) which means every provider, including GSM companies, are obliged to implement this ban,” Turkish journalist Erdem Arda Gunes <a href="http://www.dailydot.com/politics/twitter-banned-turkey/" target="_blank">told</a> the Daily Dot.rnrnErdoğan's office said in a statement that Twitter failed to follow Turkish court orders that sought Twitter to remove some links on their site. "If Twitter officials insist on not implementing court orders and rules of law ... there will be no other option but to prevent access to Twitter to help satisfy our citizens' grievances," the statement said.rnrnTwitter told Reuters they were investigating the issue but had not official statement. The San Francisco-based company has offered an alternate method for tweeters in Turkey to use the platform:rnrnhttps://twitter.com/policy/statuses/446775722120458241rnrnHowever, those who cannot access Twitter in Turkey will likely not see the alternate method offered by the company.rnrnErdoğan threatened two weeks ago to ban Facebook and YouTube along with Twitter, according to Reuters. After incriminating audio recordings revealing corruption inside his government popped up on these services, Erdoğan said his enemies were abusing the platforms.rnrn[<em><a href="http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/03/20/turkey-twitter-idUKL6N0MH5KQ20140320" target="_blank">Reuters</a></em>]Netflix and Comcast are feuding over whether "paid peering" deals should be considered a net neutrality issue. The FCC will soon decideIs Reed Hastings feeling buyer's remorse?rnrnThe Netflix CEO <a href="http://blog.netflix.com/2014/03/internet-tolls-and-case-for-strong-net.html">lashed out</a> at the top U.S. Internet service providers on Thursday for charging what he called an "arbitrary tax" on the popular online video company for ensuring that users receive good service. Hastings made his comments in a <a href="http://blog.netflix.com/2014/03/internet-tolls-and-case-for-strong-net.html">blog post</a> one month after Netflix <a href="http://time.com/9373/comcast-netflix-deal/">struck a deal</a> with Comcast to directly connect their networks to improve service for consumers.rnrnHastings' comments are the latest salvo in the multi-year battle over "<a href="http://business.time.com/2014/01/15/net-neutrality-ruling-paves-the-way-for-internet-fast-lanes/">net neutrality</a>," the idea enshrined in the <a href="http://business.time.com/2014/01/15/net-neutrality-ruling-paves-the-way-for-internet-fast-lanes/">now-defunct</a> U.S. Open Internet rules that prohibited major Internet service providers like Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T from favoring some online services at the expense of rivals. Hastings' blog post provoked a quick response from Comcast, which declared that no company "has had a stronger commitment to openness of the Internet than Comcast."rnrnThe fundamental issue at stake is whether paid peering deals, which are technical agreements between Internet content companies, bandwidth providers, and broadband service providers, should be covered by net neutrality rules. In its 2010 Open Internet order, which was <a href="http://business.time.com/2014/01/15/net-neutrality-ruling-paves-the-way-for-internet-fast-lanes/">stuck down</a> by a federal judge in January, the Federal Communications Commission made clear that wasn't the case. The timing of Hastings's post was not arbitrary: Friday is the deadline for filing comments in the FCC's Open Internet <a href="http://www.fcc.gov/document/new-docket-established-address-open-internet-remand">docket</a>, which is designed to remedy the recent court defeat.rnrnThe FCC’s order, which only applies to the “last mile” connection into consumers’ homes, <a href="https://twitter.com/samgustin/status/437771372442304513">specifically exempted</a> “existing arrangements for network interconnection, including existing paid peering arrangements,” which means that the interconnection <a href="http://time.com/9373/comcast-netflix-deal/">deal</a> struck by Comcast and Netflix last month is not covered by the rules. Still, some net neutrality advocates want to make paid peering deals a net neutrality issue, and Hastings appears to be appealing to that constituency.rnrnIn his blog post, Hastings drew a contrast between what he called "weak" net neutrality, which is how he described the FCC's <a href="http://business.time.com/2014/01/15/net-neutrality-ruling-paves-the-way-for-internet-fast-lanes/">recently overturned</a> rules, and "strong" net neutrality," which he said would prevent ISPs from "charging a toll for interconnection to services like Netflix, YouTube, or Skype, or intermediaries such as Cogent, Akamai or Level 3, to deliver the services and data requested by ISP residential subscribers."rnrnInternet service providers, Hastings asserted, "must provide sufficient access to their network without charge." That proposition is anathema to the nation's largest ISPs, which for years have expressed displeasure that they are obliged to deliver high bandwidth content -- which often competes with their own video offerings -- over the infrastructure they've spent billions of dollars to build. By suggesting that the nation's largest Internet service providers connect Netflix to consumers "without charge," the online video service is asking for special treatment, the ISPs say.rnrnIn his blog post, Hastings did not specify an actual policy solution to his company's problem. One option would be for the FCC to reclassify broadband as a “telecommunications” service, which would allow it to establish “common carrier” regulations prohibiting the broadband giants from discriminating against rival services. It's unclear whether this so-called "Title II" reclassification is what Hastings had in mind when he referred to "strong" net neutrality. A Netflix spokesperson did not immediately return a request for comment from TIME seeking clarification.rnrnHastings did say that Netflix is willing to pay ISPs for better service for consumers, at least in the short term. Neither Netflix nor Comcast will disclose the financial details of their interconnection agreement, but Netflix has said that the amount is not "material" to its bottom line. But that's just for Comcast. Netflix is concerned that now that it's struck that deal, other ISPs like AT&T and Verizon will demand a similar amount, which could add up quickly.rnrnDespite the fact that paid peering agreements have been a standard feature of the Internet's behind-the-scenes architecture for many years -- and were explicitly allowed by the FCC -- Netflix now wants to frame such deals in terms of net neutrality. "Some big ISPs are extracting a toll because they can -- they effectively control access to millions of consumers and are willing to sacrifice the interests of their own customers to press Netflix and others to pay," Hastings wrote. "Netflix believes strong net neutrality is critical, but in the near term we will in cases pay the toll to the powerful ISPs to protect our consumer experience."rnrnFor its part, Comcast bristled at the suggestion that it was extracting an unjust "tax" from Netflix. “The Open Internet rules never were designed to deal with peering and Internet interconnection, which have been an essential part of the growth of the Internet for two decades," David Cohen, Comcast's executive vice president, said in a statement. "Providers like Netflix have always paid for their interconnection to the Internet and have always had ample options to ensure that their customers receive an optimal performance through all ISPs at a fair price."rnrnNetflix's anti-Comcast outburst comes as <a href="http://time.com/9373/comcast-netflix-deal/">federal</a> and <a href="http://time.com/30616/comcast-time-warner-cable-merger-states/">state</a> regulators are scrutinizing the broadband giant's proposed $45 billion deal to buy Time Warner Cable, which would create a broadband titan with unprecedented market power. (Time Warner Cable was spun off from TIME parent Time Warner in 2009.) As part of the proposed Time Warner Cable deal, Comcast will extend the commitment it made during its NBCUniversal review to abide by open Internet principles until 2018.rnrnThe latest flare-up between Netflix and Comcast underscores the ongoing shift in the commercial architecture of the Internet as consumers use increasing amounts of bandwidth. It also highlights the growing leverage held by broadband giants like Comcast, Verizon and Time Warner Cable in negotiations with content companies like Netflix. After the FCC's Open Internet rules were <a href="http://business.time.com/2014/01/15/net-neutrality-ruling-paves-the-way-for-internet-fast-lanes/">struck down</a>, the nation's largest Internet companies were plunged into a period of uncertainty. It's now up to the FCC to decide how it wants to proceed, and whether paid peering deals like the one struck by Comcast and Netflix will be covered by its rules.Netflix and Comcast are feuding over whether "paid peering" deals should be considered a net neutrality issue. The FCC will soon decideIs Reed Hastings feeling buyer's remorse?rnrnThe Netflix CEO <a href="http://blog.netflix.com/2014/03/internet-tolls-and-case-for-strong-net.html">lashed out</a> at the top U.S. Internet service providers on Thursday for charging what he called an "arbitrary tax" on the popular online video company for ensuring that users receive good service. Hastings made his comments in a <a href="http://blog.netflix.com/2014/03/internet-tolls-and-case-for-strong-net.html">blog post</a> one month after Netflix <a href="http://time.com/9373/comcast-netflix-deal/">struck a deal</a> with Comcast to directly connect their networks to improve service for consumers.rnrnHastings' comments are the latest salvo in the multi-year battle over "<a href="http://business.time.com/2014/01/15/net-neutrality-ruling-paves-the-way-for-internet-fast-lanes/">net neutrality</a>," the idea enshrined in the <a href="http://business.time.com/2014/01/15/net-neutrality-ruling-paves-the-way-for-internet-fast-lanes/">now-defunct</a> U.S. Open Internet rules that prohibit major Internet service providers like Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T from favoring some online services at the expense of rivals. Hastings' blog post provoked a quick response from Comcast, which declared that no company "has had a stronger commitment to openness of the Internet than Comcast."rnrnThe fundamental issue at stake is whether paid peering deals, which are technical agreements between Internet content companies, bandwidth providers, and broadband service providers, should be covered by net neutrality rules. In its 2010 Open Internet order, which was <a href="http://business.time.com/2014/01/15/net-neutrality-ruling-paves-the-way-for-internet-fast-lanes/">stuck down</a> by a federal judge in January, the Federal Communications Commission made clear that wasn't the case. The timing of Hastings's post was not arbitrary: Friday is the deadline for filing comments in the FCC's Open Internet <a href="http://www.fcc.gov/document/new-docket-established-address-open-internet-remand">docket</a>, which is designed to remedy the recent court defeat.rnrnThe FCC’s order, which only applies to the “last mile” connection into consumers’ homes, <a href="https://twitter.com/samgustin/status/437771372442304513">specifically exempted</a> “existing arrangements for network interconnection, including existing paid peering arrangements,” which means that the interconnection <a href="http://time.com/9373/comcast-netflix-deal/">deal</a> struck by Comcast and Netflix last month is not covered by the rules. Still, some net neutrality advocates want to make paid peering deals a net neutrality issue, and Hastings appears to be appealing to that constituency.rnrnIn his blog post, Hastings drew a contrast between what he called "weak" net neutrality, which is how he described the FCC's <a href="http://business.time.com/2014/01/15/net-neutrality-ruling-paves-the-way-for-internet-fast-lanes/">recently overturned</a> rules, and "strong" net neutrality," which he said would prevent ISPs from "charging a toll for interconnection to services like Netflix, YouTube, or Skype, or intermediaries such as Cogent, Akamai or Level 3, to deliver the services and data requested by ISP residential subscribers."rnrnInternet service providers, Hastings asserted, "must provide sufficient access to their network without charge." That proposition is anathema to the nation's largest ISPs, which for years have expressed displeasure that they are obliged to deliver high bandwidth content -- which often competes with their own video offerings -- over the infrastructure they've spent billions of dollars to build. By suggesting that the nation's largest Internet service providers connect Netflix to consumers "without charge," the online video service is asking for special treatment, the ISPs say.rnrnIn his blog post, Hastings did not specify an actual policy solution to his company's problem. One option would be for the FCC to reclassify broadband as a “telecommunications” service, which would allow it to establish “common carrier” regulations prohibiting the broadband giants from discriminating against rival services. It's unclear whether this so-called "Title II" reclassification is what Hastings had in mind when he referred to "strong" net neutrality. A Netflix spokesperson did not immediately return a request for comment from TIME seeking clarification.rnrnHastings did say that Netflix is willing to pay ISPs for better service for consumers, at least in the short term. Neither Netflix nor Comcast will disclose the financial details of their interconnection agreement, but Netflix has said that the amount is not "material" to its bottom line. But that's just for Comcast. Netflix is concerned that now that it's struck that deal, other ISPs like AT&T and Verizon will demand a similar amount, which could add up quickly.rnrnDespite the fact that paid peering agreements have been a standard feature of the Internet's behind-the-scenes architecture for many years -- and were explicitly allowed by the FCC -- Netflix now wants to frame such deals in terms of net neutrality. "Some big ISPs are extracting a toll because they can -- they effectively control access to millions of consumers and are willing to sacrifice the interests of their own customers to press Netflix and others to pay," Hastings wrote. "Netflix believes strong net neutrality is critical, but in the near term we will in cases pay the toll to the powerful ISPs to protect our consumer experience."rnrnFor its part, Comcast bristled at the suggestion that it was extracting an unjust "tax" from Netflix. “The Open Internet rules never were designed to deal with peering and Internet interconnection, which have been an essential part of the growth of the Internet for two decades," David Cohen, Comcast's executive vice president, said in a statement. "Providers like Netflix have always paid for their interconnection to the Internet and have always had ample options to ensure that their customers receive an optimal performance through all ISPs at a fair price."rnrnNetflix's anti-Comcast outburst comes as <a href="http://time.com/9373/comcast-netflix-deal/">federal</a> and <a href="http://time.com/30616/comcast-time-warner-cable-merger-states/">state</a> regulators are scrutinizing the broadband giant's proposed $45 billion deal to buy Time Warner Cable, which would create a broadband titan with unprecedented market power. (Time Warner Cable was spun off from TIME parent Time Warner in 2009.) As part of the proposed Time Warner Cable deal, Comcast will extend the commitment it made during its NBCUniversal review to abide by open Internet principles until 2018.rnrnThe latest flare-up between Netflix and Comcast underscores the ongoing shift in the commercial architecture of the Internet as consumers use increasing amounts of bandwidth. It also highlights the growing leverage held by broadband giants like Comcast, Verizon and Time Warner Cable in negotiations with content companies like Netflix. After the FCC's Open Internet rules were <a href="http://business.time.com/2014/01/15/net-neutrality-ruling-paves-the-way-for-internet-fast-lanes/">struck down</a>, the nation's largest Internet companies were plunged into a period of uncertainty. It's now up to the FCC to decide how it wants to proceed, and whether paid peering deals like the one struck by Comcast and Netflix will be covered by its rules.As Ukraine prepares to withdraw all forces from Crimea, Russian troops continue to close in on Ukrainian naval and military strongholds, seizing three warships<!-- wp:gutenberg-custom-blocks/featured-media {"id":33081,"url":"https://api.time.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/479513323.jpg","caption":"Russian soldiers and pro-Russian self-defence activists patrol at the Ukrainian navy headquarters in the Crimean city of Sevastopol on March 19, 2014.","credit":"Viktor Drachev—AFP/Getty Images"} -->nttttntttt<!-- /wp:gutenberg-custom-blocks/featured-media --><!-- wp:paragraph -->Russian militias released a Ukrainian naval commander from captivity on Thursday, ending a tense, one-day standoff at a naval base in the Black Sea port city of Sevastopol.<!-- /wp:paragraph --><!-- wp:paragraph -->Pro-Russian militants, many in unmarked uniforms, had swarmed into Ukraine’s naval headquarters one day earlier, seizing control of a key outpost nominally in control of Ukraine’s armed forces. In reality, those forces have been trapped inside of their bases for two weeks, encircled by a loose alliance of Russian troops and Crimean “self-defense” militias calling for their defection.<!-- /wp:paragraph --><!-- wp:paragraph -->Ukraine’s fledgeling government announced that it would stage a complete military withdrawal from the region, evacuating an estimated 25,000 servicemen and family members,<em></em> but tensions continued to flare on the ground. Shots rang out at a Ukrainian shipyard on Thursday as Russian forces seized control of three Ukrainian warships, <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/20/us-ukraine-crisis-sevastopol-idUSBREA2J1X220140320" target="_blank" rel="noopener">according to</a> Reuters.<!-- /wp:paragraph --><!-- wp:paragraph -->Western leaders promised a sustained campaign to “ratchet up” pressure on Moscow. E.U. leaders emerged from a summit in Brussels Thursday evening with a new set of sanctions against 12 individuals in Russian President Vladimir Putin’s inner circle, adding to a list of 21 individuals who face asset freezes and travel bans. German Chancellor Angela Merkel said that further escalations by Russia could be met with “broad-based” economic sanctions, <a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26676745" target="_blank" rel="noopener">according to</a> the BBC. The threat of sanctions caused Fitch Ratings to downgrade Russia’s credit outlook from stable to negative, Bloomberg <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-03-20/russia-outlook-cut-to-negative-by-s-p-as-obama-widens-sanctions.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reports</a>.<!-- /wp:paragraph --><!-- wp:paragraph -->Meanwhile, Russia’s treaty of annexation sailed through Russia’s lower house of Parliament on Thursday. The upper house is expected to ratify the treaty on Friday, thereby bringing the legal transition of power to a close, even as Russian forces continue to wrest control of Ukrainian military installations. In a sign of how unsteadily the transition has proceeded on the ground, Russian forces appear to have removed Ukrainian flags from the sterns of two seized warships, Reuters <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/20/us-ukraine-crisis-sevastopol-idUSBREA2J1X220140320" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reports</a>, but have yet to raise the Russian tricolor in their places.<!-- /wp:paragraph -->
