What is the most expansive fictional universe ever created?
The Tommy Westphall Universe. A long time ago, in a fabled era known as the ’80s, there was a TV show called St. Elsewhere. It was about a run-down teaching hospital named St. Eligius in Boston and the doctors who worked there. Dr. Donald Westphall was the director of medicine, a widower who raised his two children by himself. One of those children was his autistic son Tommy. Tommy only appeared in fifteen episodes of the series. St. Elsewhere ran for six seasons and won eleven Emmys, but all anyone cares about today is its final episode. In the final scene of the final episode, Tommy Westphall holds a snow globe that reveals the building of St. Eligius inside it. And his father, who is not a doctor, comes in and says the following:
I don’t understand this autism thing, Pop. Here’s my son; I talk to him; I don’t even know if he can hear me. He sits in his world all day long, staring at that toy. What’s he thinking about?
The entire six seasons of St. Elsewhere were, in fact, a child’s daydream while looking at a snow globe.
Here’s where things get a little complicated. The character Dr. Roxanne Turner from St. Elsewhere appeared in an episode of Homicide: Life on the Street, where authorities accused her of murder. But if Dr. Turner was just a creation of Tommy, how could she possibly be on Homicide? Unless Homicide was also Tommy’s daydream. There is an episode of St. Elsewhere where the doctors of St. Eligius decide to go out for a few drinks at a local Boston bar. That bar is Cheers, the titular bar from the sitcom Cheers. So, Cheers, and Frasier are again products of Tommy’s imagination.
Detective John Munch was a character played by Richard Belzer, who starred in Homicide: Life on the Street, which we know never existed. After the cancellation of Homicide, the character was moved to Law and Order: Special Victims Unit. Detective Munch also appears in The Wire, The X-Files, and Arrested Development. So, Tommy Westphall had to create all those shows.
Cheers spun off Frasier, who crossed over with Caroline in the City, with Friends, who shared a character with Mad About You, who crossed over with Seinfeld. In a few centuries, the world of Buffy the Vampire Slayer will be Star Trek, but its distant past (sorry, spoilers) is the reboot of Battlestar Galactica. Doctor Who is canonically taking place in the same universe as I Love Lucy, Hannah Montana, Grey’s Anatomy, and All My Children.
All of it is the creation of one child, which probably explains the continuity errors. For example, no one acknowledges the zombie outbreak in Georgia in The Walking Dead, which is happening at the exact same time as It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia and Arrow.
If you map everything out, there are at least 419 shows that are in the same continuity with each other and canonically the creation of Tommy Westphall.
The first person to propose the Tommy Westphall Universe was legendary writer Dwayne McDuffie in a blog post criticizing comic book continuity. It was about just how silly it was to try to fit vast and mutually incoherent works all into the same rigid continuity. But he was kind of onto something with that whole Tommy Westphall stuff. They did all crossover with each other.
By the way, the Collector in Guardians of the Galaxy has Tobias Fünke on his ship, which means Tommy Westphall is responsible for the MCU.
Which villain’s backstory was the most understandable for them to become a villain in Star Trek? I’ll nominate Annorax from Voyager’s two-part “Year of Hell.”
Annorax was a temporal scientist working for the declining Krenim Imperium. He developed a ship with a temporal weapon that, when fired, completely removed an object from the timeline, changing history so that it had never existed. Only ships with temporal shields like his would even remember the old timeline.
The Krenim fired this weapon against a rival species, erasing them from the timeline and briefly restoring the Krenim Imperium to its former glory.
Interbreeding with that species turned out to have made the Krenim immune to a deadly plague that began to run rampant throughout the empire. To correct the error, he fired again and restored almost the entire empire—except for his home colony and his beloved wife.
Annorax, never aging inside his shielded ship, spent the next two centuries rewriting the timeline to restore his wife. Each time he fired that terrible weapon, his species’ fortunes would rise and fall, but the fate of Annorax’s home and wife was never restored.
Through a large portion of the two-parter, Annorax is barely aware of Voyager; the restored Krenim Imperium is simply battering our heroes. Eventually, Voyager develops temporal shields like Annorax’s to protect themselves from Krenim torpedoes, and these shields disastrously disrupt Annorax’s subsequent firing. Annorax sets out to track down Voyager and remove it from the equation; although the ship escapes, he manages to abduct Chakotay and Paris. But he’s impressed by Chakotay, and together, they devise a way to alter history—without additional deaths—so that Voyager never encounters the Krenim in the first place.
With Chakotay’s approval, Paris provokes a mutiny that drops the temporal shields, allowing Voyager to attack and trigger a weapon overload that erases the ship from history. Commander Annorax is finally restored to his home with his wife, and he never decides to build the ship. Following the advice of a less aggressive Krenim patrol ship, Voyager slightly alters its course, unaware of the timeline it had averted.
Annorax stands out as a villain with very relatable motivations. He was not trying to exterminate all life or take over the galaxy; all he wanted to do was restore what he and his species had lost. He was the hero of his own story—always the mark of a great villain.
In what Hollywood movie does the headliner get upstaged by another actor? How so?
Flash Gordon – (1980) is a film that featured Sam J. Jones as the main star of the film. While every actor pretty much mugged and winked their way through this one, creating one of the most overacted films ever (Gordon’s ALIVE?!), Jones, as Flash, definitely tried his best to give a straight and serious performance. Only to be given a Golden Raspberry Award for Worst Actor for his trouble.
Ming The Merciless was played by the reliably excellent Max Von Sydow, known for playing Jesus Christ in the film The Greatest Story Ever Told (1965), as well as starring in The Exorcist (1973) and Three Days of the Condor (1975).
Behind the scenes, Jones and the movie producer, Dino De Laurentiis, clashed over what Gordon’s personality should be. De Laurentiis wanted him to be Ham Fest central and humorous, while Jones wanted to play the character much like how Adam West played Batman in the 1960s — seriously. It was an authentic tug of war and power struggle between the two. Things got so bad that Jones took his ball and went home just before post-production, which would result in much of his dialogue for the film being dubbed over by professional voice and dramatic actor Peter Marinker, whose identity was unknown, even to the main draw of the film Jones.
But Von Sydow, the master of actor gravitas and versatility, a man who played both Jesus and Satan, helped carry more than his part of the load in this film with his over-the-top evil performance. He was the epitome of the 1980s cheesy bad guy. With a stereotypical line such as, while referring to his nemesis:
“‘Ahhh…now my victory is complete. With Flash Gordon dead, nothing can stop me from conquering the universe!’
But somehow, the guy made the line and the character work. Von Sydow’s contribution was the best and most exciting performance in a movie filled with most of the characters hamming it up.
What was also cool about this movie is that Queen did the entire soundtrack. It was the rock band’s first of two soundtracks that they ever recorded.
Which villain made more sense, Thanos or General Zod? General Zod makes more sense.
On a surface level, you might think Zod versus Thanos amounts to “I want my planet to survive!” versus “I want the universe to survive!” but that’s not true.
Zod is a genetically engineered warrior. He comes from a generation of Kryptonians who were bred for specific roles on the planet and lacked the freedom to choose their paths. His role was to protect Krypton at all costs. His motivation boils down to that simple purpose, and every decision he makes in Man of Steel builds towards that goal.
Now, where Zod and Thanos resemble each other is their origin story. Both of them came before their world leaders and pitched a simple plan.
Zod wanted to save Krypton by seizing power and ending all degenerative bloodlines. He believed that he could stop the planet’s destruction and strengthen their race as a whole.
Thanos wanted to end his people’s starvation by randomly killing half of Titan’s population. He believed that those who lived would understand and thrive with the additional resources.
Already, Zod’s plan makes more sense. Sure, it’s unethical and dangerous, but it might work. The Kryptonian Council refused to acknowledge the threat to the planet. Zod had legitimate plans for reversing that and saving his race—even if it meant giving himself too much power and unjustly killing off families.
Meanwhile, Thanos’ plan was unsustainable. The population would inevitably grow back, the resources would still dwindle, and they’d have to keep killing the population. Plus, the survivors would be demoralized.
The disparity gets worse throughout their movies.
The Council banishes Zod to the Phantom Zone for his crimes. Once he escapes, he discovers that Krypton is gone. Zod faces a problem: how can he fulfill his genetic programming, which drives his purpose, now that Krypton no longer exists as he knew it? Simple: rebuild Krypton and protect the new Krypton. For Zod, it’s a perfectly reasonable solution. Knowing that one Kryptonian survived, he sits out and looks for Kal-El to take advantage of the additional genetic material. Again, knowing this is the right decision in his position.
Of course, Kal-El refuses to help, so Zod uses Earth as the birthplace of the new Krypton. It is vengeful, but the only hope of converting Kal-El is destroying the planet so that only his Kryptonian heritage remains.
When that fails, Zod forces Kal-El to kill him in combat so that—as a warrior—he can die in battle, exactly what you’d expect from a man genetically bred to fight.
Meanwhile, Thanos’ plan develops into using an infinitely powerful weapon to halve the population. If you gave Zod such a Gauntlet, he’d use it to fashion a new Krypton from scratch and ensure their genetics were perfect. Refrain from amending his plan in the slightest.
Thanos was so wrapped up in his narcissism that he would NOT admit that there were better ways to accomplish the goal of saving the universe—such as doubling resources or compelling every mind to care more about conservation. You know, one of many things you can do with a freaking Infinity Gauntlet. Sure, Thanos didn’t lack will, but he lacked imagination.
And when Thanos did get to see the failure of his plan, he decided that he’d best rip the universe apart as punishment for its inability to thank him and build a new one. It’s better to kill everybody than admit he’s wrong.
So Zod made more sense. He was a warrior tasked with protecting Krypton and did everything he could to accomplish that. Thanos was just a grumpy survivor unwilling to see his plan’s flaws.
What well-known movies were “stolen” by a great performance from a supporting actor?
The Butler did it!
Anybody who has ever seen the movie Clue knows that the producers paid big dollars to assemble an A-grade ensemble of the finest comedic actors of the time.
Look at that cast! Michael McKean, Martin Mull, Lesley Ann Warren, Christopher Lloyd, Eileen Brennan, and Madeline Kahn. Some of the best ensemble comedic performers of the 1980s. Christopher Lloyd was at his Back to the Future peak. Michael McKean had just come off of Spinal Tap. And Madeline Kahn was still killing it in every Mel Brooks movie.
Yet, who stole every scene he was in from every one of these comic stars? Some little-known character actor, best known for vamping in a corset in a midnight cult film, The Rocky Horror Picture Show:
Tim Curry plays Wadsworth, the Butler. This was the first major film in which he showcased his comedic side, and he just killed it!
If you have ever seen Clue, try not to chuckle in recalling:
Colonel Mustard: Is this place for you?
Wadsworth: Indeed, no, sir. I’m merely a humble butler.
Colonel Mustard: What exactly do you do?
Wadsworth: I buttle, sir.
Wadsworth: I suggest we take the cook’s body into the study.
Colonel Mustard: Why?
Wadsworth: I’m the Butler; I like to keep the kitchen tidy.
Wadsworth: Professor Plum, you were once a professor of psychiatry specializing in helping paranoid and homicidal lunatics suffering from delusions of grandeur.
Professor Plum: Yes, but now I work for the United Nations.
Wadsworth: So your work has not changed.
…and of course:
If you have not seen the movie, go watch it now. You will see the OTHER movie that made Tim Curry a star.
Curry is one of the few actors who can be funny and terrifying in turn. His IMDB entry lists over 200 roles, including Pennywise the Clown in Stephen King’s It, Long John Silver in Muppet Treasure Island, Cardinal Richelieu in The Three Musketeers, Rooster in Annie, and the Lord of Darkness in Legend. In his later years, he continued doing voice acting for cartoons like The Wild Thornberrys and Peter Pan and the Pirates.
If you don’t know why Tim Curry is a star, then you haven’t got a Clue!
In The Matrix, when Morpheus tells Neo that “many are not ready to unplug from the system,” he is speaking to a profound truth about human nature, which reflects both the story’s fictional world and the real-life metaphysical condition of society. The “system” in The Matrix is a metaphor for the Illusion—an artificial construct designed to control and subdue humanity by giving them a false sense of reality, much like how many live today trapped in the illusions of society, unable or unwilling to see beyond the veil of lies, manipulation, and control.
Morpheus understands that, for many, the comfort of the system is preferable to the unsettling and often painful process of awakening to the truth. People have become conditioned, through years—sometimes generations—of indoctrination to accept the world as it is presented to them. To unplug from this system is to face a harsh, sometimes unbearable, reality that everything they thought was real is, in fact, a lie. This requires courage, a willingness to embrace discomfort, and, most importantly, the readiness to let go of what one thought to be the truth. Morpheus also knew that those still plugged into the system were often its most ardent defenders. Why? Because the system has become their identity. Their sense of self, beliefs, and values are all tied to that system’s illusions and constructs. To threaten it is to threaten everything they hold dear. For many, it is easier to defend the system than to confront the possibility that they have been deceived.
Defending the System: A Psychological Reaction When Morpheus says that “many will fight to protect it,” he’s speaking to a psychological truth: cognitive dissonance. When presented with information that contradicts deeply held beliefs, people experience discomfort. Instead of questioning the faith or the system, they often reject the new information to protect their ego and sense of security. This is why people still plugged into the system will vehemently defend it, even when evidence suggests it is corrupt, failing, or based on lies. The system represents safety, order, and familiarity for those not ready to unplug. It’s the comfortable prison of the mind, and to face the truth would mean losing not only this sense of safety but also their role within the system. The Illusion provides them with structure and predictability, and they will fight to preserve it, even at the cost of their freedom and truth.
Clinging to the Illusion in Today’s World In today’s world, this concept is strikingly relevant. The system can represent various elements of modern society—political ideologies, economic structures, societal norms, and even religious dogma. Those who cling to the system often do so out of fear, ignorance, or a desire for control. Through media, education, and government institutions, the system programs people from an early age to accept what The Matrix presents as reality. The Matrix offers a narrative: if you work hard, follow the rules, and accept your place within it, you will succeed, be happy, and be fulfilled. But we know this is not true for everyone.
The awakening process requires breaking away from these narratives and questioning the foundation of what is accepted as truth. This is the essence of Hermeticism—the practice of questioning the surface to find the deeper truths hidden beneath. However, those who cling to the system will often ridicule, attack, or ostracize anyone who dares question its authority. Why? because to question it is to question the very fabric of their own reality.
Unplugging: A Difficult but Necessary Process Unplugging from the system, much like in The Matrix, is a metaphor for waking up from the collective dream that has been sold to the masses. It’s about peeling back the layers of Illusion to see the world as it truly is rather than how we’ve been told to see it. Yet, this process takes work. It involves dismantling years of conditioning and societal programming. It means facing uncomfortable truths about the world and, more importantly, about ourselves.
For those ready to unplug, the journey is one of liberation—of freedom from the mental and spiritual bondage that the system imposes. But for many others, the fear of the unknown, the discomfort of confronting deep-seated beliefs, and the pain of letting go of long-held illusions are too overwhelming.
The Nature of the Matrix as a Metaphor for Control In the context of Hermeticism, the system represents more than just societal control—it represents the materialistic, limited, and external focus that keeps people trapped in ignorance of their true nature as divine consciousness. The system fosters division, fear, and separation. It teaches people to focus on external validation, material success, and power over others. But in truth, as Hermeticism teaches, we are all connected, and the real power lies in knowing and mastering the self. To unplug from the system means transcending these lower, ego-driven desires and awakening to the deeper spiritual truths that govern the universe. It’s about recognizing that the external world is a reflection of the internal state. When we unplug, we reclaim our sovereignty and align ourselves with the higher principles of wisdom, truth, and love. But those who cling to the system remain blind to this truth, often because the system rewards conformity and punishes deviation. They see anyone who unplugs as a threat, not because those individuals are dangerous, but because they challenge the false security the system provides.
Defending the Illusion: The Role of Fear The most potent weapon of the system is fear—fear of the unknown, fear of losing status, fear of being wrong. This fear causes people to defend the Illusion vehemently. They project this fear outward, attacking anyone threatening to disrupt the Illusion they’ve built their lives upon. This is why Morpheus says they will fight to protect it. They are not fighting for the system because they believe in it—they fight because they fear what lies beyond it. They fear the truth.
In Hermetic philosophy, fear is rooted in ignorance, and the antidote to fear is knowledge—gnosis, the direct experience of truth. When one begins to see beyond the Illusion, the fear starts to dissolve. The system’s control weakens because its power lies in keeping people in the dark, disconnected from their true essence. Those who cling to it do so not because the system serves them, but because they do not know who they are without it.
Moving Beyond the System For those who have unplugged or are in the process of doing so, it is crucial to remember that only some are ready. Much like Neo, we must navigate the world with the awareness that many are still prisoners of their minds, held captive by the Illusion. But the task is not to force anyone to awaken; instead, it is to continue living in truth as beacons of light, planting seeds for those ready to see beyond the veil.
Morpheus’s words hold an eternal truth: many are not ready to unplug because they are not ready to face the chaos of the real world, where their perceptions, beliefs, and identities must be re-examined. And those who cling to the system will continue to defend it until they find the courage to look beyond it.
No. And a little history is important here as context. Prior to Nicholson, the only live action Joker we had was this guy:
A yukity yuk slapstick clown played by Cesar Romero who wouldn’t shave his mustache for the role in a campy, tongue in cheek tv show.
Then along came the Batman movie:
Everything changed. Batman was much darker, more serious and way more violent and he was pitted against a completely new interpretation of a character that no one had ever given much thought to.
Nicholson turned a jokey, sad villain into THE most popular bad guy in the superhero genre. He utterly redefined the modern Joker and everyone who has played the part since has built on his work. The Joker you know today is because of him.
This guy is scary.
Gone was the slapstick, the goofiness, the over the top hamming it up and cartoonishness of Romero’s character. In its place was a sense of menace and casual cruelty where over the top antics were deliberate and deadly.
Nicholson was the first actor to capture the essence of the Joker and cement the character in the mind of the audience. Everyone who has played the character since then has worked off of this template. Without Nicholson’s Joker, no one who has followed him would have even had the opportunity.
Those who see his performance for the first time decades later might be forgiven for not understanding how amazing it was at the time, but make no mistake, your favorite Joker owes everything to Jack Nicholson.
