The post Earth’ Has A Girlboss Problem And Wendy Is A Mary Sue appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. The main problem with Alien: Earth, in its first seven episodes, is the idiot ball, which I explained in my previous post about the Hulu series. Nearly every character is incredibly stupid, or at least makes constantly stupid choices at every turn. This extends to the factions and organizations involved. The show probably ought to have been called Alien: Security Breach, but of course in order to actually breach security, you’d need some there in the first place. Spoilers ahead. On the USCSS Maginot, in Episode 5, almost every character, in nearly every situation, took a turn carrying the idiot ball, including a trained scientist eating her lunch in a biolab and then failing to secure two alien containers. The only reason for this incessant stupidity? To drive the plot forward. Fans of the show excused this and other bad character choices by saying something like: “This crew isn’t the cream of the crop. Nobody goes on a 65-year space mission unless they’re desperate.” You can’t expect people on an important space voyage to actually be smart! This misunderstands human nature entirely. Humanity has always had its adventurers and trailblazers, people who would go seek out “The New World” on voyages that could take months, and expeditions that could take years or even entire lifetimes, risking life and limb. These people were not the bottom of the barrel. In a future with space travel, scientists and explorers would compete to go to space, even if it meant leaving loved ones behind. They would train rigorously for the honor. Only the best of the best would be sent on a crucial mission to retrieve dangerous alien species and bring them back to Earth. I have a question: If these scientists and engineers and the rest of the crew were really just… The post Earth’ Has A Girlboss Problem And Wendy Is A Mary Sue appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. The main problem with Alien: Earth, in its first seven episodes, is the idiot ball, which I explained in my previous post about the Hulu series. Nearly every character is incredibly stupid, or at least makes constantly stupid choices at every turn. This extends to the factions and organizations involved. The show probably ought to have been called Alien: Security Breach, but of course in order to actually breach security, you’d need some there in the first place. Spoilers ahead. On the USCSS Maginot, in Episode 5, almost every character, in nearly every situation, took a turn carrying the idiot ball, including a trained scientist eating her lunch in a biolab and then failing to secure two alien containers. The only reason for this incessant stupidity? To drive the plot forward. Fans of the show excused this and other bad character choices by saying something like: “This crew isn’t the cream of the crop. Nobody goes on a 65-year space mission unless they’re desperate.” You can’t expect people on an important space voyage to actually be smart! This misunderstands human nature entirely. Humanity has always had its adventurers and trailblazers, people who would go seek out “The New World” on voyages that could take months, and expeditions that could take years or even entire lifetimes, risking life and limb. These people were not the bottom of the barrel. In a future with space travel, scientists and explorers would compete to go to space, even if it meant leaving loved ones behind. They would train rigorously for the honor. Only the best of the best would be sent on a crucial mission to retrieve dangerous alien species and bring them back to Earth. I have a question: If these scientists and engineers and the rest of the crew were really just…

Earth’ Has A Girlboss Problem And Wendy Is A Mary Sue

2025/09/18 20:20

The main problem with Alien: Earth, in its first seven episodes, is the idiot ball, which I explained in my previous post about the Hulu series. Nearly every character is incredibly stupid, or at least makes constantly stupid choices at every turn. This extends to the factions and organizations involved. The show probably ought to have been called Alien: Security Breach, but of course in order to actually breach security, you’d need some there in the first place. Spoilers ahead.

On the USCSS Maginot, in Episode 5, almost every character, in nearly every situation, took a turn carrying the idiot ball, including a trained scientist eating her lunch in a biolab and then failing to secure two alien containers. The only reason for this incessant stupidity? To drive the plot forward. Fans of the show excused this and other bad character choices by saying something like: “This crew isn’t the cream of the crop. Nobody goes on a 65-year space mission unless they’re desperate.” You can’t expect people on an important space voyage to actually be smart!

This misunderstands human nature entirely. Humanity has always had its adventurers and trailblazers, people who would go seek out “The New World” on voyages that could take months, and expeditions that could take years or even entire lifetimes, risking life and limb. These people were not the bottom of the barrel. In a future with space travel, scientists and explorers would compete to go to space, even if it meant leaving loved ones behind. They would train rigorously for the honor. Only the best of the best would be sent on a crucial mission to retrieve dangerous alien species and bring them back to Earth.

I have a question: If these scientists and engineers and the rest of the crew were really just desperate, incompetent people (by design, in the script) how did they capture the aliens in the first place? Nothing about their actions after the fact lead me to believe they would have been able to secure dangerous Xenomorphs, deadly cockroaches, a super-intelligent eyeball alien and giant bugs that spew acid.

In Episode 6, one of the hybrid synths, who we are constantly told are super intelligent and super strong and overall better than their human and synth counterparts, awkwardly tries to put a tray of food inside the bug cell and, thanks to the eyeball-sheep’s quick thinking, is trapped in the cell and killed. You can excuse this by saying “He’s just a kid” but then I have to ask: What are the rules for these hybrids, exactly, wthin the fiction? Because some of them act like complete idiots, but Wendy is constantly outsmarting everyone. Are they super intelligent or are they just kids? The show never establishes any real parameters.

Wendy, of course, is the exception. She is the worst kind of tropey modern Hollywood writing in one implausible and obnoxious bundle. Wendy, unlike the other hybrids, is always one step ahead. She is the bravest. She is the strongest. She can speak the Xenomorph’s language and even makes one her pet who she can order to kill enemy guards. Earlier in the season, she killed a Xenomorph (offscreen) with a paper-cutter blade. Everyone else is easily duped and manipulated, but not Wendy. Wendy is special, we’re told over and over again.

Wendy, alas, is Alien’s very own Mary Sue. We can compare her to the franchise’s first protagonist, Ellen Ripley, to drive this point home.

For those who do not know, a Mary Sue is a character (typically female in modern discourse, but I believe the term applies to both male and female characters) who is good at everything without having to really try and who everyone loves and looks up to just because. A Mary Sue is unrealistically perfect and typically idolized by everyone else in the cast. They are generally presented without flaws and overpowered. The story revolves around this character in ways that feel hackneyed and forced.

Ultimately, this makes for a pretty uninteresting character. Unfortunately, Wendy ticks every box. In the latest pair of episodes, she becomes instantly disillusioned with Prodigy and its leader, Boy Kavalier, when they wipe the traumatic memories of her fellow hybrid, Nibs. This is not a position she comes to over time. She is simply on a higher moral ground from the outset. There is no real character development that leads to her adoption of her new moral code – some version of “nobody should have anything erased” though I’m paraphrasing – but we, as the audience, are supposed to root for her and view this as a deeply principled stance. Nevermind that Nibs immediately starts going crazy again once Wendy intervenes, and that she ultimately dies because of Wendy’s actions. Wendy is always good and right. When her brother, Joe, blasts Wendy to stop her from killing more Prodigy security guards, Wendy is aghast. “What did you do!?” she hollers at him over and over again before the credits roll. We are supposed to be aghast as well, because Wendy is not just the darling of Boy Kavalier, but of the show’s writers and creators. Like the sea in Rings Of Power, Wendy is always right.

I had a very similar criticism of Fargo Season 5, which was also created and written by Alien: Earth creator, Noah Hawley, and featured some of the same actors. That season completely changed the formula from every previous season of the show, and the movie upon which the show is based. In Fargo, there are four character archetypes. Spoilers for that series ahead.

  • The Citizen: This is a character who is normal in every possible way, living an unexceptional life, who makes a morally dubious choice that leads them down The Path Of No Return. The choices they make lead to suffering and ultimately karmic retribution. Think of Lester from Season 1 who kills his wife and then goes to great lengths to cover up his crime. For a while he’s able to live a good life, free from his wife’s nagging and resentment toward his brother, who he frames. But in the end, he pays the piper.
  • The Criminal Element: This character or characters represents the dark side of humanity. Sometimes the Criminal Element is separated into two parts. One is more mundane – Steve Buscemi’s Carl in the film – and one is Primordial – Peter Stormare’s Swede. Whatever the case, The Criminal Element is invited into the normal lives of everyday people when they are invited by The Citizen. In the film, William H. Macy’s Jerry Lundegaard hires Carl and the Swede to kidnap his wife so he can extort money from his father-in-law to cover up his fraud. Once invited by The Citizen, the Criminal Element wreaks havoc on the lives of ordinary people. This is all part of the Path Of No Return.
  • The Victim(s): These are the many people affected by the amoral choices of The Citizen, though only sometimes at the actual hands of The Citizen (Lester’s wife). Mostly, The Victims die or suffer greatly at the hands of the Criminal Element, but only because The Citizen invited the bad guys in. In Season 5, the Victims’ suffering was not due to The Citizen’s actions.
  • The Hero: Finally, we come to The Hero, often played by a police officer or officers in Fargo. Frances McDormand’s Marge Gunderson is a great example. The Hero is rarely your typical heroic figure. Marge was pregnant and at an age where pregnancy is rare (McDormand was 38). She was not physically daunting, but she was smart and capable and could smell a rat. The Hero ultimately restores balance to the updended lives of the people impacted by The Citizen’s poor choices and the Criminal Element’s violence and evil.

In Season 5 of Fargo, Hawley abandoned pretty much all of these archetypes and the story format in favor of bundling The Citizen with The Hero: Dorothy Lyon (you see, already Hawley was toying with the idea of using classic stories like Wizard of Oz to buttress his own; it is just much more blatant in Alien: Earth’s extended Peter Pan analogy).

Instead of selfish or immoral choices leading Dorothy down the Path Of No Return, she begins the story as the third archetype: The Victim. Hawley even reproduces the kidnapping scene from the film, but with Dorothy as the intended kidnapee. Of course, because Dorothy is also The Hero, she’s able to fight off her captors. Unlike previous seasons, Dorothy never makes immoral choices. There is no real Citizen archetype in this season, nobody who welcomes in disaster. Rather, she is a Victim, on the run from an abusive husband (the mundane half of The Criminal Element) who she ultimately defeats, because she is also The Hero (the cop dies trying).

Dorothy Lyon, like Wendy, is a Mary Sue with all the unfortunate girlboss tropes on display. She is adored by everyone (even her mistrustful mother-in-law comes around) and tougher than everyone and smarter than everyone and constantly referred to as a “Tiger” all of which makes her a far less compelling character than Marge or the many other female protagonists this franchise has given us. It’s a shame, too, because Juno Temple’s performance was phenomenal and absolutely deserved the Emmy over Jodie Foster’s lackluster showing in the far, far worse True Detective: Night Country.

In my analysis of Fargo Season 5, I wrote:

Perhaps Wendy will go down this path. She has used shocking violence to get her way, allowing the Xenomorph out of its cage despite knowing it would kill many innocent people in the process; not just security guards, but regular workers in the facility. She did this not out of ignorance or naivete, but with full knowledge of what would come next. We are meant to root for her, it seems, because the Evil Corporation is so evil and Wendy is so good and pure, and Joe is presented as a coward and traitor for turning on her, however meekly. But I’m not sure it works. Wendy feels hollow to me. More than anything, I hope that our expectations at this point are dashed, and she becomes a villain.

Flaws are what make characters interesting. I don’t mean “just make everyone wildly stupid” when I say this. Some critics of my critique have said that “stories about smart people are boring” and I suppose if everyone always made the perfect choice every time, and faced no consequences or conflict, that would be true (and is integral to a critique of a Mary Sue-type character!)

Ultimately, I want characters to be complex. Make smart people do selfish things that lead to bad outcomes. Give genuinely good characters hard choices that put them in tight spots. Give us conflicted villains who do more than twirl mustaches (or read ominous passages from Peter Pan). Give characters choices between breaking their moral code to save a loved one, or sticking to their guns and losing something dear.

Prodigy thus far has been defined by its incompetence and the brash stupidity of its “boy genius” overlord. This is intended as a critique of corporate power and arrogance, but it’s not very interesting if every choice the corporation and its leader make are stupid and rash. If we’re not shown the ruthless intelligence of the villains, how do we ever truly undermine them in the story? It’s a story on easy mode.

Plot holes and contrivances, the idiot ball doing its dirty work and a girlboss protagonist all conspire to make Alien: Earth a deeply unsatisfying entry in the franchise, though to be fair that is pretty much par for the course when it comes to Alien content post-Aliens. It looks gorgeous for the most part (though the Xenomorph is rather goofy looking at times) and sounds great (except for the insertion of modern rock songs) and many of the actors are nailing their performances.

But the story keeps going nowhere fast (you could almost certainly fit the entire thing into a two hour movie) and I can’t help but wish this was a different tale altogether, focused not on these hybrid Lost Boys and Wendy and Boy “Peter Pan” Kavalier, but on the cyborg Morrow, the synth Kirsh and the eyeball alien. You know something is wrong when a demented sheep is one of the best characters in your TV show.

Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2025/09/18/alien-earth-has-a-girlboss-problem-and-wendy-is-a-mary-sue/

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

Revolutionary CFTC Push: Spot Crypto Services Coming to Major Exchanges Next Month

Revolutionary CFTC Push: Spot Crypto Services Coming to Major Exchanges Next Month

BitcoinWorld Revolutionary CFTC Push: Spot Crypto Services Coming to Major Exchanges Next Month Get ready for a game-changing development in cryptocurrency regulation! The CFTC’s acting chair has revealed exciting discussions about launching spot crypto services with major exchanges. This breakthrough could transform how Americans access cryptocurrency markets through regulated platforms. What Are CFTC Spot Crypto Services and Why Do They Matter? The Commodity Futures Trading Commission is actively working to bring regulated spot crypto services to the market. Acting Chair Caroline Pham confirmed that these discussions involve not just traditional financial giants but also innovative crypto-native platforms. This represents a significant step toward mainstream cryptocurrency adoption. These spot crypto services would allow direct trading of cryptocurrencies rather than just derivatives. The CFTC’s involvement brings crucial regulatory oversight that could boost investor confidence. Moreover, the inclusion of leveraged instruments suggests comprehensive market coverage. Which Exchanges Are Involved in These Groundbreaking Talks? The CFTC’s conversations span across diverse market participants. Traditional powerhouses like Chicago Mercantile Exchange and Cboe Futures Exchange are at the table. However, the real excitement comes from including companies like: Coinbase Derivatives Kalshi Polymarket US This diverse participation ensures that the resulting spot crypto services will serve various market segments. The blend of established institutions and innovative newcomers creates a balanced regulatory approach. How Will These New Spot Crypto Services Benefit Traders? Regulated spot crypto services offer multiple advantages for market participants. First, they provide enhanced consumer protection through established regulatory frameworks. Second, institutional investors gain comfortable entry points into cryptocurrency markets. The inclusion of leveraged products within these spot crypto services addresses sophisticated trader needs. This comprehensive approach could attract significant capital from traditional finance sectors. Furthermore, standardized procedures may reduce operational risks associated with cryptocurrency trading. What Challenges Might These Regulatory Efforts Face? Implementing spot crypto services through CFTC-regulated exchanges presents several hurdles. Regulatory clarity remains an ongoing concern across different jurisdictions. Additionally, technological integration between traditional and crypto systems requires careful planning. Market participants must adapt to new compliance requirements. However, the potential benefits of regulated spot crypto services outweigh these challenges. The CFTC’s proactive approach demonstrates commitment to fostering innovation while maintaining market integrity. When Can We Expect These Services to Launch? According to recent reports, the timeline appears remarkably aggressive. The CFTC aims to have initial spot crypto services operational as early as next month. This accelerated schedule reflects both market demand and regulatory readiness. The rapid progression suggests that groundwork has been underway for some time. Market participants should prepare for potentially swift implementation of these new spot crypto services. Early adoption could provide competitive advantages in the evolving regulatory landscape. Conclusion: A New Era for Cryptocurrency Regulation The CFTC’s push for spot crypto services marks a pivotal moment in digital asset regulation. This initiative bridges traditional finance with innovative cryptocurrency markets. Investors, traders, and the broader financial ecosystem stand to benefit from these regulated access points. As these developments unfold, market participants should stay informed about evolving requirements. The successful implementation of spot crypto services could set new standards for global cryptocurrency regulation. Frequently Asked Questions What exactly are spot crypto services? Spot crypto services enable direct trading of cryptocurrencies at current market prices, unlike derivatives which are based on future price expectations. Why is the CFTC involved in spot cryptocurrency markets? The CFTC regulates commodity futures and options markets in the US, and since cryptocurrencies are classified as commodities, they fall under its jurisdiction. How will these services differ from existing crypto exchanges? CFTC-regulated spot crypto services will operate under established financial regulations, offering enhanced consumer protections and institutional-grade infrastructure. Can retail investors access these new services? Yes, these services are designed to be accessible to both institutional and retail investors through regulated exchange platforms. What cryptocurrencies will be available initially? While specific assets haven’t been confirmed, major cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Ethereum are likely candidates for initial offerings. How will leverage work in these spot crypto services? Leveraged instruments will allow traders to amplify their positions, similar to margin trading in traditional markets, but with regulatory oversight. Ready to stay ahead in the evolving crypto landscape? Share this groundbreaking news with your network and join the conversation about regulated cryptocurrency access. Your insights could help shape the future of digital asset trading! To learn more about the latest cryptocurrency regulatory trends, explore our article on key developments shaping Bitcoin institutional adoption and market evolution. This post Revolutionary CFTC Push: Spot Crypto Services Coming to Major Exchanges Next Month first appeared on BitcoinWorld.
Share
Coinstats2025/11/10 06:40
Facts Vs. Hype: Analyst Examines XRP Supply Shock Theory

Facts Vs. Hype: Analyst Examines XRP Supply Shock Theory

Prominent analyst Cheeky Crypto (203,000 followers on YouTube) set out to verify a fast-spreading claim that XRP’s circulating supply could “vanish overnight,” and his conclusion is more nuanced than the headline suggests: nothing in the ledger disappears, but the amount of XRP that is truly liquid could be far smaller than most dashboards imply—small enough, in his view, to set the stage for an abrupt liquidity squeeze if demand spikes. XRP Supply Shock? The video opens with the host acknowledging his own skepticism—“I woke up to a rumor that XRP supply could vanish overnight. Sounds crazy, right?”—before committing to test the thesis rather than dismiss it. He frames the exercise as an attempt to reconcile a long-standing critique (“XRP’s supply is too large for high prices”) with a rival view taking hold among prominent community voices: that much of the supply counted as “circulating” is effectively unavailable to trade. His first step is a straightforward data check. Pulling public figures, he finds CoinMarketCap showing roughly 59.6 billion XRP as circulating, while XRPScan reports about 64.7 billion. The divergence prompts what becomes the video’s key methodological point: different sources count “circulating” differently. Related Reading: Analyst Sounds Major XRP Warning: Last Chance To Get In As Accumulation Balloons As he explains it, the higher on-ledger number likely includes balances that aggregators exclude or treat as restricted, most notably Ripple’s programmatic escrow. He highlights that Ripple still “holds a chunk of XRP in escrow, about 35.3 billion XRP locked up across multiple wallets, with a nominal schedule of up to 1 billion released per month and unused portions commonly re-escrowed. Those coins exist and are accounted for on-ledger, but “they aren’t actually sitting on exchanges” and are not immediately available to buyers. In his words, “for all intents and purposes, that escrow stash is effectively off of the market.” From there, the analysis moves from headline “circulating supply” to the subtler concept of effective float. Beyond escrow, he argues that large strategic holders—banks, fintechs, or other whales—may sit on material balances without supplying order books. When you strip out escrow and these non-selling stashes, he says, “the effective circulating supply… is actually way smaller than the 59 or even 64 billion figure.” He cites community estimates in the “20 or 30 billion” range for what might be truly liquid at any given moment, while emphasizing that nobody has a precise number. That effective-float framing underpins the crux of his thesis: a potential supply shock if demand accelerates faster than fresh sell-side supply appears. “Price is a dance between supply and demand,” he says; if institutional or sovereign-scale users suddenly need XRP and “the market finds that there isn’t enough XRP readily available,” order books could thin out and prices could “shoot on up, sometimes violently.” His phrase “circulating supply could collapse overnight” is presented not as a claim that tokens are destroyed or removed from the ledger, but as a market-structure scenario in which available inventory to sell dries up quickly because holders won’t part with it. How Could The XRP Supply Shock Happen? On the demand side, he anchors the hypothetical to tokenization. He points to the “very early stages of something huge in finance”—on-chain tokenization of debt, stablecoins, CBDCs and even gold—and argues the XRP Ledger aims to be “the settlement layer” for those assets.He references Ripple CTO David Schwartz’s earlier comments about an XRPL pivot toward tokenized assets and notes that an institutional research shop (Bitwise) has framed XRP as a way to play the tokenization theme. In his construction, if “trillions of dollars in value” begin settling across XRPL rails, working inventories of XRP for bridging, liquidity and settlement could rise sharply, tightening effective float. Related Reading: XRP Bearish Signal: Whales Offload $486 Million In Asset To illustrate, he offers two analogies. First, the “concert tickets” model: you think there are 100,000 tickets (100B supply), but 50,000 are held by the promoter (escrow) and 30,000 by corporate buyers (whales), leaving only 20,000 for the public; if a million people want in, prices explode. Second, a comparison to Bitcoin’s halving: while XRP has no programmatic halving, he proposes that a sudden adoption wave could function like a de facto halving of available supply—“XRP’s version of a halving could actually be the adoption event.” He also updates the narrative context that long dogged XRP. Once derided for “too much supply,” he argues the script has “totally flipped.” He cites the current cycle’s optics—“XRP is sitting above $3 with a market cap north of around $180 billion”—as evidence that raw supply counts did not cap price as tightly as critics claimed, and as a backdrop for why a scarcity narrative is gaining traction. Still, he declines to publish targets or timelines, repeatedly stressing uncertainty and risk. “I’m not a financial adviser… cryptocurrencies are highly volatile,” he reminds viewers, adding that tokenization could take off “on some other platform,” unfold more slowly than enthusiasts expect, or fail to get to “sudden shock” scale. The verdict he offers is deliberately bound. The theory that “XRP supply could vanish overnight” is imprecise on its face; the ledger will not erase coins. But after examining dashboard methodologies, escrow mechanics and the behavior of large holders, he concludes that the effective float could be meaningfully smaller than headline supply figures, and that a fast-developing tokenization use case could, under the right conditions, stress that float. “Overnight is a dramatic way to put it,” he concedes. “The change could actually be very sudden when it comes.” At press time, XRP traded at $3.0198. Featured image created with DALL.E, chart from TradingView.com
Share
NewsBTC2025/09/18 11:00