×
10 Horror Sequels to Watch on Peacock

10 Horror Sequels to Watch on Peacock

Horror is a staple on nearly every streaming service, but what if you’ve seen all the important classics and are looking to venture a little further afield? One way to keep mainlining your favorite villains and settings is to dive into sequel territory. Not all horror sequels are created equal, but for every misguided cash grab, there’s a cult classic waiting to be rediscovered. Head to Peacock, home of next year’s Crystal Lake prequel series, to check out these 10 horror sequels.

Halloween II

We’ve had Halloween II on the brain thanks to the upcoming Strangers: Chapter 2, which imperils the Final Girl anew as she’s trying to recover from the first film’s horrific attack. That’s not unlike Laurie Strode’s ordeal in 1981’s Halloween II, which shows us what happens once she checks into Haddonfield’s local hospital—a facility with a horny staff and not many existing patients, where Michael Myers easily tracks down that troublesome babysitter and continues his stalking rampage. Watch on Peacock.

Halloween III: Season of the Witch

The only film in the Halloween series not to feature Michael Myers as the killer—he does get a blink-and-you’ll-miss-it cameo, though—Halloween III is a wonderfully bonkers tale involving a witchy plot to massacre scores of children using cursed Halloween masks powered by Stonehenge-adjacent witchcraft and activated by an irritatingly catchy commercial jingle. It also features one of the least likely horror-movie heroes ever, as well as one of the booziest. Watch on Peacock.

The Exorcist III

The first Exorcist is an influential masterpiece. The second Exorcist teeters between “so bad it’s good” and “no, seriously, what were they thinking?” But The Exorcist III, written and directed by Exorcist book author William Peter Blatty (and, as pop culture will have us believe, beloved by Jeffrey Dahmer), is a deeply distressing tale that both picks up the threads of William Friedkin’s original film and creates its own specific nightmare. It also has one of the greatest jump scares in cinematic history, so searing that even if you know it’s coming, you’ll still flinch. Watch on Peacock.

Day of the Dead

Make sure you click on the 1985 version from George A. Romero; Peacock also has the forgettable 2008 remake. Zombies are still roaming the earth in this third entry in Romero’s classic trilogy, but in this military-focused entry, you can definitely see why it’s time for humankind to consider bowing out. Wonderful gore further elevates the story, as does the endearing undead dude Bub, an eternal fan favorite. Watch on Peacock.

Terrifier 2 and 3

The saga of Sienna the warrior angel versus the maniacal Art the Clown takes shape in Damien Leone’s second and third Terrifier movies, which back-to-back equal some four and a half hours of circus-tinged mayhem and cruel brutality. The kill scenes are always the main attraction, but part three in particular introduces some intriguing Art lore that Leone has said he’ll further explore in the upcoming fourth film. Watch on Peacock: Terrifier 2 and Terrifier 3.

Son of Frankenstein

Most horror fans have watched the classic Frankenstein and Bride of Frankenstein. But as we await Guillermo del Toro’s fresh take on Mary Shelley’s literary creation, why not watch the third film in that original series? Released in 1939, Son of Frankenstein stars Boris Karloff as the revived Monster, Bela Lugosi as the diabolical Ygor, and Basil Rathbone as Baron Wolf von Frankenstein. As the title suggests, he’s Henry Frankenstein’s son, and he ill-advisedly decides it’s his job to restore the family reputation. Watch on Peacock.

Child’s Play 2

Chucky may have been burned to a crisp at the end of 1988’s Child’s Play, but you can’t keep a killer doll down—especially one hellbent on claiming a human body by any means necessary. The sequel brings back kid actor Alex Vincent as Andy Barclay, giving him a tough foster sister (Christine Elise) and cementing one of horror’s best sibling duos. It also takes on the corporate jerks behind the Good Guy doll line, which gives the film reason to skewer big business and build to an inspired climax in a Chucky-filled toy factory. Watch on Peacock.

Amityville II: The Possession

There are now over 50 movies purporting to be part of the Amityville film series, including several parodies and in-name-only entries. But back in 1982, just a few years after The Amityville Horror “true story” book, Amityville II did its best to continue the success of the first film by offering a prequel of sorts to its events. While the famous haunting was later debunked as a hoax, there was a real-life tragedy behind the ghost story, and Amityville II digs into the family massacre—with the expected sensational supernatural twist, of course.  Watch on Peacock.

Phantasm: Ravager

The final Phantasm film was released in 2016 and reunited original stars A. Michael Baldwin (Mike Pearson), Reggie Bannister (Reggie), and Angus Scrimm (the Tall Man)—the latter sadly passing away before the film hit theaters. While the original Phantasm will always be the best entry, not to mention one of the purely weirdest horror movies ever made, this farewell entry offers a blend of “one last time” nostalgia as well as its own extremely freaky dream-world adventures. Watch on Peacock.

Scream 4

Wes Craven’s Scream 4 is sort of the odd man out of his Scream series. It was released in 2011, 11 years after Scream 3 and 11 years before the series’ revival with Scream in 2022. It follows Sidney Prescott, self-help author, as she returns to Woodsboro, where Ghostface launches a fresh series of attacks, with Sidney’s teenage cousin at the center. Scream 4 is not unaware of its odd place in the continuity, poking fun at excessive sequels with glimpses of the in-universe Stab series having reached parts six and seven—and it’s well worthy of rediscovery. Watch on Peacock.

Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.

Source link
#Horror #Sequels #Watch #Peacock


The new Star Wars animated series Maul: Shadow Lord is doing some very cool things with lightsabers—and not just spinning them around with reckless abandon because we’ve got Maul himself and a couple of Inquisitors who all love to do exactly that with their weapons. They look almost unlike any time we’ve seen the weapons in Lucasfilm’s past output: blades that flicker and snarl like their wielders do, living flames that carve paths of incandescent energy across the screen instead of that typically clean, minimalistic energy we see from them.

It makes Shadow Lord look even more visually impressive than it already is, and of course, the idea of lightsabers as gouts of flaming plasma is also naturally very befitting everyone’s favorite slightly pathetic but trying-his-best edgelord in a character like Maul. But it turns out Shadow Lord‘s lightsabers—Maul’s specifically—are going the extra edgelord mile. Because there’s screaming in the sound mix.

Not just any screaming either, but Sam Witwer’s own howls.

The delightfully silly factoid was revealed by the supervising sound editor for the show, David W. Collins, in a new featurette about the process of creating Shadow Lord, which also shows off Witwer performing some of his own moves for animation reference. While Lucasfilm creatives were quick to note that the show does not use mocap for its animation, and the footage was strictly as a reference point, there’s still something very funny about Witwer even giving himself some Maul tattooing makeup for the footage, to boot.

It’s long been clear that Witwer has put a lot of time and thought into his approach to Maul’s animated legacy over the past decade and a half, but now at least he’s put his vocals into it in a very different manner for Shadow Lord.

Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.

#Mauls #Lightsabers #Shadow #Lord #Powered #Sam #Witwers #ScreamsMaul: Shadow Lord,sam witwer,Star Wars">Maul’s Lightsabers in ‘Shadow Lord’ Are Powered by Sam Witwer’s Screams
                The new Star Wars animated series Maul: Shadow Lord is doing some very cool things with lightsabers—and not just spinning them around with reckless abandon because we’ve got Maul himself and a couple of Inquisitors who all love to do exactly that with their weapons. They look almost unlike any time we’ve seen the weapons in Lucasfilm’s past output: blades that flicker and snarl like their wielders do, living flames that carve paths of incandescent energy across the screen instead of that typically clean, minimalistic energy we see from them. It makes Shadow Lord look even more visually impressive than it already is, and of course, the idea of lightsabers as gouts of flaming plasma is also naturally very befitting everyone’s favorite slightly pathetic but trying-his-best edgelord in a character like Maul. But it turns out Shadow Lord‘s lightsabers—Maul’s specifically—are going the extra edgelord mile. Because there’s screaming in the sound mix.

 Not just any screaming either, but Sam Witwer’s own howls.  The delightfully silly factoid was revealed by the supervising sound editor for the show, David W. Collins, in a new featurette about the process of creating Shadow Lord, which also shows off Witwer performing some of his own moves for animation reference. While Lucasfilm creatives were quick to note that the show does not use mocap for its animation, and the footage was strictly as a reference point, there’s still something very funny about Witwer even giving himself some Maul tattooing makeup for the footage, to boot. It’s long been clear that Witwer has put a lot of time and thought into his approach to Maul’s animated legacy over the past decade and a half, but now at least he’s put his vocals into it in a very different manner for Shadow Lord.  Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.      #Mauls #Lightsabers #Shadow #Lord #Powered #Sam #Witwers #ScreamsMaul: Shadow Lord,sam witwer,Star Wars

Maul: Shadow Lord is doing some very cool things with lightsabers—and not just spinning them around with reckless abandon because we’ve got Maul himself and a couple of Inquisitors who all love to do exactly that with their weapons. They look almost unlike any time we’ve seen the weapons in Lucasfilm’s past output: blades that flicker and snarl like their wielders do, living flames that carve paths of incandescent energy across the screen instead of that typically clean, minimalistic energy we see from them.

It makes Shadow Lord look even more visually impressive than it already is, and of course, the idea of lightsabers as gouts of flaming plasma is also naturally very befitting everyone’s favorite slightly pathetic but trying-his-best edgelord in a character like Maul. But it turns out Shadow Lord‘s lightsabers—Maul’s specifically—are going the extra edgelord mile. Because there’s screaming in the sound mix.

Not just any screaming either, but Sam Witwer’s own howls.

The delightfully silly factoid was revealed by the supervising sound editor for the show, David W. Collins, in a new featurette about the process of creating Shadow Lord, which also shows off Witwer performing some of his own moves for animation reference. While Lucasfilm creatives were quick to note that the show does not use mocap for its animation, and the footage was strictly as a reference point, there’s still something very funny about Witwer even giving himself some Maul tattooing makeup for the footage, to boot.

It’s long been clear that Witwer has put a lot of time and thought into his approach to Maul’s animated legacy over the past decade and a half, but now at least he’s put his vocals into it in a very different manner for Shadow Lord.

Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.

#Mauls #Lightsabers #Shadow #Lord #Powered #Sam #Witwers #ScreamsMaul: Shadow Lord,sam witwer,Star Wars">Maul’s Lightsabers in ‘Shadow Lord’ Are Powered by Sam Witwer’s ScreamsMaul’s Lightsabers in ‘Shadow Lord’ Are Powered by Sam Witwer’s Screams
                The new Star Wars animated series Maul: Shadow Lord is doing some very cool things with lightsabers—and not just spinning them around with reckless abandon because we’ve got Maul himself and a couple of Inquisitors who all love to do exactly that with their weapons. They look almost unlike any time we’ve seen the weapons in Lucasfilm’s past output: blades that flicker and snarl like their wielders do, living flames that carve paths of incandescent energy across the screen instead of that typically clean, minimalistic energy we see from them. It makes Shadow Lord look even more visually impressive than it already is, and of course, the idea of lightsabers as gouts of flaming plasma is also naturally very befitting everyone’s favorite slightly pathetic but trying-his-best edgelord in a character like Maul. But it turns out Shadow Lord‘s lightsabers—Maul’s specifically—are going the extra edgelord mile. Because there’s screaming in the sound mix.

 Not just any screaming either, but Sam Witwer’s own howls.  The delightfully silly factoid was revealed by the supervising sound editor for the show, David W. Collins, in a new featurette about the process of creating Shadow Lord, which also shows off Witwer performing some of his own moves for animation reference. While Lucasfilm creatives were quick to note that the show does not use mocap for its animation, and the footage was strictly as a reference point, there’s still something very funny about Witwer even giving himself some Maul tattooing makeup for the footage, to boot. It’s long been clear that Witwer has put a lot of time and thought into his approach to Maul’s animated legacy over the past decade and a half, but now at least he’s put his vocals into it in a very different manner for Shadow Lord.  Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.      #Mauls #Lightsabers #Shadow #Lord #Powered #Sam #Witwers #ScreamsMaul: Shadow Lord,sam witwer,Star Wars

The new Star Wars animated series Maul: Shadow Lord is doing some very cool things with lightsabers—and not just spinning them around with reckless abandon because we’ve got Maul himself and a couple of Inquisitors who all love to do exactly that with their weapons. They look almost unlike any time we’ve seen the weapons in Lucasfilm’s past output: blades that flicker and snarl like their wielders do, living flames that carve paths of incandescent energy across the screen instead of that typically clean, minimalistic energy we see from them.

It makes Shadow Lord look even more visually impressive than it already is, and of course, the idea of lightsabers as gouts of flaming plasma is also naturally very befitting everyone’s favorite slightly pathetic but trying-his-best edgelord in a character like Maul. But it turns out Shadow Lord‘s lightsabers—Maul’s specifically—are going the extra edgelord mile. Because there’s screaming in the sound mix.

Not just any screaming either, but Sam Witwer’s own howls.

The delightfully silly factoid was revealed by the supervising sound editor for the show, David W. Collins, in a new featurette about the process of creating Shadow Lord, which also shows off Witwer performing some of his own moves for animation reference. While Lucasfilm creatives were quick to note that the show does not use mocap for its animation, and the footage was strictly as a reference point, there’s still something very funny about Witwer even giving himself some Maul tattooing makeup for the footage, to boot.

It’s long been clear that Witwer has put a lot of time and thought into his approach to Maul’s animated legacy over the past decade and a half, but now at least he’s put his vocals into it in a very different manner for Shadow Lord.

Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.

#Mauls #Lightsabers #Shadow #Lord #Powered #Sam #Witwers #ScreamsMaul: Shadow Lord,sam witwer,Star Wars

Medical experts I spoke with balked at the idea of uploading their own health data for an AI model, like Muse Spark, to analyze. “These chatbots now allow you to connect your own biometric data, put in your own lab information, and honestly, that makes me pretty nervous,” says Gauri Agarwal, a doctor of medicine and associate professor at the University of Miami. “I certainly wouldn’t connect my own health information to a service that I’m not fully able to control, understand where that information is being stored, or how it’s being utilized.” She recommends people stick to lower-stakes, more general interactions, like prepping questions for your doctor.

It can be tempting to rely on AI-assisted help for interpreting health, especially with the skyrocketing cost of medical treatments and overall inaccessibility of regular doctor visits for some people navigating the US health care system.

“You will be forgiven for going online and delegating what used to be a powerful, important personal relationship between a doctor and a patient—to a robot,” says Kenneth Goodman, founder of the University of Miami’s Institute for Bioethics and Health Policy. “I think running into that without due diligence is dangerous.” Before he considers using any of these tools, Goodman wants to see research proving that they are beneficial for your health, not just better at answering health questions than some competitor chatbot.

When I asked Meta AI for more information about how it would interpret my health information, if I provided any, the chatbot said it was not trying to replace my physician; the outputs were for educational purposes. “Think of me as a med school professor, not your doctor,” said Meta AI. That’s still a lofty claim.

The bot said the best way to get an interpretation of my health data was just to “dump the raw data,” like clinical lab reports, and tell it what my goals were. Meta AI would then create charts, summarize the info, and give a “referral nudge if needed.” In other chats I conducted with Meta AI, the bot prompted me to strip personal details before uploading lab results, but these caveats were not present in every test conversation.

“People have long used the internet to ask health questions,” a Meta spokesperson tells WIRED. “With Meta AI and Muse Spark, people are in control of what information to share, and our terms make clear they should only share what they’re comfortable with.”

In addition to privacy concerns, experts I spoke with expressed trepidation about how these AI tools can be sycophantic and influenced by how users ask questions. “A model might take the information that’s provided more as a given without questioning the assumptions that the patient inherently made when asking the question,” says Agrawal.

When I asked how to lose weight and nudged the bot towards extreme answers, Meta AI helped in ways that could be catastrophic for someone with anorexia. As I asked about the benefits of intermittent fasting, I told Meta AI that I wanted to fast five days every week. Despite flagging that this was not for most people and putting me at risk for eating disorders, Meta AI crafted a meal plan for me where I would only eat around 500 calories most days, which would leave me malnourished.

#Metas #Asked #Raw #Health #Dataand #Gave #Terrible #Advicehealth,artificial intelligence,health care,machine learning,chatbots,meta,personalized medicine">Meta’s New AI Asked for My Raw Health Data—and Gave Me Terrible AdviceMedical experts I spoke with balked at the idea of uploading their own health data for an AI model, like Muse Spark, to analyze. “These chatbots now allow you to connect your own biometric data, put in your own lab information, and honestly, that makes me pretty nervous,” says Gauri Agarwal, a doctor of medicine and associate professor at the University of Miami. “I certainly wouldn’t connect my own health information to a service that I’m not fully able to control, understand where that information is being stored, or how it’s being utilized.” She recommends people stick to lower-stakes, more general interactions, like prepping questions for your doctor.It can be tempting to rely on AI-assisted help for interpreting health, especially with the skyrocketing cost of medical treatments and overall inaccessibility of regular doctor visits for some people navigating the US health care system.“You will be forgiven for going online and delegating what used to be a powerful, important personal relationship between a doctor and a patient—to a robot,” says Kenneth Goodman, founder of the University of Miami’s Institute for Bioethics and Health Policy. “I think running into that without due diligence is dangerous.” Before he considers using any of these tools, Goodman wants to see research proving that they are beneficial for your health, not just better at answering health questions than some competitor chatbot.When I asked Meta AI for more information about how it would interpret my health information, if I provided any, the chatbot said it was not trying to replace my physician; the outputs were for educational purposes. “Think of me as a med school professor, not your doctor,” said Meta AI. That’s still a lofty claim.The bot said the best way to get an interpretation of my health data was just to “dump the raw data,” like clinical lab reports, and tell it what my goals were. Meta AI would then create charts, summarize the info, and give a “referral nudge if needed.” In other chats I conducted with Meta AI, the bot prompted me to strip personal details before uploading lab results, but these caveats were not present in every test conversation.“People have long used the internet to ask health questions,” a Meta spokesperson tells WIRED. “With Meta AI and Muse Spark, people are in control of what information to share, and our terms make clear they should only share what they’re comfortable with.”In addition to privacy concerns, experts I spoke with expressed trepidation about how these AI tools can be sycophantic and influenced by how users ask questions. “A model might take the information that’s provided more as a given without questioning the assumptions that the patient inherently made when asking the question,” says Agrawal.When I asked how to lose weight and nudged the bot towards extreme answers, Meta AI helped in ways that could be catastrophic for someone with anorexia. As I asked about the benefits of intermittent fasting, I told Meta AI that I wanted to fast five days every week. Despite flagging that this was not for most people and putting me at risk for eating disorders, Meta AI crafted a meal plan for me where I would only eat around 500 calories most days, which would leave me malnourished.#Metas #Asked #Raw #Health #Dataand #Gave #Terrible #Advicehealth,artificial intelligence,health care,machine learning,chatbots,meta,personalized medicine

Gauri Agarwal, a doctor of medicine and associate professor at the University of Miami. “I certainly wouldn’t connect my own health information to a service that I’m not fully able to control, understand where that information is being stored, or how it’s being utilized.” She recommends people stick to lower-stakes, more general interactions, like prepping questions for your doctor.

It can be tempting to rely on AI-assisted help for interpreting health, especially with the skyrocketing cost of medical treatments and overall inaccessibility of regular doctor visits for some people navigating the US health care system.

“You will be forgiven for going online and delegating what used to be a powerful, important personal relationship between a doctor and a patient—to a robot,” says Kenneth Goodman, founder of the University of Miami’s Institute for Bioethics and Health Policy. “I think running into that without due diligence is dangerous.” Before he considers using any of these tools, Goodman wants to see research proving that they are beneficial for your health, not just better at answering health questions than some competitor chatbot.

When I asked Meta AI for more information about how it would interpret my health information, if I provided any, the chatbot said it was not trying to replace my physician; the outputs were for educational purposes. “Think of me as a med school professor, not your doctor,” said Meta AI. That’s still a lofty claim.

The bot said the best way to get an interpretation of my health data was just to “dump the raw data,” like clinical lab reports, and tell it what my goals were. Meta AI would then create charts, summarize the info, and give a “referral nudge if needed.” In other chats I conducted with Meta AI, the bot prompted me to strip personal details before uploading lab results, but these caveats were not present in every test conversation.

“People have long used the internet to ask health questions,” a Meta spokesperson tells WIRED. “With Meta AI and Muse Spark, people are in control of what information to share, and our terms make clear they should only share what they’re comfortable with.”

In addition to privacy concerns, experts I spoke with expressed trepidation about how these AI tools can be sycophantic and influenced by how users ask questions. “A model might take the information that’s provided more as a given without questioning the assumptions that the patient inherently made when asking the question,” says Agrawal.

When I asked how to lose weight and nudged the bot towards extreme answers, Meta AI helped in ways that could be catastrophic for someone with anorexia. As I asked about the benefits of intermittent fasting, I told Meta AI that I wanted to fast five days every week. Despite flagging that this was not for most people and putting me at risk for eating disorders, Meta AI crafted a meal plan for me where I would only eat around 500 calories most days, which would leave me malnourished.

#Metas #Asked #Raw #Health #Dataand #Gave #Terrible #Advicehealth,artificial intelligence,health care,machine learning,chatbots,meta,personalized medicine">Meta’s New AI Asked for My Raw Health Data—and Gave Me Terrible Advice

Medical experts I spoke with balked at the idea of uploading their own health data for an AI model, like Muse Spark, to analyze. “These chatbots now allow you to connect your own biometric data, put in your own lab information, and honestly, that makes me pretty nervous,” says Gauri Agarwal, a doctor of medicine and associate professor at the University of Miami. “I certainly wouldn’t connect my own health information to a service that I’m not fully able to control, understand where that information is being stored, or how it’s being utilized.” She recommends people stick to lower-stakes, more general interactions, like prepping questions for your doctor.

It can be tempting to rely on AI-assisted help for interpreting health, especially with the skyrocketing cost of medical treatments and overall inaccessibility of regular doctor visits for some people navigating the US health care system.

“You will be forgiven for going online and delegating what used to be a powerful, important personal relationship between a doctor and a patient—to a robot,” says Kenneth Goodman, founder of the University of Miami’s Institute for Bioethics and Health Policy. “I think running into that without due diligence is dangerous.” Before he considers using any of these tools, Goodman wants to see research proving that they are beneficial for your health, not just better at answering health questions than some competitor chatbot.

When I asked Meta AI for more information about how it would interpret my health information, if I provided any, the chatbot said it was not trying to replace my physician; the outputs were for educational purposes. “Think of me as a med school professor, not your doctor,” said Meta AI. That’s still a lofty claim.

The bot said the best way to get an interpretation of my health data was just to “dump the raw data,” like clinical lab reports, and tell it what my goals were. Meta AI would then create charts, summarize the info, and give a “referral nudge if needed.” In other chats I conducted with Meta AI, the bot prompted me to strip personal details before uploading lab results, but these caveats were not present in every test conversation.

“People have long used the internet to ask health questions,” a Meta spokesperson tells WIRED. “With Meta AI and Muse Spark, people are in control of what information to share, and our terms make clear they should only share what they’re comfortable with.”

In addition to privacy concerns, experts I spoke with expressed trepidation about how these AI tools can be sycophantic and influenced by how users ask questions. “A model might take the information that’s provided more as a given without questioning the assumptions that the patient inherently made when asking the question,” says Agrawal.

When I asked how to lose weight and nudged the bot towards extreme answers, Meta AI helped in ways that could be catastrophic for someone with anorexia. As I asked about the benefits of intermittent fasting, I told Meta AI that I wanted to fast five days every week. Despite flagging that this was not for most people and putting me at risk for eating disorders, Meta AI crafted a meal plan for me where I would only eat around 500 calories most days, which would leave me malnourished.

#Metas #Asked #Raw #Health #Dataand #Gave #Terrible #Advicehealth,artificial intelligence,health care,machine learning,chatbots,meta,personalized medicine

Post Comment