Senators Adam Schiff and Elizabeth Warren are calling for an ethics investigation into President Trump's promotion of his meme coin.

Go behind the scenes of the visual effects of ‘Death of a Unicorn’, and see a detailed video breakdown.  When Elliot (Paul Rudd) and his daughter Ridley (Jenna Ortega) accidentally kill a unicorn on the way to the estate of Elliot’s boss in Alex Scharfman’s horror-comedy Death of a Unicorn, unusual things start to happen. The ‘dead’ unicorn’s blood and horn appear to have healing qualities, while Ridley’s encounter with the creature causes her to have cosmic visions. Eventually, the animal’s parents arrive to taunt–and kill–those at the estate trying to take advantage of the unicorn’s magical qualities. Behind much of this mayhem were visual effects supervisor Andrew Orloff, visual effects producer Jeremy Newmark, and Zoic Studios. CG unicorns were the centerpiece visual effects, while environments, set extensions, blood and gore and the cosmic visions also became key components of the 600 VFX shot film. Rob Price was Zoic Studios’ visual effects supervisor and Danica Tsang was the Zoic visual effects producer.  When Orloff came on board, he helped put together a number of decks, reference and mood boards for the creatures, working closely with concept artist Paul Mellender (Wētā Workshop had also done some preliminary designs). “The director, Alex, wanted it to be prehistoric,” recounts Orloff. “Like a real cryptid that the legend of a unicorn was based on, but as if that was a real creature that had been existing in our world, just hidden from human view.” “That idea that it had been around for so long took us away from the modern show horse with a horn on it into more of a predatory, apex predator kind of a feel,” continues Orloff. “We were looking at prehistoric horses, we were looking at lions and tigers and putting them all together to create a unique creature.”  To help establish the movements of the unicorns, Orloff oversaw a motion analysis exploration period with Zoic, relating to horses. “At one point, we were going to do some mocap’d horses, but we found that we couldn’t really get the motion that we wanted exactly. The body mechanics of the creature evolved in a way that we were going to have to step on the mocap so much that we decided to do it all keyframed. Patricia Binga was the animation supervisor and was amazing at putting together tests as part of the creature design process. This period also involved fur dynamics testing to see how thick the fur should be, and what fur patterns worked.” Death of Unicorn filmmakers and cast review a scene. What was further explored early on was the methodology for shooting scenes that included unicorns. Says Orloff: “We explored prosthetic pieces on real horses. We looked at just shooting real horses and manipulating them. Where we ended up with was CG unicorns, of course, but shooting with a combination of prosthetic puppets made by Filmefx, mostly for the foal. Filmefx took our designs and made a latex mold with a little bit of armature inside of them. We ended up building a full version of the foal that was on the ground and on the table. Then they built a head of the adult unicorn that had an articulated jaw and also a somewhat articulated neck. The horns were built as separate props from our 3D files.” To film scenes that involved close interaction between the unicorns and the characters, Orloff says ‘every trick in the book’ was utilized. “For example, there’s a scene where Téa Leoni’s character is impaled through the shoulder by the horn coming from behind a bookcase and then it slams her all around. That was a stunt where we had a plant-on for the back of the horn coming out of her back, and some prosthetic blood. And then we had a separate plate of the stuffy coming through. We ended up doing a CG version of it, but we kept as much as we could. We kept the plant-on, we kept some of the on-set special effects stuff of the books falling, and the dust, and we added to that with more books falling out and more blood. We also re-timed it in VFX so that the stunt looked more violent.” “Later in that same scene,” adds Orloff, “her character’s innards are being ripped out by the unicorn. There is a puppet in that shot that is pulling out some prop guts. We just left the stuff that’s on her torso that’s interacting with her, but the stuff that’s in the creature’s mouth was CG gore matched to the other gore.” A scene from the film. A principal challenge with the unicorns was their colorings. They are a mix of white also darker sheens, which, Orloff states, needed specific considerations. “We talked about the color of the unicorns extensively. I made it clear after doing white creatures before that a white creature isn’t white. It’s going to be the color of whatever the environment is. At the very beginning of the shot, we did do some experiments in rendering the fur to more of a mid-gray with a very strong ambient occlusion pass to ‘grab’ the details out. If it gets too dark, all the detail goes away and if it gets too bright, everything mushes together.” For the moment when Ridley experiences her cosmic visions (a phenomenon that Elliot also later encounters), Orloff says he discussed with the director a wealth of space film reference. “The idea was to keep it in the realm of the Stargate from 2001: A Space Odyssey, or Contact’s space travel, where it’s not really clear what it is you’re seeing because what you’re seeing is something that you can’t really fathom. However, we also knew we wanted it to have some realistic space imagery, like something out of the James Webb Space Telescope nebula imagery.” Orloff designed the cosmic scenes via ripomatics and animatics. The final imagery by Zoic Studios involved generating renders in Cinema 4D. “What we were trying to show was that they’re journeying into the source of the unicorn’s power,” continues Orloff. “We put some Easter eggs in there; one of them was when they shoot through the eye and they are jettisoned out. If you look at it, the Nebula there is actually derived from the model of the horn of the unicorn.” The post Creature feature: the art of a CG unicorn appeared first on befores & afters.

The Fast Company Impact Council is an invitation-only membership community of leaders, experts, executives, and entrepreneurs who share their insights with our audience. Members pay annual dues for access to peer learning, thought leadership opportunities, events and more. The landscape of home automation has sparked numerous discussions about security and control. According to SonicWall’s comprehensive 2025 Annual Cyber Threat Report, smart home products experienced a staggering 124% increase in cyberattacks during 2024, with smart plugs emerging as particularly vulnerable targets. These vulnerabilities have ignited growing consumer concern about the safety of cloud-dependent technologies that have dominated the smart home market.  As our homes become increasingly connected, the cloud-connected home automation we’ve been seeing for the past decade is being critically examined. A growing segment of consumers now seeks alternatives emphasizing local control, data privacy, and system resilience. Here we’ll examine the emerging paradigm of locally controlled smart home technologies, an approach that promises to return technological autonomy to homeowners.  The current landscape of smart home technology  The modern smart home ecosystem has evolved into an interconnected network predominantly reliant on cloud infrastructure. This cloud-centric approach requires constant internet connectivity, routing even the simplest commands through distant data centers thousands of miles away.  While promising convenience, this model introduces vulnerabilities:  A single network interruption can render home systems inoperable.  Each connected device becomes a potential cybersecurity entry point.  Data privacy becomes increasingly compromised as more personal information is transmitted and stored remotely.  Real-world IoT and smart home security failures  The most troubling aspect of cloud-dependent smart home technology is the threat of planned obsolescence. Manufacturers can shut down cloud services that power devices consumers have already purchased, rendering functional hardware useless.  For example, in February 2024, Amazon announced that its Echo Connect landline adapter would cease functioning, giving users just three weeks’ notice. This transition forced vulnerable users to quickly adapt to new technologies or lose access to a potentially life-saving communication tool.  The Echo Connect shutdown is far from an isolated incident. In April 2022, Insteon abruptly shut down its servers without warning, rendering thousands of connected devices instantly nonfunctional.   These incidents expose a critical flaw in cloud-dependent systems: Consumers never truly own their devices. When business interests change or financial pressures mount, companies can—and sometimes must—abandon their customers.  Beyond platform shutdowns, security researchers continue to uncover alarming vulnerabilities in cloud-connected devices. For example, in 2020, multiple families experienced privacy violations when their Ring security cameras were compromised, allowing strangers to speak directly to family members through the devices meant to protect them.  Corporate resistance to local control  Some manufacturers have actively blocked consumers from maintaining local control of purchased devices. In January 2024, appliance giant Haier issued legal threats against a developer who created Home Assistant integration plugins for the company’s smart appliances. These open-source tools allowed consumers to control their purchased devices without relying on Haier’s cloud infrastructure.  Despite overwhelming community support, with users creating hundreds of backup copies of the developer’s work, Haier’s aggressive stance exemplifies how manufacturers prioritize maintaining control over their ecosystems rather than respecting consumer ownership rights.  These failures underscore fundamental problems with cloud-dependent smart home technologies that consumers are increasingly recognizing:   Personal security is compromised when critical home systems depend on external servers.  Single points of failure make entire ecosystems vulnerable.  Personal data faces unnecessary exposure and transmission risks.  Manufacturers maintain excessive control over hardware consumers believe they own.  There is a growing community focused on local control, like Home Assistant, where users actively discuss strategies to maintain autonomy and minimize cloud dependency.   The local control revolution  Locally controlled smart home technology represents a paradigm shift in home automation, offering a fundamentally different approach to device management and data processing. At its core, this approach keeps all smart device functionalities within your home’s local network, providing unprecedented levels of privacy, reliability, and user control. The key principles of local control are simple.   Locally controlled smart home technology represents a paradigm shift, offering fundamentally different approaches to device management and data processing:  Local processing: Devices process information directly within the home network, delivering near-instantaneous response times  Network independence: Systems operate independently of internet connectivity  Privacy by design: Data processing remains within the home network, creating a barrier against external data collection  Platforms like Home Assistant and Hubitat have emerged as leaders in this revolution, offering robust, customizable ecosystems that prioritize user autonomy. These platforms empower tech-savvy users to build truly personalized smart home experiences that reflect their unique needs and values.  The path forward  The shift toward locally controlled smart home technology presents a significant opportunity for forward-thinking developers and manufacturers. As consumer demand for privacy, security, and true ownership grows, businesses that embrace this paradigm will gain competitive advantage in an increasingly crowded market.  For developers and product teams, the strategy is clear: Incorporate local processing capabilities alongside cloud features, respect user autonomy through open APIs, and build trust through transparent data practices. Companies that prioritize these values aren’t just serving a niche—they’re positioning themselves at the forefront of the next evolution in smart home technology.  The most successful smart home ecosystems won’t be those that lock users into vulnerable cloud dependencies, but those that empower customers with genuine control while delivering exceptional experiences.  Svetlin Todorov is cofounder of Shelly and CEO of Shelly U.S.A. 

This Quilted Furniture project is by Sapna Tayal, an Industrial Design student at Carnegie-Mellon University. I'd give her an "A;" Tayal has imaginatively harnessed production technology, collaborated with non-ID-department bodies and produced a highly professional level of documentation.Tayal's central question was: "How can we harness the unique capabilities of the overlooked CNC sewing machine, traditionally only used to make soft blankets, and expand its fabrication possibilities?" To get to the answer, she worked with researchers from CMU's Human Computer Interaction Institute (HCII) and Robotics Institute (RI).Flat-to-shape objects fabricated with a CNC sewing machineHow can we harness the unique capabilities of the overlooked CNC sewing machine, traditionally only used to make soft blankets, and expand its fabrication possibilities? Deployable objects allow quick activation and compact storage but often require intricate assembly processes. We establish a novel rapid, scalable method to fabricate functional objects using a large computer-controlled quilting machine (11 ft / 3.4 m wide). Rigid materials like plywood or acrylic are sandwiched between fabric layers and secured through sewing, forming soft hinges. These hinges allow smooth transitions into three-dimensional forms with minimal post-processing. Flat-to-shape steps of the side table Method OverviewLongarm Quilting Machine. Fabric is tensioned over the rollers. Leveraging the machine's strengthsModern CNC quilting machines, offer precision, reliability, and scale. However, their potential remains largely untapped beyond flat, fabric-based products like quilts. We take advantage of the machine's unique features to craft unique, surprising, fully functional objects. Computer-controlled sewing and panel insertion for the backpack design (10x speed).Human-machine co-creation Establishing an incremental fabrication process with alternating passes of sewing pockets and placing inserts.Designed Objects1. Lamp Made up of four panel types for localized functions to achieve dynamic functionality: plain acrylic at the base, cardstock-laminated panels in the inner ring, LED-integrated "active" panels in the upright section, and open spaces at the top for a graceful fabric drape as the lampshade.2. Backpack Inspired by packaging design, a tendon cord system transforms the bag from flat to 3D and doubles as the straps. Made of 3/16" plywood inserts. Gusset panels remain flexible with Velcro for selective attachment and locking.3. Side Table Transforming with a simple tug secured with a spring cord lock while in use. The cord acts on short rectangular struts, which meet in the center under the tabletop when fully deployed, stopping further movement.4. Lounge Chair A large (60" by 56" when flat) chair designed to support an adult's weight.The insert panels, made from 1/2" plywood cut on a CNC router, are designed to meet face-to-face when deployed. Neodymium magnets, glued into milled pockets, allow the chair to "snap" into place, aligning the panels, while the fabric and panels carry the primary loads.Design ProcessSewing PossibilitiesA research-through-design process to play with different sewing and gathering methods and studying their effects. Geometry and Method TuningPrototyping possible forms. Technical ProcessChair fabrication process where a table and weights are used to build objects larger than the bed size.Scaling upWe adapt the machine (11 ft x 25 in sewing area) for large scale rigid panel fabrication by replacing the typical fabric rolling method with a height-adjustable table. A weighted rod threaded through the fabric edge maintains tension and alignment during stitching.Original machine set up: Our modifications to expand fabrication scope: Path and Panel Sequence AlgorithmIn the full research paper, we formalize a repeatable design space to share our discoveries. Reach out for more information! Putting the CNC Sewing machine together! Mid-project we needed to move the machine (~13' by 5') from its original home in Robotics to the HCI lab across campus.Taking the machine apart and putting it back together was an incredible opportunity to learn about its workings and nuances of operating it! You can see more of Tayal's work here.

At Expo 2025 Osaka, among the eight Signature Pavilions redefining the architectural dialogue of the future, null² emerges as a standout vision. Designed by Tokyo- and Taipei-based studio NOIZ in collaboration with media artist and researcher Yoichi Ochiai, the pavilion is more than just a building, it’s a living experiment in hybrid space-making, where the boundaries between physical and digital, static and dynamic, dissolve into a shimmering architectural interspace. Conceived as a speculative model for future architecture, null² occupies a unique conceptual realm: it’s neither fully real nor entirely virtual, but something in between, a meta-environment that interacts with its users and surroundings. Its form is built from voxel-like modules, cubic units of 2, 4, or 8 meters, arranged to create a flowing sequence of exhibition, support, and rest spaces. These modules vary from rigid geometric blocks to more warped, organic shapes, each clad in a newly developed mirrored membrane that shifts with the wind and reflects the changing world around it. Designer: NOIZ This tensile membrane does more than just mirror its environment. Designed to be reactive, it shimmers and moves in response to environmental forces, creating a visual rhythm that gives the structure a sense of breath. In doing so, it transforms the building’s presence from a static object to a living system, one that visually and metaphorically blurs into its context. From its very conception, null² has been designed with agility in mind. In response to the tight timeline and uncertain future beyond Expo 2025, NOIZ developed a modular framework that prioritizes speed, flexibility, and reuse. The structure can be rapidly deployed, easily dismantled, and potentially relocated. The innovative membrane not only enhances the structure’s aesthetics but also offers solar reflectance and thermal insulation, features that hint at sustainable applications beyond the Expo, such as retrofitting existing buildings. Inside the pavilion, visitors are drawn into a multisensory exhibition experience built around the concept of digital twins. These avatars reflect and respond to the user’s presence, making the act of visiting itself a kind of co-creation. Within select modules, robotic arms and embedded woofers interact with the mirrored surfaces through movement and sound, producing an environment that feels both tactile and intelligent. The building, in this way, becomes a responsive interface, a medium for communication between the visitor and the space. But null² is not confined to its physical form. It extends into the digital, offering a participatory platform where remote users can engage with the pavilion through robotic avatars or augment their on-site experience using AR overlays. Visitors are encouraged to digitally reinterpret the structure, creating personalized spatial edits and contributing to an evolving archive of user-generated designs. This participatory approach redefines architectural authorship, replacing the singular vision of the designer with a collective, crowd-sourced process. The post Expo 2025’s Most Futuristic Pavilion Feels Alive and Responds to Your Presence first appeared on Yanko Design.

We like Max, but it may be held back by a few hardware concerns

Several founders of hot startups took big payouts and let Mark Zuckerberg gobble up their companies—and came to regret it.

Macworld Whether or not the iPad can replace a MacBook often depends on what you do. For students and professionals, the iPad Pro’s superior display, Apple Pencil input, and portability have made it the ideal productivity device. It worked for me; I earned my college degree and worked as a TV script translator while relying solely on an iPad. However, anyone with a more complicated workflow beyond reading, researching, writing, and illustrating like I did won’t find the iPad a suitable platform for work. Today, flagship iPads pack Apple’s M-series chipsets, similar to those powering the latest Macs–iPads are powerful. It’s iPadOS that prevents the tablet from truly being a viable option to a MacBook. iPadOS 19 is rumored to address some of these shortcomings by improving multitasking, productivity, and window management. That sounds great, especially if Apple brings over these nine macOS features to truly unlock the iPad’s full potential. Break the App Store shackle In the Apple ecosystem, macOS is the only Apple operating system that officially permits users to install apps from sources other than Apple’s App Store. If an application fails the App Store’s unforgiving screening process, developers can still distribute it independently. This enables Mac users to install third-party apps that don’t necessarily comply with Apple’s guidelines.  In contrast, iPadOS users outside the European Union are currently restricted to the app selection available on Apple’s storefront. If your workflow depends on a noncompliant or niche app, there’s no straightforward way to obtain it on your iPad–a dealbreaker for many. To truly match desktop flexibility, iPadOS 19 should support direct app installation. Enhanced window management macOS’s strength is its window management, which goes beyond what iPadOS offers with organization.Mahmoud Itani While iPadOS currently supports resizable app instances via Stage Manager, the feature is too limited compared to the Mac’s window management. The execution feels wonky and pushes me to use the traditional Split View and Slide Over multitasking features. iPadOS 19 should make multitasking more practical by adopting a macOS-like approach that’s fully optimized for the company’s tablet. Multiple user profiles Another essential feature is support for multiple user profiles on iPadOS. Apple has already built and shipped this feature, but it’s limited to iPads managed by educational institutions. The company could effortlessly make it available for all users, but it chooses not to. This makes it challenging for family members to share a single iPad, as you can’t easily separate individual apps, data, and settings. Improved cursor Another iPad annoyance is the bloated cursor when using a mouse or trackpad. For those unfamiliar, iPadOS’ cursor is significantly larger than that of macOS and features a magnetic effect that pulls it toward UI elements. This is totally expected, as iPadOS is a touch-first OS with large targets to accommodate human fingers. Though with iPadOS 19 and macOS 16 rumored to adopt similar looks, now is Apple’s chance to finally develop a more intuitive pointer.  Upgraded built-in apps Ever since iOS and iPadOS split, Apple has distinguished its own iPad apps with new UIs exclusive to the larger displays. But functionally, these apps continue to mimic the iPhone and its limitations. So, macOS-only features, like Smart Playlists in Apple Music and system file browsing in Finder, are absent from the iPad. To lure power users, iPadOS 19 should upgrade system apps by porting some of the Mac’s unique offerings. Extended work environments An iPad that could support multiple monitors and workspaces like a Mac would make it a more viable workstation.Mahmoud Itani Speaking of power users, the premium iPad Pro M4 still limits you to a single external monitor. Meanwhile, Macs support multiple screens and desktops. This lets users jump between different sets of opened apps by creating several environments with distinct layouts based on the tasks they’re focusing on. Without these functions, iPadOS remains a terrible platform for getting serious work done. Compatibility with Mac software The highest-end iPads now use the same processors as Macs. Yet, while macOS can run many iPad apps (it’s up to the app developer to allow it), iPadOS can’t run Mac software. Consequently, those relying on desktop-exclusive apps, like Xcode, can’t completely ditch their Macs. Similarly, those who already bought lifetime licenses for Final Cut Pro and Logic Pro on macOS can’t access these tools on their tablets without paying recurring subscription fees for the mobile editions. Apple could realistically address this limitation and expand the iPad’s app library by supporting Mac software on iPadOS 19. Continuity features The Mac offers special Continuity features that work seamlessly with iOS. With macOS Monterey 12, Apple added support for AirPlay receiving, letting you cast media from your iPhone to the computer’s larger display. And with macOS Sequoia 15, the company introduced the iPhone Mirroring app, enabling users to fully control their iPhones, view iOS notifications, and more. Both of these features are missing from iPadOS, further chaining its potential. Apple should expand the Continuity features between macOS and iPadOS.Mahmoud Itani iPhone OS tools Other macOS exclusives that stop many users from switching to iPadOS are the iOS management tools. Macs let you back up, restore, or update an iPhone using a wired connection. While newer iPads can repair your bricked iPhone wirelessly, they’re incapable of creating local, full-device backups. Similarly, they can’t update your iPhone’s OS when it doesn’t have sufficient storage to download the package over the air. Tempering expectations I’ve made peace with the fact that most of these features likely won’t make it to the iPad anytime soon, if ever. Apple knows that adding them could cannibalize Mac sales, since fewer customers would feel inclined to pay more for a real computer. The iPad seems to be stuck in limbo, and I struggle to figure out where it’s heading. There’s no denying that every annual OS update makes the device slightly more powerful. Regardless, its software features continue to underperform when compared to Windows tablets. I had high hopes when Stage Manager was first announced, only to be disappointed by the same main set of limitations soon after trying it. For this reason, I’m skeptical about iPadOS 19 meaningfully elevating the experience. I think the iPad is doomed to remain a stretched-out iPhone with fancy branding just to pad quarterly earnings reports.

The European Union (EU) AI Act may seem like a done deal, but stakeholders are still drafting the code of practice that will lay out rules for general-purpose AI (GPAI) models, including those with systemic risk. Now, though, as that drafting process approaches its deadline, US President Donald Trump is reportedly pressuring European regulators to scrap the rulebook. The US administration and other critics claim that it stifles innovation, is burdensome, and extends the bounds of the AI law, essentially creating new, unnecessary rules. The US government’s Mission to the EU recently reached out to the European Commission and several European governments to oppose its adoption in its current form, Bloomberg reports. “Big tech, and now government officials, argue that the draft AI rulebook layers on extra obligations, including third party model testing and full training data disclosure, that go beyond what is in the legally binding AI Act’s text, and furthermore, would be very challenging to implement at scale,” explained Thomas Randall, director of AI market research at Info-Tech Research Group. Onus is shifting from vendor to enterprise On its web page describing the initiative, the European Commission said, “the code should represent a central tool for providers to demonstrate compliance with the AI Act, incorporating state-of-the-art practices.” The code is voluntary, but the goal is to help providers prepare to satisfy the EU AI Act’s regulations around transparency, copyright, and risk mitigation. It is being drafted by a diverse group of general-purpose AI model providers, industry organizations, copyright holders, civil society representatives, members of academia, and independent experts, overseen by the European AI Office. The deadline for its completion is the end of April. The final version is set to be presented to EU representatives for approval in May, and will go into effect in August, one year after the AI Act came into force. It will have teeth; Randall pointed out that non-compliance could draw fines of up to 7% of global revenue, or heavier scrutiny by regulators, once it takes effect. But whether or not Brussels, the de facto capital of the EU, relaxes or enforces the current draft, the weight of ‘responsible AI’ is already shifting from vendors to the customer organizations deploying the technology, he noted. “Any organization conducting business in Europe needs to have its own AI risk playbooks, including privacy impact checks, provenance logs, or red-team testing, to avoid contractual, regulatory, and reputational damages,” Randall advised. He added that if Brussels did water down its AI code, it wouldn’t just be handing companies a free pass, “it would be handing over the steering wheel.” Clear, well-defined rules can at least mark where the guardrails sit, he noted. Strip those out, and every firm, from a garage startup to a global enterprise, will have to chart its own course on privacy, copyright, and model safety. While some will race ahead, others will likely have to tap the brakes because the liability would “sit squarely on their desks.” “Either way, CIOs need to treat responsible AI controls as core infrastructure, not a side project,” said Randall. A lighter touch regulatory landscape If other countries were to follow the current US administration’s approach to AI legislation, the result would likely be a lighter touch regulatory landscape with reduced federal oversight, noted Bill Wong, AI research fellow at Info-Tech Research Group. He pointed out that in January, the US administration issued Executive Order 14179, “Removing Barriers to American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence.” Right after that, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) updated its guidance for scientists working with the US Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute (AISI). Further, references to “AI safety,” “responsible AI,” and “AI fairness” were removed; instead, a new emphasis was placed on “reducing ideological bias to enable human flourishing and economic competitiveness.” Wong said: “In effect, the updated guidance appears to encourage partners to align with the executive order’s deregulatory stance.”

Tom Hanks is steering Apple TV+ back into WWII waters with a high-stakes sequel to "Greyhound," with production scheduled for early 2026."Greyhound" returns with a sequelApple Original Films is once again partnering with Hanks' Playtone banner and director Aaron Schneider for the follow-up to the 2020 wartime thriller. Hanks returns as Captain Krause and is also writing the script.The sequel will expand beyond the Atlantic setting of the first film, taking audiences from the beaches of Normandy to battles in the Pacific theater, according to Deadline. Continue Reading on AppleInsider | Discuss on our Forums