There are a few things an interior designer wouldn’t dare put in a bathroom. Carpet? Definitely not. Only overhead lighting? Design blasphemy. But there is one feature that finds its way into the bathroom all the time—rarely questioned, though maybe it should be—and that’s artwork. We get it: who doesn’t want to add a little personality to a space that otherwise is quite functional? Still, design fans are often split on the addition, especially when it comes to certain types of art. Related StoriesAn oil painting resting above a clawfoot bathtub or a framed graphic print next to a mirror infuses your bathroom with warmth and storytelling, a very necessary addition to a space that's often centered around pure function. “In a bathroom, where surfaces tend to be hard and the layout driven by function, a thoughtful piece can shift the entire ambience,” shares interior designer Linette Dai. “It brings dimension to the everyday.”According to designer Ali Milch, art can transform the entire experience from “routine to restorative.” But, is it the bathroom the best (read: most hygienic) place to put a favorite photo or heirloom painting? With moisture in the mix and potential for it being in the “splash zone” (sorry, but it's true), you need to be considerate of the art you bring in and where it’s placed. To help guide your curation, we chatted with interior designers and experts on how to integrate art into your space in a way that is both beautiful and bathroom-appropriate.Be Wary of HumidityMaybe this one is obvious, but when placing art in the bathroom, be sure to look for materials that aren’t prone to water damage. “We recommend framing art with a sealed backing and UV-protective acrylic instead of glass, which is both lighter and more resistant to moisture—an important consideration in steamy bathrooms,” Cathy Glazer, founder of Artfully Walls, shares. “Plus, acrylic is much safer than glass if dropped, especially on hard tile floors, as it won’t shatter.”Dai agrees that acrylic is the way to go when putting framed works into the bathroom, “I usually recommend acrylic glazing to avoid moisture damage. For humid environments, prints or photography mounted directly on aluminum or face-mounted under acrylic are durable and beautiful.”Make It Your Creative CanvasCourtsey of Ali MilchUnless you have a sprawling space, chances are your bathroom’s square footage is limited. Rather than viewing this as a constraint, think about it as an opportunity to get creative. “Because they’re smaller and more self-contained, [bathrooms] invite experimentation—think unexpected pieces, playful themes, or striking colors,” shares Glazer. “Art helps turn the bathroom into a moment of surprise and style.”“It doesn’t have to feel stuffy or overly formal,” Milch adds. “In a recent Tribeca project, we installed a kitschy iMessage bubble with the text ‘I love you too’ on the wall facing the entry. It’s a lighthearted, personal touch.”While it’s fun to get whimsical with your bathroom art (pro tip: secondhand stores can be a great place for unique finds), Dai also suggests still approaching it with a curated eye and saving anything that is precious or too high-maintenance for the powder room. “In full baths, I tend to be more selective based on how the space is ventilated and used day-to-day,” she shares. “Powder rooms, on the other hand, offer more freedom. That’s where I love incorporating oil paintings. They bring soul and a sense of history, and can make even the smallest space feel elevated.”Keep Materials And Size In MindAnother material worth considering adding? Ceramics. “Ceramic pieces also work beautifully, especially when there’s open shelving or decorative niches to display them,” shares Milch. Be wary of larger-scale sculptures, as they could potentially be slightly disruptive to the space. “Any type of artwork can work in a bathroom depending on the spatial allowances, but the typical bathroom is suited to wall hangings versus sculptures,” says Sarah Latham of L Interiors.And don’t forget to be mindful of scale. “As for size, I always opt for larger pieces in smaller spaces, it may feel counter-intuitive, but it makes a tight space feel larger,” Anastasia Casey of The Interior Collective shares. “I look for works that complement the finishes and palette without overwhelming it.”Let It Set The ToneCourtesy of Annie SloanArtwork in the bathroom doesn’t just decorate it; it can define it. “In bathrooms, there’s often less visual competition—no bold furniture or patterned textiles—so the art naturally becomes more of a focal point,” Dai adds. “That’s why the mood it sets matters so much. I think more intentionally about subject matter—what someone will see up close, often in moments of solitude,” shares Dai. Whether it’s a serene landscape photo or storied painting, don’t underestimate what a piece of art can do for the most utilitarian room in the house. With the right materials and placement, it can hold its own—moisture and all—while adding a design moment and feels considered and unexpected.Follow House Beautiful on Instagram and TikTok.

If you’ve ever flown through outer space, at least while watching a documentary or a science fiction film, you’ve seen how artists turn astronomical findings into stunning visuals. But in the process of visualizing data for their latest planetarium show, a production team at New York’s American Museum of Natural History made a surprising discovery of their own: a trillion-and-a-half mile long spiral of material drifting along the edge of our solar system. “So this is a really fun thing that happened,” says Jackie Faherty, the museum’s senior scientist. Last winter, Faherty and her colleagues were beneath the dome of the museum’s Hayden Planetarium, fine-tuning a scene that featured the Oort cloud, the big, thick bubble surrounding our Sun and planets that’s filled with ice and rock and other remnants from the solar system’s infancy. The Oort cloud begins far beyond Neptune, around one and a half light years from the Sun. It has never been directly observed; its existence is inferred from the behavior of long-period comets entering the inner solar system. The cloud is so expansive that the Voyager spacecraft, our most distant probes, would need another 250 years just to reach its inner boundary; to reach the other side, they would need about 30,000 years.  The 30-minute show, Encounters in the Milky Way, narrated by Pedro Pascal, guides audiences on a trip through the galaxy across billions of years. For a section about our nascent solar system, the writing team decided “there’s going to be a fly-by” of the Oort cloud, Faherty says. “But what does our Oort cloud look like?”  To find out, the museum consulted astronomers and turned to David Nesvorný, a scientist at the Southwest Research Institute in San Antonio. He provided his model of the millions of particles believed to make up the Oort cloud, based on extensive observational data. “Everybody said, go talk to Nesvorný. He’s got the best model,” says Faherty. And “everybody told us, ‘There’s structure in the model,’ so we were kind of set up to look for stuff,” she says.  The museum’s technical team began using Nesvorný’s model to simulate how the cloud evolved over time. Later, as the team projected versions of the fly-by scene into the dome, with the camera looking back at the Oort cloud, they saw a familiar shape, one that appears in galaxies, Saturn’s rings, and disks around young stars. “We’re flying away from the Oort cloud and out pops this spiral, a spiral shape to the outside of our solar system,” Faherty marveled. “A huge structure, millions and millions of particles.” She emailed Nesvorný to ask for “more particles,” with a render of the scene attached. “We noticed the spiral of course,” she wrote. “And then he writes me back: ‘what are you talking about, a spiral?’”  While fine-tuning a simulation of the Oort cloud, a vast expanse of ice material leftover from the birth of our Sun, the ‘Encounters in the Milky Way’ production team noticed a very clear shape: a structure made of billions of comets and shaped like a spiral-armed galaxy, seen here in a scene from the final Space Show (curving, dusty S-shape behind the Sun) [Image: © AMNH] More simulations ensued, this time on Pleiades, a powerful NASA supercomputer. In high-performance computer simulations spanning 4.6 billion years, starting from the Solar System’s earliest days, the researchers visualized how the initial icy and rocky ingredients of the Oort cloud began circling the Sun, in the elliptical orbits that are thought to give the cloud its rough disc shape. The simulations also incorporated the physics of the Sun’s gravitational pull, the influences from our Milky Way galaxy, and the movements of the comets themselves.  In each simulation, the spiral persisted. “No one has ever seen the Oort structure like that before,” says Faherty. Nesvorný “has a great quote about this: ‘The math was all there. We just needed the visuals.’”  An illustration of the Kuiper Belt and Oort Cloud in relation to our solar system. [Image: NASA] As the Oort cloud grew with the early solar system, Nesvorný and his colleagues hypothesize that the galactic tide, or the gravitational force from the Milky Way, disrupted the orbits of some comets. Although the Sun pulls these objects inward, the galaxy’s gravity appears to have twisted part of the Oort cloud outward, forming a spiral tilted roughly 30 degrees from the plane of the solar system. “As the galactic tide acts to decouple bodies from the scattered disk it creates a spiral structure in physical space that is roughly 15,000 astronomical units in length,” or around 1.4 trillion miles from one end to the other, the researchers write in a paper that was published in March in the Astrophysical Journal. “The spiral is long-lived and persists in the inner Oort Cloud to the present time.” “The physics makes sense,” says Faherty. “Scientists, we’re amazing at what we do, but it doesn’t mean we can see everything right away.” It helped that the team behind the space show was primed to look for something, says Carter Emmart, the museum’s director of astrovisualization and director of Encounters. Astronomers had described Nesvorný’s model as having “a structure,” which intrigued the team’s artists. “We were also looking for structure so that it wouldn’t just be sort of like a big blob,” he says. “Other models were also revealing this—but they just hadn’t been visualized.” The museum’s attempts to simulate nature date back to its first habitat dioramas in the early 1900s, which brought visitors to places that hadn’t yet been captured by color photos, TV, or the web. The planetarium, a night sky simulator for generations of would-be scientists and astronauts, got its start after financier Charles Hayden bought the museum its first Zeiss projector. The planetarium now boasts one of the world’s few Zeiss Mark IX systems. Still, these days the star projector is rarely used, Emmart says, now that fulldome laser projectors can turn the old static starfield into 3D video running at 60 frames per second. The Hayden boasts six custom-built Christie projectors, part of what the museum’s former president called “the most advanced planetarium ever attempted.”  In about 1.3 million years, the star system Gliese 710 is set to pass directly through our Oort Cloud, an event visualized in a dramatic scene in ‘Encounters in the Milky Way.’ During its flyby, our systems will swap icy comets, flinging some out on new paths. [Image: © AMNH] Emmart recalls how in 1998, when he and other museum leaders were imagining the future of space shows at the Hayden—now with the help of digital projectors and computer graphics—there were questions over how much space they could try to show. “We’re talking about these astronomical data sets we could plot to make the galaxy and the stars,” he says. “Of course, we knew that we would have this star projector, but we really wanted to emphasize astrophysics with this dome video system. I was drawing pictures of this just to get our heads around it and noting the tip of the solar system to the Milky Way is about 60 degrees. And I said, what are we gonna do when we get outside the Milky Way?’ “Then [planetarium’s director] Neil Degrasse Tyson “goes, ‘whoa, whoa, whoa, Carter, we have enough to do. And just plotting the Milky Way, that’s hard enough.’ And I said, ‘well, when we exit the Milky Way and we don’t see any other galaxies, that’s sort of like astronomy in 1920—we thought maybe the entire universe is just a Milky Way.'” “And that kind of led to a chaotic discussion about, well, what other data sets are there for this?” Emmart adds. The museum worked with astronomer Brent Tully, who had mapped 3500 galaxies beyond the Milky Way, in collaboration with the National Center for Super Computing Applications. “That was it,” he says, “and that seemed fantastical.” By the time the first planetarium show opened at the museum’s new Rose Center for Earth and Space in 2000, Tully had broadened his survey “to an amazing” 30,000 galaxies. The Sloan Digital Sky Survey followed—it’s now at data release 18—with six million galaxies. To build the map of the universe that underlies Encounters, the team also relied on data from the European Space Agency’s space observatory, Gaia. Launched in 2013 and powered down in March of this year, Gaia brought an unprecedented precision to our astronomical map, plotting the distance between 1.7 billion stars. To visualize and render the simulated data, Jon Parker, the museum’s lead technical director, relied on Houdini, a 3D animation tool by Toronto-based SideFX. The goal is immersion, “whether it’s in front of the buffalo downstairs, and seeing what those herds were like before we decimated them, to coming in this room and being teleported to space, with an accurate foundation in the science,” Emmart says. “But the art is important, because the art is the way to the soul.”  The museum, he adds, is “a testament to wonder. And I think wonder is a gateway to inspiration, and inspiration is a gateway to motivation.” Three-D visuals aren’t just powerful tools for communicating science, but increasingly crucial for science itself. Software like OpenSpace, an open source simulation tool developed by the museum, along with the growing availability of high-performance computing, are making it easier to build highly detailed visuals of ever larger and more complex collections of data. “Anytime we look, literally, from a different angle at catalogs of astronomical positions, simulations, or exploring the phase space of a complex data set, there is great potential to discover something new,” says Brian R. Kent, an astronomer and director of science communications at National Radio Astronomy Observatory. “There is also a wealth of astronomics tatical data in archives that can be reanalyzed in new ways, leading to new discoveries.” As the instruments grow in size and sophistication, so does the data, and the challenge of understanding it. Like all scientists, astronomers are facing a deluge of data, ranging from gamma rays and X-rays to ultraviolet, optical, infrared, and radio bands. Our Oort cloud (center), a shell of icy bodies that surrounds the solar system and extends one-and-a-half light years in every direction, is shown in this scene from ‘Encounters in the Milky Way’ along with the Oort clouds of neighboring stars. The more massive the star, the larger its Oort cloud [Image: © AMNH ] “New facilities like the Next Generation Very Large Array here at NRAO or the Vera Rubin Observatory and LSST survey project will generate large volumes of data, so astronomers have to get creative with how to analyze it,” says Kent.  More data—and new instruments—will also be needed to prove the spiral itself is actually there: there’s still no known way to even observe the Oort cloud.  Instead, the paper notes, the structure will have to be measured from “detection of a large number of objects” in the radius of the inner Oort cloud or from “thermal emission from small particles in the Oort spiral.”  The Vera C. Rubin Observatory, a powerful, U.S.-funded telescope that recently began operation in Chile, could possibly observe individual icy bodies within the cloud. But researchers expect the telescope will likely discover only dozens of these objects, maybe hundreds, not enough to meaningfully visualize any shapes in the Oort cloud.  For us, here and now, the 1.4 trillion mile-long spiral will remain confined to the inside of a dark dome across the street from Central Park.

The Mission: Impossible franchise is built on intense Tom Cruise stares, convoluted plot twists and reveals, and incredible stunts. It is not, however, built on compelling stories. Most of the Mission movies are about rogue agents and ill-defined MacGuffins, a repetition that would be annoying if anyone cared about the plots. However, lack of plot clarity does not equate to lack of tension. Most of the movies feature excellent villains who make life difficult for Cruise’s Ethan Hunt and force him to do incredible feats, resulting in the stunts we all love so much. So as the franchise winds down (maybe) with Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning, let’s take a look at the best of the worst: the villains who literally drove Ethan Hunt up a wall or into a giant turbine or hanging from a biplane. Point of clarity, first. While the series does have some fun henchmen like Paris (Pom Klementieff) and some stories have shadowy baddies pulling the strings, such as duplicitous IMF director John Musgrave (Billy Crudup) or the Entity, we’re just looking at main bad guys here, the people who dare to match wills with Ethan Hunt. 7. Sean Ambrose (Mission: Impossible II) Mission: Impossible II almost killed the franchise in its infancy. It seemed like a good idea to bring on director John Woo, a Hong Kong auteur with just as much style as the first film’s director, Brian De Palma. Furthermore, Woo and screenwriter Robert Towne (a Hollywood legend who co-wrote the first movie) base their story on the Alfred Hitchcock movie Notorious, casting Thandiwe Newton in place of Ingrid Bergman as the untrustworthy spy who captures our hero’s heart. The combination proved disastrous. Woo’s melodramatic method clashed with underdeveloped characterizations, a problem particularly clear with M:I2‘s central antagonist, former IMF agent Sean Ambrose, played by Dougray Scott. The legend of how Scott, the first person cast to play Wolverine in 2000’s X-Men, lost the role because of an on-set injury has been told time and again, overshadowing the worse insult, that he’s quite badly used in this movie. Ambrose is intended to be Hunt’s dark double, so much so that he begins the film masquerading as Cruise’s character. But he never has the intensity nor the charisma of his enemy, too often coming off as a sulking man-child than anyone who could threaten Hunt, let alone the world. 6. Kurt Hendricks (Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol) Kurt Hendricks, aka Cobalt, is so much better in conception than in execution. Played by Swedish actor Michael Nyqvist, Hendricks is exactly the type of antagonist who should challenge Ethan Hunt. A true believer in a nihilistic ideology, Hendricks wants to spark a nuclear war between the U.S. and Russia. That extremist belief gives the IMF no choice but to engage in the sort of over-the-top action that makes the franchise so special. The threat posed by Hendricks might send Ethan scaling the Birge Kalifa, but as a person, he’s a nothing onscreen. Nyqvist knows how to play menace, as demonstrated in his many genre roles in his native Sweden, or in American movies like John Wick, but he has nothing to do here but glower. Worse, he’s overshadowed by his minion Sabine (Léa Seydoux), whose personal connection to Hunt’s colleague Jane Carter (Paula Patton) gives her an edge that Hendricks never achieves. The main antagonist of Dead Reckoning and The Final Reckoning, the agent known only as Gabriel (Esai Morales) is set up as Ethan Hunt’s greatest foil. Not only does he apparently have espionage skills even greater than those of our hero, but he was directly responsible for Ethan joining IMF. We learn that Gabriel killed Ethan’s girlfriend Marie and framed him for the murder, which put him on the IMF’s radar. Worse still, Gabriel resurfaces as an acolyte of the all-powerful AI known as the Entity, giving him a driving ethos to match Ethan’s desire to save everyone. On paper there’s nothing wrong with this characterization. In practice it stinks. Dead Reckoning and especially The Final Reckoning suffer from a self-mythologizing that keeps dragging the movie back into the past instead of charging forward, and Gabriel embodies that backwards impulse. Gabriel is given some big moments of evil, directly killing fan favorites Ilsa Faust (Rebecca Ferguson) and Luther Stickell (Ving Rhames), and Morales has fun playing up the villain role, but Gabriel’s worst sin is boring the audience. 4. Jim Phelps (Mission: Impossible) Before we get further, we must be clear: Jim Phelps is a good villain. The fact that he ranks so low here is a testament to the strength of the other baddies, not a knock against Jim. One of the main protagonists of the original 1960s television series (albeit portrayed by Peter Graves instead of Jon Voight), Jim Phelps makes Mission: Impossible into a legacy sequel, connecting the classic series to a new set of heroes. However, Mission: Impossible has a bravery that most legacy sequels lack, turning the former hero into the new villain. Phelps initially seems to die in the attack that takes out most of Hunt’s team at the start of the movie, during a mission that IMF boss Kitteridge later reveals to be a “mole hunt.” However, Phelps returns late in the film as first Ethan’s ally and then his enemy, the true traitor that Kitteridge seeks. Voight brings plenty of gravitas to the role, but he struggles a bit with the stunts at the end—despite the fact that he was 57 when the movie was shot, a year younger than Cruise was when filming on Dead Reckoning began. 3. August Walker (Mission: Impossible – Fallout) Going into Fallout, the buzz was all about the mustache that Henry Cavill grew for the movie. Because he could/would not shave the facial hair for reshoots on Justice League, that movie’s director Joss Whedon had to digitally remove the ‘stache from Cavill’s face, resulting in an infamously absurd looking Superman. It seemed like a petty move at the time, but once we all saw Fallout, we got it. The mustache looks amazing and deserves to stay. Join our mailing list Get the best of Den of Geek delivered right to your inbox! The mustache is important because it sums up Cavill’s character August Walker. Described as a “blunt instrument” assigned to work with (read: spy on) Hunt for CIA Director Erika Sloane (Angela Bassett), Walker proves to be a force of nature who is just as destructive as our hero. Even before he’s revealed to be the malevolent John Lark, the man who the IMF sought in Rogue Nation, Walker proves a credible threat to Ethan. He’s ready to pummel our hero to death at any second—and he looks great doing it. 2. Owen Davian (Mission: Impossible III) For all of the death-defying derring-do in the Mission: Impossible franchise, it’s notable that the scariest moment comes not during one of Ethan Hunt’s feats, but in a line of dialogue. When arms dealer Owen Davian wakes up to discover he’s been captured by IMF, he ignores Ethan’s questions and blithely asks some of his own: “Do you have a wife, a girlfriend? Because you know what I’m gonna do next? I’m gonna find her… and I’m gonna hurt her.” It’s not so much the specific words that Davian says that send a chill down the spine. It’s the way that they’re delivered, completely without passion. Of course Davian is played by Philip Seymour Hoffman, one of the greatest actors of his generation. Hoffman’s ability to play cool and controlled (and, in one memorable scene, play the ever-energetic Ethan Hunt disguised as Davian) elevates the otherwise mundane J.J. Abrams-directed third film. In fact, Hoffman brings so much to the part that it’s hard to notice how bland the writing of Davian is, a demerit that knocks him to second place despite the utterly mesmerizing performance. 1. Solomon Lane (Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation) Owen Davian may talk about killing Ethan’s loved ones, but Solomon Lane actually almost did it. The pure sorrow and terror on sweet Benji’s face when he reveals the bomb strapped to his chest tells us more about Lane’s capacity for evil than any of Davian’s monologues could do. In fact, Lane encapsulates everything about the franchise’s past baddies, perfecting everything they tried to do. He has Davian’s quiet menace, the espionage skills of Gabriel and Ambrose, and he has the twisted worldview of Hendricks. By the time he sends a bomb to the worksite of Ethan’s estranged wife Julia Meade (Michelle Monaghan) out of pure pettiness, Lane even develops a personal animosity like Phelps. Much of the credit goes to Sean Harris, who uses his raspy voice and dark eyes to enhance the malevolence. So much of the Mission: Impossible franchise rests on Cruise’s gift of being earnest on camera, looking out from the screen with yearning blue eyes and a furrowed brow to convince viewers that he can do whatever he intends to do. Harris’ eyes do the exact opposite. When he looks out from the screen, we see pools of blackness, drowning us in nothingness. If Hunt is, as IMF Director Alan Hunley (Alec Baldwin) memorably put it, “the living manifestation of destiny,” then Lane is truly the opposite; the living manifestation of nihilism.

After spending several months doing not much besides watching Tom Cruise movies, I now spend a lot of time wondering about Tom Cruise running. The Mission: Impossible star is a high-cadence runner. He’s famously short of stature, low to the ground and with short legs. But that build is perfect for cinema, because those arms swing and those legs churn and convey a viscerality, a violence, a constant labored activity that translates perfectly to the screen. What they convey is a man of action, a man summoning all of his energy and will in a single direction: to move as quickly as he can. What is he thinking about when he’s running? I like to think the answer is nothing. That Tom Cruise is able to empty his head when he runs, blanking out his career, his cultural meaning, his past and present personal relationships, and move in a state of pure being. Maybe he’s doing one of his infamous stunts, a run towards a large dangerous vehicle, or off the side of a cliff. Maybe that makes him run faster. Maybe he feels a drive toward oblivion (and for Oblivion), to make the ultimate sacrifice to cinema, resulting in a cultural afterlife even longer than eternal stardom allows. This, in many ways, has been Tom Cruise’s career-long relationship with action movies. They’re his port in the storm, a safe harbor, a place to go and find love and acceptance when there seemingly is none to be had elsewhere. When the press is digging into your religion or snickering about your failed marriages or accusing you of being awkward or crazy or scary, you can find refuge in a MacGuffin to track down, a bad guy’s plot to foil, a world to save. The challenge each writer and director must face is how to handle Cruise’s well-known persona. Do they lean in or subvert? And to what end? When gifted with perhaps the most charismatic, committed movie star ever, are you willing to grapple with this stardom, how it explains the actor at a given point in his career, and what our response to him means? Or do you run? The following is a ranking of Tom Cruise’s greatest action films. In the interest of gimmicky symmetry, we’ve once again capped ourselves at 26 titles. We didn’t cheat… much. The films below all contain shootouts, fistfights, corpses, and missile crises. Most importantly, they are (mostly) tense, suspenseful, violent, escapist popcorn, not to be confused with the other half of Cruise’s equation: the pool-playing, the bartending, the litigating, and the deeply felt character work with auteurs, intended to get him the ultimate prize, which has eluded him for nearly half a century. Let’s run the numbers. 26. Valkyrie (2008) Director: Bryan SingerWhere to watch: Free on Pluto TV, Kanopy, Hoopla You could make a decent argument that this piece of shit doesn’t even belong on this list. It’s mostly a plodding chamber drama about “good Germans” ineffectually plotting to not kill Hitler at the end of World War II. But there’s an explosion, a dull shootout, and a bunch of executions at the end, so it seems to qualify as an action movie. Making Valkyrie is one of the most baffling decisions in Cruise’s entire career. And yet it’s also one of the most important films of his career, one that arguably defines his late period, because it’s how he first met his future M:I steward Christopher McQuarrie. Run report: Ominously, Tom Cruise doesn’t run in this movie.   25. Oblivion (2013) Director: Joseph KosinskiWhere to watch: Rent on Amazon, Apple Like Valkyrie, Oblivion technically qualifies as an action movie, but there’s little actual action or narrative tension to any of it. Cruise essentially plays the source code for a clone army created by a weird super-intelligence in space that runs Earth via killer droids, and the clones to service them. It comes out of a filmmaking period packed with sci-fi puzzlebox movies that were all atmosphere and often led nowhere, though this is probably the “best” example of that tiresome trend. The silver lining is that, like Valkyrie, this film led to Cruise meeting an important future collaborator: Top Gun: Maverick director Joseph Kosinski. Run report: Cruise literally exercises by running on a giant sleek modern hamster wheel in this. It’s the physical manifestation of everything I hate about this film. 24. Legend (1985) Director: Ridley ScottWhere to watch: Rent on Amazon, Apple This 1985 fantasy movie has its defenders, but I am not one of them. The action is completely disjointed and chaotic, a fractured fairy tale composed of an incoherent, weird/horny unholy union of J.R.R. Tolkien, Jim Henson, Peter Greenaway, Ken Russell, and a handful of psilocybin mushrooms. Legend looks like something pieced together by Jack Horner on a camcorder, so it’s hard to fault Cruise for looking clunky and uncomfortable. Who knows what a good performance in that role would look like?  Run report: A lot of odd almost skipping around in this, which adds to the “high school play” quality of the film. Cruise has a proper run toward the end, but it’s not fully baked yet.  23. The Mummy (2017) Director: Alex KurtzmanWhere to watch: Rent on Amazon, Apple Rewatching 2017’s The Mummy actually made me slightly disappointed we didn’t get the Dark Universe Universal Pictures briefly promised us. The setup had potential: Cruise as Indiana Jones, with Jake Johnson as Short Round and Courtney B. Vance as the archetypal no-bullshit sergeant? Potential. But Alex Kurtzman’s take on Karl Freund’s 1932 Boris Karloff Mummy needed less plot and more screwing around. This is an instance where Spielbergian pacing actually ruins a blockbuster, because it entirely lacks Spielberg Sauce. It becomes a horror movie after the first act, with Cruise as a largely personality-free, mentally unsound Black Swan/Smile protagonist. Then they spend all this time with Russell Crowe as Dr. Jekyll, introducing this universe of monsters that never gets off the ground. No fun! Run report: Notable because co-star Annabelle Wallis did a ton of press speaking to how much thought Cruise puts into his on-screen running. She specifically said he initially didn’t want to run on screen with Wallis, because he doesn’t like to share his on-screen run time. He relented, to little effect.  22. Mission: Impossible II (2000) Director: John WooWhere to watch: Free on Hulu, Paramount Plus Folks, I rewatched this recently. I really wanted to love it because some close and valued colleagues sing its praises, and I love a good, hot contrarian take. Respectfully, I don’t know what the hell they’re on. The camera work in Mission: Impossible II is so berserk, it borders on amateurish. The series hadn’t figured out what it was yet, but not in an interesting exploratory way: This installment is more like trying on a pair of pants that are not your vibe. The idea that Ethan Hunt lost his team in Mission: Impossible and now he’s a broken lone wolf (plus Ving Rhames’ Luther and Thandiwe Newton’s Nyah), an agent with the weight of the world on his shoulders, is not a bad premise. But in the role that ruined his career, Dougray Scott is a wooden, toothless bad guy. And somehow, the stakes feel impossibly low, even with a world-killing bioweapon on the line. Mission: Impossible II does, however, get points for being far and away the horniest movie in the franchise. Run report: Unsurprisingly, Woo is great at filming running, and there’s a lot of clay to work with here: Cruise’s long hair flopping in the wind, slow motion, a rare mid-run mask-rip, the inevitable dove-release: It’s all good! A definitive ranking of love interests and partners in the Mission: Impossible movies 6. Claire Phelps (Emmanuelle Béart) in Mission: Impossible5. Julia Meade (Michelle Monaghan) in Mission: Impossible III and Fallout4. Grace (Hayley Atwell) in Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning and The Final Reckoning3. Nyah Nordoff-Hall (Thandiwe Newton) in Mission: Impossible II2. Ilsa Faust (Rebecca Ferguson) in Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation, Fallout, and Dead Reckoning1. Jane Carter (Paula Patton) in in Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol 21. American Made (2017) Director: Doug Liman Where to watch: Rent on Amazon, Apple It’s a funny idea: What if Top Gun’s Maverick was a schmuck pilot turned drug-runner? It’s clearly Cruise reaching for a Blow of his own, but decades into this type of narrative, we know the beats by heart. American Made is sorely lacking in depravity. Cruise’s affected good ol’ boy Southern accent both has nothing to do with the film’s disposability, and explains everything. It’s a sanitized drug narrative in which we never see Cruise blow a line or fire a gun. We don’t even see his death on screen — Cruise dying in a movie is a big deal, and has only happened a few times. It’s almost like he knew this nothingburger wasn’t worth the distinction. Run report: Not much running, which is indicative of a larger problem with this film. But at one point, Cruise runs after a car with Caleb Landry Jones in it, and it explodes, in arguably the highlight of the film, for whatever that’s worth.  20. The Last Samurai (2003) Director: Edward ZwickWhere to watch: Rent on Amazon, Apple The one’s a weird movie about a mercenary who, after participating in the genocide of Native Americans, goes native in 19th-century Japan, in the wake of the Meiji Restoration. But it’s a somewhat unusual approach to the standard Cruise narrative arc. In this, he begins as a broken, drunken husk, a mercenary arm of the growing American empire who belatedly regains his honor by joining up with some samurai. The aspects of that plotline which feel unusual for a Cruise movie don’t make up for all the story elements that have aged terribly, but they’re something.  Run report: Less running than you’d expect, but running with swords while wearing leather samurai armor. 19. Jack Reacher: Never Go Back (2016)  Director: Edward ZwickWhere to watch: Rent on Amazon, Apple A lot of the films in the lower ranks of this list suffer from the problem of filmmakers settling, simply putting Cruise on screen and letting his iconography do the heavy lifting, sans interesting backstory or dialogue. In this sequel, thanks to Lee Child’s blunt dialogue, the deep-state rogue-army plotting in the source material, and Cruise’s typical level of meticulous fight choreo, it’s simply really entertaining, solid, replacement-level action. This sequel to 2012’s Jack Reacher gives the title troubleshooter (played by Cruise) a surrogate daughter and a foil in Cobie Smulders, which is great. But its primary sin is replacing Werner Herzog, the villain from the first movie, with a generic snooze of a bad guy. Run report: Some running and sliding on rooftops with guns, as fireworks go off in the night sky. Impressive for some action movies, a bit ho-hum compared to the bigger hits on this list.  18. Taps (1981) Director: Harold Becker Where to watch: Rent on Amazon, Apple Fascinating film. A Toy Soldiers riff interrogating the military-school system, and suggesting that it’s probably not a bad thing that former American ideals like patriotic honor, duty, and masculinity are fading. It’s Cruise’s first major role (with George C.Scott, Sean Penn, and baby Giancarlo Esposito!), and you’ll never believe this, but he plays a tightly wound, thrill-addicted, bloodthirsty maniac. Run report: Great characterization via run here. Cadet Captain David Shawn is a hawkish conservative dick, and Cruise’s running reflects that. He’s stiff, carrying an automatic rifle that he looks like he’s going to start firing wildly at any minute.  17. Mission: Impossible III (2006)  Director: J.J. Abrams Where to watch: Free on Hulu, Paramount Plus In the last Mission: Impossible installment made before the filmmakers really figured out what the series was doing, J.J. Abrams assembles a mostly incoherent, boring clunker that has a few very important grace notes. It’s a film about Ethan Hunt trying to carve out a normal life for himself, with the great Philip Seymour Hoffman playing the bucket of ice water dumped on his domestic fantasy. Hoffman’s Owen Davian is the greatest bad guy in the Cruise filmography, and there’s really no close second. (I suppose, if there was a gun to my head, I would point to Werner Herzog in Jack Reacher, or Jay Mohr in Jerry Maguire.) There are many moments I could point to in Hoffman’s wonderful performance, but the one I’d recommend, if you want to feel something, is when Hoffman gets to play Ethan Hunt playing Owen Davian with a mask on for a few scenes during the Vatican kidnapping, roughly 50 minutes in. He was so fucking great.  Run report: A lot of running, but none of it is very good. No knock on Cruise, but Abrams is doing perfunctory work, shot poorly via shaky cam that has trouble keeping Cruise in the frame, from a perfunctory director making a perfunctory action film. There are two notable exceptions. “The Shanghai Run,” which we may have more on later, and Cruise running straight up a wall. A definitive ranking of Mission: Impossible villain performances 10. Dougray Scott in Mission: Impossible II9. Eddie Marsan in Mission: Impossible III8. William Mapother — that’s right, Thomas Cruise Mapother IV’s cousin! — in Mission: Impossible II7. Lea Seydoux in Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol6. Sean Harris in Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation and Fallout5. Jean Reno in Mission: Impossible4. Esai Morales/The Entity in Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning and The Final Reckoning3. Jon Voight in Mission: Impossible2. Henry Cavill in Mission: Impossible – Fallout1. Phillip Seymour Hoffman in Mission: Impossible III 16. Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning (2025) Director: Christopher McQuarrieWhere to watch: In theaters The franchise potentially falls with a thud — or is it an AI-generated death fantasy that plays out entirely in Ethan Hunt’s head when he gets trapped in a digital coffin early in the movie? Either way, the resulting film is something the McQuarrie-Cruise collaboration has never been before: clunky and imprecise, a disjointed watch that delivers some high highs, but is unfortunately thin on story. McQuarrie seems unconcerned with character arcs, or any substantive grand narrative that might land in any meaningful way. This movie plays out like an aimless succession of beats, allowing boredom to creep in. That hasn’t been a part of the franchise since M:I 3. It’s a Simpsons clip show masquerading as a Mission: Impossible film, signaling that this iteration of the franchise is exhausted, with little left to say or explore. Perhaps there was no other way for this series to go out than on its back.  Run report: A run through the tunnels to save Luther, oddly reminiscent of the run attempting to save Ilsa Faust, followed by the run out of the tunnels, allowing Ethan to escape the film’s first trap (or does he?) A definitive ranking of Ethan Hunt’s “best friends/allies” (non-love interest/boss division) 17. Wes Bentley16. Greg Tarzan Davis15. Aaron Paul14. Jonathan Rhys Meyers13. Maggie Q12. Shea Whigham11. Hannah Waddington 10. Katy O’Brian9. Pom Klementieff8. Rolf Saxon7. Vanessa Kirby6. Keri Russell5. Simon Pegg4. Jeremy Renner3. Emilio Estevez2. Bogdan (Miraj Grbić)1. Luther (Ving Rhames) 15. War of the Worlds (2005) Director: Steven Spielberg Where to watch: Free on Hulu, Paramount Plus A curious movie I liked better on a rewatch than I did on my initial watch 20 years ago. Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom is often misremembered as Spielberg’s darkest movie, but I’d argue that War of the Worlds beats it: It’s a divorced-dad-anxiety horror movie that has the most nightmare-inducing, traumatic, post-9/11 visuals in the master’s oeuvre. It can be read as Spielberg wrestling with his relationship with his son Max, who would’ve been around the age of Cruise’s disgruntled, estranged son in the movie. War of the Worlds has issues: Cruise never works when he’s cast in a “just some guy” role, as he’s meant to be here, and the plot goes off the rails in the third act. But it has some of the best set pieces Spielberg ever directed. What will haunt me for the rest of my life is a scene where Cruise’s character is forced to essentially make a Sophie’s Choice between his son and daughter (a great Dakota Fanning), and lets his son go. The ominous music at the end when he’s magically reunited with his son is completely bizarre and unsettling, and I don’t think is meant to be taken at face value.  Run report: This is why Cruise is the king. He’s playing a supposed normal, everyday schmoe in this movie. When you focus on the running, compared to other roles, you can see he’s running like a mechanic who is still a little athletic, but doesn’t know where he’s going, or what is happening from one moment to the next. It’s building character through running. Incredible. 14. Knight and Day (2010) Director: James Mangold  Where to watch: Free on Cinemax; rent on Amazon, Apple Knight and Day is a sneakily important film in the Cruise action canon because it’s the first time a movie really puts Cruise into the role of the creepy, charismatic, psychotically intense, beleaguered, put-upon invincible cartoon character he became in the Mission: Impossible franchise as of Ghost Protocol. This movie is based around a funny idea: It’s basically a Mission: Impossible movie from the perspective of a clueless civilian. It helps that the civilian is phenomenal, physical, funny, and fucking ripped: Cameron Diaz plays the world’s hottest mechanic, and makes me wish she had gotten her own Atomic Blonde-style vehicle. Run report: Some co-running with Cameron Diaz here, which is as you might imagine, is good.  13. The Firm (1993) Director. Sydney PollackWhere to watch: Free on Paramount Plus It’s easy to put The Firm on a pedestal because of Sydney Pollack, the jazz score, the ’90s outfits, Gene Hackman, and every other significant gravitas-oozing “That Guy” as a mobster, shady lawyer, or Fed in a great “They don’t make them like that anymore” legal thriller. But what really stood out to me on a recent rewatch is this movie is two and a half hours about the now laughably quaint notion of rediscovering purity in the law. It isn’t much more than a story about a shady law firm that gets hit with mail-fraud charges, plus several deaths and a few smartly tied up loose ends. Run report: A clinic in Tom Cruise running, a draft-version highlight reel of his running scenes. In my memory, this contains some of his most iconic early runs, and it signals the moment when “Tom Cruise running” became a whole cultural thing.  12. Top Gun (1986) Director: Tony Scott Where to watch: Free on Paramount Plus Top Gun set the template for Tom Cruise’s on-screen narrative, and it took a decade before filmmakers were willing to start subverting that narrative again. This is straight-up hero porn, without any of the humbling that the sequel eventually dishes out. Tom Cruise as Maverick is the best pilot on Earth. He loses his best friend and co-pilot Goose, due to a combination of a mechanical failure and another pilot’s fuck-up. He then has to find the courage to fly with the exact same lack of inhibition he did at the outset of the film, which he finally does, based on essentially nothing that happens in the plot. Scott makes the wise decision to center the action (or non-action) of the film on pure Cruise charisma and star power, and it works. Run report: Believe it or not, Tom Cruise does not run in this movie.  11. Days of Thunder (1990) Director: Tony Scott Where to watch: Free on Paramount Plus Scott and Cruise’s Top Gun follow-up is essentially Top Gun with cars instead of jets — but yes, it’s marginally better. Why? Because this is a quintessential “We didn’t know how good we had it” classic. It’s the film where Cruise met his future spouse Nicole Kidman on set. Robert Duvall is swigging moonshine. It’s Randy Quaid’s last performance actually based on planet Earth. Plus there’s John C. Reilly, Michael Rooker, Cary Elwes, Fred Thompson, Margo Martindale, and a rousing Hans Zimmer score. Need I say more? Run report: They cut the climatic race off, but Cruise’s character Cole potentially gets smoked by 59-year-old Robert Duvall?! 10. Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning (2023) Director: Christopher McQuarrieWhere to watch: Free on Paramount Plus The metaphor that the Mission: Impossible franchise is a manifestation of Tom Cruise’s deep-seated need to save blockbuster filmmaking and the Hollywood star system has never been more overt. Cruise is literally up against AI, which is always a step ahead of him, dismantling his every gambit. It’s an update/remix of Ghost Protocol’s premise: The only antidote to the world-spanning AI known as The Entity is becoming a refusenik anti-tech Luddite in the spirit of John Henry, and using the raw materials of humanity to defeat an invincible machine.  Run report: Cruise running in confined spaces is a lot of fun, but the heavily CGI’d running up the side of a train losing its battle with gravity isn’t.  A definitive ranking of Mission: Impossible MacGuffins 8. Ghost Protocol’s Russian launch codes7. Fallout’s plutonium cores 6. Rogue Nation’s $2.4 billion Syndicate bankroll5. M:I2’s Chimera Virus4. Final Reckoning’s Sevastopol3. M:I’s NOC list 2. Dead Reckoning Part One’s cruciform key1. M:I3’s rabbit’s foot 9. Jack Reacher (2012)  Director: Christopher McQuarrie Where to watch: Free on Paramount Plus I loathe hyperbole: it’s a shortcut for unimaginative writers. I’ve never resorted to it in my entire life. So I hope you’ll take me at my word when I say that this movie is a fucking masterpiece. Amazon’s great Reacher series is made more in the image of Lee Child’s books, with a distinctive breakout lead in Alan Ritchson, who appears to have been designed in a lab to draw striking contrast to Tom Cruise in this role. But Reacher made us forget how good Jack Reacher gets. It’s a perfect elevated action programmer with a remarkable cast: David Oyelowo! Richard Jenkins! Rosamund Pike! A Days of Thunder reunion with Robert Duvall! Werner Herzog showing up in a completely brilliant, bonkers heel turn! McQuarrie made this one in vintage Shane Black ’90s style, with a dash of Don Siegel and Clint Eastwood. I totally get why Cruise decided to turn his career over to McQuarrie after this. I don’t understand why he didn’t let McQuarrie direct the sequel. Run report: There isn’t much running in this. At one point, Cruise is darting from shelter point to shelter point because a sniper is trying to pick him off, but that’s it. It’s because Jack fucking Reacher doesn’t have to run, which is simply good writing and filmmaking.  8. Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation (2015)  Director: Christopher McQuarrieWhere to watch: Free on Hulu, Paramount Plus This film famously opens with Tom Cruise hanging from the side of a plane as it takes off. But to me, the key moment comes when he’s broken into the plane, attached himself to a package which isn’t named, but looks like a crate of rockets the size of a minivan. He gives a final raised eyebrow and shrug to a gobsmacked henchman, who watches helplessly as Cruise deploys a parachute and falls out the back of the plane’s cargo bay with a ton of atomic weapons, and no plausible way to land without killing himself and creating a Grand Canyon-sized nuclear crater in Belarus. This scene was practically drawn by Chuck Jones, which sets the tone for a film that repositions Ethan Hunt on the border of superherodom, in a film about Tom Cruise as the literal manifestation of destiny.  It also marks the return of Alec Baldwin, the first (but not last) M:I handler who carried over from one film to the next. Evaluating the handlers’ position in the franchise (see below) is challenging: They’re constantly shifting allegiances, at times working in service of Hunt’s mission, at times in direct opposition to it, either attacking him with governmental red tape, or colluding with nefarious forces. Run report: A lot of different looks when it comes to the running in this. Shirtless running, running with Rebecca Ferguson, running across the wing of a moving plane. It’s all good. A definitive ranking of the “most fun” M:I handlers 6. Theodore Brassel (Laurence Fishburne) in Mission: Impossible III5. Erika Sloane (Angela Bassett) in Mission: Impossible – Fallout and The Final Reckoning4. Eugene Kittridge (Henry Czerny) in Mission: Impossible3. John Musgrave (Billy Crudup) in Mission: Impossible III2. Commander Swanbeck (Anthony Hopkins) in Mission: Impossible II1. Alan Hunley (Alec Baldwin*) in Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation and Fallout * One of my only lingering complaints about the M:I movies is that aside from Ving Rhames and Simon Pegg, we don’t get enough big family continuity. The Fast & Furious franchise is an exemplar/cautionary tale of how found-family dynamics can be a great source of fun and emotion — and also tank the series, if creators keep piling on new recurring elements. It sounds like Baldwin didn’t want to stay on board, but I would love to live in a world where he didn’t jump ship — or where, say, Henry Cavill’s August Walker joined Ethan’s team at the end of Mission: Impossible – Fallout, as he would have if he’d had a similar role in an F&F installment. 7. Minority Report (2002) Director: Steven SpielbergWhere to watch: Free on Paramount Plus I’m guessing this placement on this ranking will upset some people. I’m surprised it’s this low in the rankings too — but that’s how good the next six films are. And honestly, Minority Report doesn’t hold up as the masterpiece I remember it being. It’s a very cool story. It marks the first fantasy-team matchup of Tom Cruise and Steven Spielberg. They’re adapting a paranoid Philip K. Dick story, and largely delivering on the promise that implies. Minority Report is an inventive, dark, weird future horror movie, made with Spielberg’s standard stunning visual economy. But among the perfect elements in this film, I have to call out some aspects that didn’t age well. Janusz Kaminski’s lighting effects feel like the whole movie is stuck inside an iPod halo. and this dutch-angled high melodrama, sauced with a dash of Terry Gilliam dystopian/gross wackiness, which lends the film a degree of occasionally atonal, squishy gonzo elasticity you’ve likely forgotten.   Run report: Mileage may vary on white pools of light, but running through them in futuristic uniforms is decisively cool.  6. Mission: Impossible (1996) Director: Brian De PalmaWhere to watch: Free on Hulu, Paramount Plus Because MI:2 and MI:3 struggle with tone (and long, listless patches), and because it’s actually Brad Bird that sets the template for the McQuarrie era of the franchise, you could argue the first Mission: Impossible is the strangest, most personal vision of what this series is and what it can be. DePalma is asserting himself with every practical mask and stylized shot. Your mileage may vary with that approach to what has become this Swiss set piece machine, I love it. A few things stand out nearly three decades on: Of course, how ridiculously young Cruise looks, but perhaps crucially, how collegial, intimate, and even tender the first act is before his first team is eliminated and the movie becomes a DePalma paranoid thriller. It’s an element we never quite get from Mission: Impossible again, one that brings the arc of the franchise into focus and explains Ethan Hunt if you extend continuity: He’s a character betrayed by his father figure and his government in the first film, and spends the rest of the franchise running from this largely unspoken trauma, determined to never let that happen again. In the wake of this, he reluctantly pieces together a life, semblance of a family, and all the risks that come with those personal attachments. In honor of my favorite set piece in any of the films, one of DePalma’s finest taught masterpieces: A definitive ranking of the top 10 M:I set pieces  Honorable Mention: The Sebastopol Extraction- (Tie) The Train Fights– MI:1 & Dead Reckoning 10. The Plane Door- Rogue Nation9. The “Kick In The Head” Russian Jail Break- Ghost Protocol8. The Water Vault Ledger Heist Into The Motorcycle Chase- Rogue Nation7. The Handcuffed Car Chase- Dead Reckoning6. The Red Baron Plane Fight- Final Reckoning5. The Burj Khalifa- Ghost Protocol4. Kidnapping At The Vatican- MI:33. The Opera House Hit- Rogue Nation2. The Louvre Halo Jump Into the Bathroom Fight- Fallout1. The NOC List Heist- MI:1 Run report: Fitting that this franchise opens with Cruise putting on a running clinic, as that first op falls apart, then of course his run away from Kittridge and the massive fish tank explosion.  5. Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol  Director: Brad Bird (2011) Where to watch: Free on Hulu, Paramount Plus Nothing is working like it’s supposed to. Not the Impossible Mission Force, not the mask machine, not the radio comms, not the magnet gloves keeping Ethan Hunt tethered to the side of the world’s tallest building, not the Mission: Impossible franchise, and not Tom Cruise’s at-the-time fading movie stardom. But somehow, one incredible film made by a career animation director solves all of these problems, by stripping down, getting back to basics and reminding us what we always loved about these films and its star. It was supposed to be the beginning of a franchise reboot, with Jeremy Renner stepping in. Bird (and McQuarrie, in for a pass at the troubled screenplay and on deck to become Cruise’s Guy For Life) fights this decision off, gets away from trying to figure out the character Ethan Hunt and lets him be a superhero, more annoyed than concerned by the escalating difficulty of the impossible problems he has to solve. Through this, Bird correctly identifies the difference between Cruise and these other Hollywood candy asses: He’s a reckless warrior with a death wish who will do whatever is necessary to win, and he does. The team concept is back in full force with a genuinely showstopping stunt, and without the masks and tech, Cruise has to do it all with his wits, his hands, and his pure bravado. The series, and Cruise, never looked back.  Run report: Some of the most fun, imaginative set pieces built around running in this installment. A definitive ranking of who should replace Tom Cruise in the inevitable M:I reboot 10. Aaron Taylor Johnson9. Charlie Cox8. Sterling K. Brown7. Florence Pugh6. John David Washington5. Haley Atwell4. Miles Teller3. Jeremy Renner2. Aaron Pierre 1. Glen Powell 4. Top Gun: Maverick  Director: Joseph Kosinski (2022) Where to watch: Free on Paramount Plus It’s a death dream, it’s red meat nationalist troopaganda, it’s the greatest legacyquel ever made that no one asked for and you didn’t realize you desperately needed, it’s nostalgia porn, it saved the movie going experience post-COVID, it’s a finely calibrated joy machine. Cruise is downright mystical, shimmering in the sun’s reflection off the surf, dominating an endless football game with no rules that doesn’t make sense. He has actual chemistry with Jennifer Connelly, and he has the grace to cede the floor to his old nemesis — both in the first Top Gun and as a once contemporary Hollywood star/rival — the late Val Kilmer, to drive home the crush of time and destroy everyone in the theater, no matter how many times they went to see this monster hit that first summer back in theaters.  Run report: Immediately coming off of the stunning, emotional high point of the film, we get Cruise running in salt water soaked jeans shirtless on the beach. Are you not entertained? 3. Collateral  Director: Michael Mann (2004) Where to watch: Free on Paramount Plus An elemental, visceral faceoff that is radical in its simplicity of purpose. A film made by the second-best director on this list, and on a very short list of Cruise’s finest performances ever. He’s the salt and pepper terminator in a taxi, playing a pure evil bad guy, a classic Mann anti-hero samurai nihilist that also lives by a code and values being good at his job. Of course Cruise retains a kind of charm, but is also willing to get slimy and be deeply unlikeable and die on screen. Well worth the sacrifice.  Run report: Incredible running on display here. Once again he is running like a professional killer probably runs, almost always holding a gun, the hair matches the suit, so fucking bad ass.  2. Mission: Impossible – Fallout  Director: Christopher McQuarrie (2018) Where to watch: Free on Hulu, Paramount Plus As much time and energy as I just expended exalting Ghost Protocol, at a certain point you have to eschew poetic narratives and tip your cap, by the slightest of margins, to a fucking perfect movie. Ghost Prot is close, but you can feel its lack of a nailed-down shooting script at certain points towards its conclusion, as the action begins to wind down. McQuarrie becomes the first director in the franchise to get a second bite of the apple, and the result is a finely cut diamond. Fallout is about exhaustion and the impossibility of that manifestation of destiny idea from Rogue Nation. It makes the argument that you can’t actually save the day and save everyone without making any sacrifices forever, and because of that, sets up The Trolly Problem over and over again to try and get Ethan Hunt to compromise and/or give up. But, of course, he won’t, and neither, seemingly, will Cruise.  Run report: You can tell McQuarrie loves watching Cruise run as much as we do. He frames the runs in these wide shots and takes his time with them. It’s not conveying any additional information, a beat or two less would suffice, but the camera lingers and you get to just sit and appreciate the form and it really connects. It’s why he was the logical choice to take control of this franchise. He understands how a Tom Cruise action flick operates and what makes it special. And of course: A definitive ranking of the best runs in the franchise 10. The Opening Plane Run- Rogue Nation9. The Sandstorm Run- Ghost Protocol8. The Mask Rip Run- MI:27. Running through the alleys of Italy- Dead Reckoning6. Running Through the Tunnels for Luther (then out)- Final Reckoning5. Running down the Burj Khalifa- Ghost Protocol 4. Running from the fishtank explosion- MI:13. The Rooftop Run- Fallout2. The Shanghai Run- MI:31. The Kremlin Run- Ghost Protocol 1. Edge of Tomorrow  Director: Doug Liman (2014) Where to watch: Rent on Amazon, Apple Edge of Tomorrow is the best Tom Cruise action film had to be made in his late period of action stardom. You need the gravity and the gravitas, the emotional baggage earned through those decades of culture-remaking roles, the toll that exerted effort took on him, and the time spent and time passed on his face. The late, largely perfect Mission: Impossible films that dominate the top 10 of this list do much of that work: They feint, they allude, they nod to the realities of stardom, of life and death. But Ethan Hunt is a superhero, an inevitability, so the outcome is never in doubt — until, perhaps someday, it is. But for now, the masterpiece from Doug Liman — a director who either hits dingers or strikes out looking, with no in between — is a movie that punctuated Cruise’s post-Ghost Prot action renaissance: Edge of Tomorrow, or Live. Die. Repeat. It’s the unlikely on-paper melding of Starship Troopers and Groundhog Day, but in practice it’s the action film equivalent of Jerry Maguire, a movie that relies on your history with Maverick, and Mitch McDeere, and Ethan Hunt, and uses it to dismantle and subvert Tom Cruise, the infallible hero.  Liman is at the top of his game, particularly in editing, which uses repetition and quick cuts masterfully to convey the long and slow transformation of a public relations major named Cage — who becomes trapped in a disastrous, endless intergalactic Normandy scenario — from a marketing clown in a uniform to an alien killer badass while he falls in love and saves the world. We watch as Cruise has all his bravado and bullshit stripped away by “a system” (maybe the single best Paxton performance?!) with no time for that, a woman smarter and stronger than he is and immune to his charms, and an invading force that tears him to pieces over and over again. We watch the five-tool movie star — robbed of all his tools — regroup, rebuild, and in the process, grow a soul. It’s the platonic ideal of what a great blockbuster action film can be, one that only could’ve been made by one of its most important, prolific, and talented stars.  Run report: A beautiful physical metaphor for this film is watching the evolution of Cruise’s ability to move in that ridiculous mech suit. 

Let's make this simple: You want to know if there are any post- or mid-credits scenes in Mission: Impossible - The Final Reckoning. The answer is no, there are none.Full spoilers follow.It's been one wild, stunt-filled ride over the past 29 years, but every mission must come to an end eventually. Mission: Impossible - The Final Reckoning is apparently the final entry in this long-running series, as Tom Cruise's Ethan Hunt confronts his most daring and high-stakes mission yet.Now that The Final Reckoning is in theaters, we’re here to break down the ending to this epic blockbuster. Who lives? Who dies? Is this really the end of the road for Ethan and his team, or could the franchise return? Read on to learn more.Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning GalleryMission: Impossible - The Final Reckoning’s Ending ExplainedThe Mission: Impossible series has always been about the IMF racing against the clock to prevent various villains from unleashing global catastrophes, but the deck is really stacked against Ethan and his team in the eighth and final movie. While Ethan stopped Esai Morales’ Gabriel in the short term in 2023’s Mission: Impossible - Dead Reckoning Part One, there’s still the little problem of the hyper-advanced AI known as “The Entity” worming its way into every computer system across the globe. The situation is immediately dire in The Final Reckoning, with The Entity systematically taking over the nuclear stockpiles of every nation on Earth and Angela Bassett’s President Sloane forced to choose whether to unleash a preemptive strike on those nations. The Final Reckoning only further cements its dark, foreboding tone when Ving Rhames’ Luther Stickell becomes an early casualty in the conflict with Gabriel, which allows Gabriel to take possession of Luther’s Poison Pill device. Even after Ethan defies the odds and retrieves The Entity’s source code from the sunken Sevastopol submarine, he knows that the code is useless unless he can combine it with the Poison Pill. One way or another, all roads lead to Gabriel.As this conflict unfolds, The Final Reckoning introduces some fun and unexpected callbacks to previous Mission: Impossible films. For example, we learn that The Entity has its roots in the Rabbit’s Foot, the MacGuffin device from 2006’s Mission: Impossible III. Ethan’s team also reunites with former CIA analyst William Donloe (Rolf Saxon), the man who almost walked in on Ethan during his tense wire-hacking mission from the original film. Meanwhile, Shea Whigham’s Jasper Briggs is revealed to be the son of Jon Voight’s Jim Phelps, the IMF leader from the original film. No wonder he seems to bear such a personal grudge toward Ethan. Ethan and Gabriel’s paths do ultimately converge in South Africa, at a digital bunker where The Entity plans to retreat before unleashing a nuclear holocaust. Ethan’s plan is to retrieve the Poison Pill and combine it with the source code module, tricking The Entity into isolating itself on a holographic drive that Hayley Atwell’s Grace can then pickpocket. Predictably, things go haywire with the arrival of CIA Director Kittridge (Henry Czerny) and his team, and Simon Pegg’s Benji is shot in the ensuing chaos. As Ethan and Gabriel battle it out aboard two dueling planes, the clock steadily ticks down to nuclear armageddon. President Sloane is forced to make her choice, and she chooses to trust Ethan and pull the US’s nuclear arsenal offline rather than allow The Entity to take control. Ethan finally outwits Gabriel, and the latter’s defiant villain speech is cut short when he bashes his head into the tail of his plane. Ethan parachutes to safety and combines the module with the Poison Pill. Grace performs the impossible feat of snatching the drive at just the right moment, trapping The Entity in its tiny prison. Once again, Ethan and the IMF have saved the world from ruin, even if few people will ever know the full truth. Even more impressive, they do so without any further casualties. Benji survives his near-fatal gunshot wound, meaning Luther is the only IMF member to die in The Final Reckoning. Ethan and his team reunite one last time in London’s Trafalgar Square, where Grace hands Ethan the briefcase containing The Entity. After exchanging solemn nods, they all go their separate ways. Thus ends their latest, and apparently last, impossible mission.PlayDoes The Final Reckoning Have a Post-Credits Scene?As mentioned above, the eighth and final (for now?) Mission: Impossible movie has no mid- or post-credits scenes. You're free to leave once the credits start rolling. Though, as always, it never hurts to stick around and show some appreciation for all the cast and crew who made those death-defying stunts happen. The lack of a post-credits scene isn't necessarily that surprising, given that they've never really been a thing with this particular Hollywood franchise. Still, with this supposedly being the last entry in the series, you might think Cruise and director Christopher McQuarrie would want to give fans one last nod before sending Ethan Hunt off into the sunset. As much as this is billed as the conclusion of the series, The Final Reckoning certainly leaves the door open for more. A post-credits scene could have hinted at what’s next for the victorious Ethan. But that does raise an important question. Is this really the end? Let’s explore what we know.Is This Really the End of the Mission: Impossible Series? Paramount has definitely marketed The Final Reckoning as the conclusion to the Mission: Impossible saga. It’s right there in the name. This film is meant to cap off a 29-year journey and chronicle Ethan Hunt’s final and most desperate mission.But how final is this film, really? It certainly wraps up on a pretty open-ended note. Ethan is still alive, having somehow survived diving to loot a sunken submarine in the frigid Arctic Ocean. Luther may have perished heroically, but the rest of the IMF is alive, too (even Benji, who was touch-and-go there for a bit). That’s honestly one of the criticisms that can be leveled at The Final Reckoning. Even in this supposedly final outing, the film seems reluctant to break too many of its toys or veer outside the standard formula. Anyone expecting to see Cruise’s iconic hero finally bite off more than he can chew and meet his end will come away disappointed.Given the way The Final Reckoning ends, there’s nothing stopping Paramount from greenlighting another sequel featuring this revamped cast, with Cruise’s Ethan being joined by Atwell’s Grace, Pegg’s Benji, Pom Klementieff’s Paris, and Greg Tarzan Davis’ Theo Degas. The studio certainly seems to be leaving that door open, whether or not they choose to walk through it.It may all come down to a question of money. The Mission: Impossible franchise has certainly raked in the cash for Paramount over the years, but these movies are also insanely expensive to produce. Stunts this epic and stars this famous don’t come cheap. Case in point: Mission: Impossible - Dead Reckoning Part One grossed an impressive $571 million worldwide, yet the film is still considered to be a box office failure because of its massive budget (which was inflated by complications stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic). PlayThe Final Reckoning’s budget is reported to be as high as $400 million even before marketing, meaning it needs to gross way more than its predecessor to break even. That may be too much to hope for in a summer movie season as crowded as this one. That’s to say nothing of the fact that audiences are proving ever more fickle in the age of endless streaming options.Given the astronomical cost of making Mission: Impossible movies, Paramount may be happy to close the door on the franchise and focus on the more profitable Top Gun series. The ROI simply isn’t there any longer.That said, we could see Paramount pivoting in a slightly different direction with Mission: Impossible. Perhaps Cruise’s character could become more of a supporting player, with a new generation of heroic IMF agents taking center stage. That formula certainly worked for 2022’s Top Gun: Maverick. At one point, rumors even suggested that Maverick star Glen Powell was being eyed to become the new face of the M:I franchise, though Powell himself has denied this. At the very least, we know director Christopher McQuarrie has explored the idea of further sequels beyond The Final Reckoning. But if the studio ever does greenlight them, we suspect the goal will be to pivot to smaller, cheaper spinoffs with less emphasis on Cruise. It’s not as if Cruise is getting any younger, and at some point, Ethan Hunt needs to be allowed to retire for real. How many times can one guy save the world before it’s enough? In IGN's Mission: Impossible - The Final Reckoning review, Clint Gage gave the film a 6 out of 10, writing, "While its action is reliably thrilling and a few of its most exciting sequences are sure to hold up through the years, Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning tries to deal with no less than the end of every living thing on the planet – and suffers because of it. The somber tone and melodramatic dialogue miss the mark of what’s made this franchise so much fun for 30 years, but the door is left open for more impossible missions and the hope that this self-serious reckoning isn’t actually final." PlayFor more on the series, check out our ranking of the Mission: Impossible movies from worst to best.Jesse is a mild-mannered staff writer for IGN. Allow him to lend a machete to your intellectual thicket byfollowing @jschedeen on BlueSky.

French fries at Steak 'n' Shake in Greenwood, Indiana. RFK Jr touted French fries while dining at a ... More Steak 'n' Shake.Missvain, Wikimedia Commons RFK Jr is not just bringing back infectious diseases like measles. Our top health official is working hard to back diet-related diseases like obesity, diabetes, and heart attacks. During his first three months in office, RFK, Jr. has made three big pronouncements about what Americans should eat. The first is important but for the wrong reasons. The second builds on the fallacies of the first. And the third goes against 60 plus years of scientific evidence. 1. Ultra-processed foods (UPFs) are poisoning us Something is poisoning the American people. And we know that the primary culprit is our changing food supply to highly chemical and processed food. RFK Jr, at his Senate Finance Confirmation Hearings, January 29, 2025 French Fries, with 13 Ingredients, would be considered an ultra-processed food.Open Food Facts RFK is not wrong if he is referring to ultra-processed foods (or UPFs). A recent study found that those who ate more UPFs were more likely to show early symptoms of Parkinson’s disease and a review study linked UPFs to higher risk of dying from heart disease, type 2 diabetes, obesity, and mental health outcomes including anxiety and sleeping difficulties. UPFs are made from multiple ingredients including additives like colorants, flavor enhancers, and preservatives. They contain high amounts of sugars, salt, and fats, which makes them hyper-palatable, or simply tasty. And they are cheap, readily available (witness the local gas station convenience store), and handy to eat. Unfortunately for the consumer, a review of studies with a combined population of over 1 million, found that for each 10% increase in UPF consumption, your risk of mortality increases by 10%. Why are UPFs unhealthy? Many people eschew the long list of “chemicals” on the ingredient labels of everything from Wheaties to Fritos. One type of ingredient--food dyes--can have negative health effects and are associated with hyperactivity in children. In fact, MAHA hopes to ban food dyes in UPFs like soft drinks and Fruit Loops. Yet I haven’t heard MAHA alerting us to the high levels of salt, sugar, and saturated fat in UPFs… all things that have been shown over and over to contribute to chronic diseases like high blood pressure, diabetes, and cancer.FI/FOOD Washington Post Studio DATE: 1/7/05 PHOTO: Julia Ewan/TWP Kellogg's Fruit Loops now have 1/3 ... More less sugar and 12 added vitamins and minerals. (Photo by Julia Ewan/The The Washington Post via Getty Images)The Washington Post via Getty Images Dr Kevin Hall, who worked as a nutrition researcher at NIH for 21 years, found that people on an ultra-processed diet consumed about 500 more calories per day, which could explain why UPFs are associated with type 2 diabetes and obesity. But what explains why UPF consumers gobble up more calories? Dr Hall thinks energy density might be the culprit. Simply put, a chocolate chip cookie packs a lot more calories into every bite than a banana. So eating that ultra processed chocolate chip cookie means eating more calories per bite compared to eating fruit and other less processed foods. Not to mention that the sugar, salt and fat taste good… making me want to eat 4 or 5 chocolate chip cookies instead of one banana. Cramer ton, North Carolina, Floyd & Blackie's bakery employee with tray of large M&M chocolate chip ... More cookies. (Photo by: Jeffrey Greenberg/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)Jeffrey Greenberg/Universal Images Group via Getty ImagesUndated: A bunch of ripe yellow Bananas. (Photo by Richard Whiting /Getty Images)Getty Images The preliminary results of Dr Hall’s recent study, which he posted on X, show that the high energy density and the irresistible taste of salt, sugar, and fat explain why people on high UPF diets eat more calories. But don’t expect to see the final results of this important study published anytime soon. Turns out Dr Hall took early retirement at 54 yrs old from his research position at NIH. Why? Because the MAHA administration forced him to withdraw his name from a paper on UPFs that mentioned “health equity”--or the difficulties some groups have accessing healthy food. The administration also took away the money Dr Hall needed to continue his UPF research, censored his media access, and even incorrectly edited his response to a NY Times inquiry. Just as we were on the brink of understanding why UPFs are making us sick, one of the world’s leading UPF scientists is out. Hard to see how lack of scientific information is Making Americans Healthy Again. 2. Eat Beef Tallow instead of Seed OilsWASHINGTON, DC - MARCH 31: Beef tallow french fries photographed for Food in Washington, DC on March ... More 31, 2025. (Photo by Scott Suchman for The Washington Post via Getty Images; food styling by Lisa Cherkasky for The Washington Post via Getty Images)The Washington Post via Getty Images While dining on fries and a double cheeseburger at Steak N Shake with Fox News’s Sean Hannity, Kennedy touted French fries cooked in beef tallow. Robert F. Kennedy Jr 10/21/24 @RobertKennedyJr Did you know that McDonald’s used to use beef tallow to make their fries from 1940 until phasing it out in favor of seed oils in 1990? This switch was made because saturated animal fats were thought to be unhealthy, but we have since discovered that seed oils are one of the driving causes of the obesity epidemic. …Americans should have every right to eat out at a restaurant without being unknowingly poisoned by heavily subsidized seed oils. It’s time to Make Frying Oil Tallow Again 🇺🇸🍔 Close-up of a large frozen ball of beef kidney fat during home rendering of beef tallow, Lafayette, ... More California, March 25, 2025. (Photo by Smith Collection/Gado/Getty Images)Gado via Getty Images To be sure, consuming a lot of seed oils raises health concerns, including that they contain few nutrients, are often highly processed, and some, like soybean oil, might contain unhealthy amounts of omega 6 acids. But, are seed oils worse than saturated animal fats? Seed oils, unlike animal fats, are mostly unsaturated. According to Dr. Christopher Gardner, director of nutrition studies at the Stanford Prevention Research Center who has been studying the role of fat in our diet since 1995, "Every study for decades has shown that when you eat unsaturated fats instead of saturated fats, this lowers the level of LDL cholesterol [bad cholesterol] in your blood. There are actually few associations in nutrition that have this much evidence behind them…To think that seed oils are anywhere near the top of the list of major nutrition concerns in our country is just nuts." And in a 2025 study, participants with the highest intake of butter, which similar to beef tallow is largely saturated animal fat, had a 16% less likely to die. About ⅓ of the deaths were due to cancer, about a third to cardiovascular disease, and a third other causes. The authors conclude: “Substituting butter with plant-based oils may confer substantial benefits for preventing premature deaths. These results support current dietary recommendations to replace animal fats like butter with non hydrogenated vegetable oils that are high in unsaturated fats, especially olive, soy, and canola oil.” (Note that olive oil, while plant-based, is not a seed oil since most of the oil comes from the fleshy part of the olive.) Still life featuring a collection of olive oil bottles, 2011. (Photo by Tom Kelley/Getty Images)Getty Images In short, if you have to choose between seed oils and animal fat, you are probably better off with seed oils, or even better, extra virgin olive oil (EVOO). But, you should avoid consuming too much of any sort of oil or fat, which brings us to the third RFK Jr pronouncement.RFK Jr and West Virginia Governor Morissey. Presidential Candidate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. ... More Celebrates Hispanic Heritage Month In Los Angeles. Patrick Morrisey speaking at the 2017 CPAC in National Harbor, Maryland.Mario Tama, Getty Images; Gage Skidmore 3. Become a Carni-Bro At a public event to promote MAHA in West Virginia, RFK Jr body shamed Governor Patrick Morrisey for his weight. I’m going to put him on a really rigorous regime. We’re going to put him on a carnivore diet … Raise your hand if you want Governor Morrissey to do a public weigh-in once a month. And then when he’s lost 30 lbs I’m going to come back to this state and we’re going to do a celebration and a public weigh in with him. RFK, Jr. MAHA seems to be at the forefront of the next culture war: dump plant-based foods and become a “carni-bro.” Yet a comprehensive review of studies on foods and obesity concluded: High intakes of whole grains, legumes, nuts, and fruits are associated with a reduced risk of overweight and obesity, while red meat and sugar-sweetened beverages are associated with an increased risk of overweight and obesity. NEW YORK, NEW YORK - JULY 04: Spectators pose for a photo ahead of the 2023 Nathan's Famous Fourth ... More of July International Hot Dog Eating Contest at Coney Island on July 04, 2023 in the Brooklyn borough of New York City. The annual contest, which began in 1972, draws thousands of spectators to Nathan’s Famous located on Surf Avenue. (Photo by Alexi J. Rosenfeld/Getty Images)Getty Images How do UPFs compare to red meat? The only study I found comparing the two found people eating UPFs had an approximately 14% greater chance of dying whereas those who ate red meat had an approximately 8% chance of death over the same time period. (Those eating other types of meats like chicken and pork and fish did not have a greater chance of dying.) But this study was conducted with Seventh Day Adventists, whose meat consumption was way lower than the average American (while their UPF consumption was fairly typical of the US). People in West Virginia, whose governor is in fact rotund, are by far and away the biggest consumer of hotdogs in the US, at 481 hot dogs per person per year. In a recent UK study with a more typical population, every added 70 g of red meat and processed meat (like ham, hotdogs, bacon, and deli meats) per day was associated with a 15% higher risk of coronary heart disease and a 30% higher risk of diabetes. Because red and processed meat consumption is also associated with higher rates of cancer, the World Cancer Research Fund recommends limiting red meat to no more than three portions per week and avoiding processed meat altogether.TOPSHOT - An overweight woman walks at the 61st Montgomery County Agricultural Fair on August 19, ... More 2009 in Gaithersburg, Maryland. At USD 150 billion, the US medical system spends around twice as much treating preventable health conditions caused by obesity than it does on cancer, Health Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said. Two-thirds of US adults and one in five children are overweight or obese, putting them at greater risk of chronic illness like heart disease, cancer, stroke and diabetes, according to reports released recently at the "Weight of the Nation" conference. AFP PHOTO / Tim Sloan (Photo by Tim SLOAN / AFP) (Photo by TIM SLOAN/AFP via Getty Images)AFP via Getty Images Heart Disease: Still the leading killer According to the CDC, heart disease is the leading cause of death in the US, accounting for one in five deaths, or one death every 33 seconds. Heart disease cost the US about $252.2 billion from 2019 to 2020. And if you look at a map of where heart disease is more common, it looks uncannily like a map of MAHA supporters (including in West Virginia). .Heart Disease Death Rates, 2018–2020 for Adults, Ages 35+, by CountyCDC The first items in a list of CDC recommendations for preventing heart disease are all about food: Choose healthy meals and snacks high in fiber and limit saturated and trans fats, salt, and sugar. This sounds like a recipe for avoiding UPFs. But it could also be a recipe for substituting whole grains and fruit and vegetables for red and processed meats, which punch the double whammy of being meat and UPFs. Is RFK, Jr. Making America Healthy Again? Let’s celebrate Kennedy’s move away from UPFs, an important step toward improving Americans’ health. But why does our top health official publicly tout beef tallow, French fries, and double cheeseburgers, when we know that Americans’ consumption of saturated fat and meat lead to obesity, diabetes, cancer, and heart disease? Or has he weighed in on ultra-processed meats, like Slim Jim’s, which with sales at $3 billion last year is America’s fastest growing snack?NEW ORLEANS - OCTOBER 01: Amanda Barrett (L), 18-years-old, watches her mother Eve Barrett peel a ... More mold-covered layer of paint off a wall as the family sees what is left of their home in the Lakeview District October 1, 2005 in New Orleans, Louisiana. The people of New Orleans are still cleaning up over a month after Hurricane Katrina hit the area. (Photo by Ethan Miller/Getty Images)Getty Images It’s hard to understand what is going on in RFK’s brain. He gloms on to a limited number of studies suggesting health risks of eating seed oils, while ignoring saturated fats and even encouraging Americans to eat fast foods. He wants to rout out corruption in the food and pharmaceutical industry, yet uses his position to sell Make America Tallow Again hats and T-shirts. He says he believes climate change poses an existential threat, yet on his second day in office eliminated funding for research on heat waves, indoor mold after flooding, and other NIH climate change and health programs. And in his big May report on children’s health, he ignores the largest causes of death for those under 19--gun violence and accidents. Raise your hand if you want Secretary Kennedy to conduct a public truth-telling once a month.

May 21, 202522 min readMildred Weeks Wells’s Work on Airborne Transmission Could Have Saved Many Lives—If the Scientific Establishment ListenedMildred Weeks Wells and her husband figured out that disease-causing pathogens can spread through the air like smoke Dutton (image); Lily Whear (composite)Air-Borne: The Hidden History of the Life We Breathe, by Carl Zimmer, charts the history of the field of aerobiology: the science of airborne microorganisms. In this episode, we discover the story of two lost pioneers of the 1930s: physician and self-taught epidemiologist Mildred Weeks Wells and her husband, sanitary engineer William Firth Wells. Together, they proved that infectious pathogens could spread through the air over long distances. But the two had a reputation as outsiders, and they failed to convince the scientific establishment, who ignored their findings for decades. What the pair figured out could have saved many lives from tuberculosis, SARS, COVID and other airborne diseases. The contributions of Mildred Weeks Wells and her husband were all but erased from history—until now.LISTEN TO THE PODCASTOn supporting science journalismIf you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.TRANSCRIPTCarl Zimmer: Mildred is hired in the late 1920s to put together everything that was known about polio. And she does this incredible study, where she basically looks for everything that she can find about how polio spreads.At the time, the idea that it could spread through the air was really looked at as being just an obsolete superstition. Public health experts would say, look, a patient's breath is basically harmless. But the epidemiology looks to her like these germs are airborne, and this goes totally against the consensus at the time.Carol Sutton Lewis: Hello, I'm Carol Sutton Lewis. Welcome to the latest episode of Lost Women of Science Conversations, where we talk with authors and artists who've discovered and celebrated female scientists in books, poetry, film, and the visual arts.Today I'm joined by Carl Zimmer, an award-winning New York Times columnist and the author of 15 books about science. His latest book, Airborne: The Hidden History of the Life We Breathe, focuses on the last great biological frontier: the air. It presents the history of aerobiology, which is the science dealing with the occurrence, transportation, and effects of airborne microorganisms.The book chronicles the exploits of committed aerobiologists from the early pioneers through to the present day. Among these pioneers were Mildred Weeks Wells and her husband, William Firth Wells.Airborne tells the story of how Mildred and William tried to sound the alarm about airborne infections, but for many reasons, their warnings went unheard.Welcome, Carl Zimmer. It's such a pleasure to have you with us to tell us all about this fascinating woman and her contributions to science.Can you please tell us about Mildred Weeks Wells—where and how she grew up and what led her to the field of aerobiology?Carl Zimmer: She was born in 1891, and she came from a very prominent Texas family—the Denton family. Her great-grandfather is actually whom the city of Denton, Texas is named after. Her grandfather was a surgeon for the Confederate Army in the Civil War, and he becomes the director of what was called then the State Lunatic Asylum.And he and the bookkeeper there, William Weeks, are both charged with embezzlement. It's a big scandal. The bookkeeper then marries Mildred's mother. Then, shortly after Mildred's born, her father disappears. Her mother basically abandons her with her grandmother. And she grows up with her sister and grandmother in Austin, Texas. A comfortable life, but obviously there's a lot of scandal hanging over them.She is clearly incredibly strong-willed. She goes to medical school at the University of Texas and graduates in 1915, one of three women in a class of 34. That is really something for a woman at that point—there were hardly any women with medical degrees in the United States, let alone someone in Texas.But she books out of there. She does not stick around. She heads in 1915 to Washington, D.C., and works at the Public Health Service in a lab called the Hygienic Laboratory. Basically, what they're doing is studying bacteria. You have to remember, this is the golden age of the germ theory of disease. People have been figuring out that particular bacteria or viruses cause particular diseases, and that knowledge is helping them fight those diseases.It's there in Washington at this time that she meets a man who will become her husband, William Firth Wells.Carol Sutton Lewis: Just a quick aside—because we at Lost Women of Science are always interested in how you discover the material in addition to what you've discovered. How were you able to piece together her story? What sources were you able to find? It seems like there wasn't a lot of information available.Carl Zimmer: Yeah, it was a tough process. There is little information that's really easy to get your hands on. I mean, there is no biography of Mildred Wells or her husband, William Firth Wells.At the Rockefeller archives, they had maybe 30 document boxes full of stuff that was just miraculously conserved there. There are also letters that she wrote to people that have been saved in various collections.But especially with her early years, it's really tough. You know, in all my work trying to dig down for every single scrap of information I could find of her, I have only found one photograph of her—and it's the photograph in her yearbook. That’s it.Carol Sutton Lewis: You talked about that photograph in the book, and I was struck by your description of it. You say that she's smiling, but the longer you look at her smile, the sadder it becomes. What do you think at that young age was the source of the sadness?Carl Zimmer: I think that Mildred grew up with a lot of trauma. She was not the sort of person to keep long journals or write long letters about these sorts of things. But when you've come across those clues in these brief little newspaper accounts, you can kind of read between the lines.There are reports in newspapers saying that Mildred's mother had come to Austin to pay a visit to Mildred because she had scarlet fever when she was 10, and then she goes away again. And when I look at her face in her yearbook, it doesn't surprise me that there is this cast of melancholy to it because you just think about what she had gone through just as a kid.Carol Sutton Lewis: Oh. Absolutely. And fast forward, she meets William and they marry. They have a son, and they start collaborating. How did that begin?Carl Zimmer: The collaboration takes a while. So William Wells is also working at the Public Health Service at the time. He is a few years older than Mildred and he has been trained at MIT as what was called then a sanitarian. In other words, he was going to take the germ theory of disease and was going to save people's lives.He was very clever. He could invent tests that a sanitarian could use, dip a little tube into a river and see whether the water was safe or not, things like that. He was particularly focused on keeping water clean of bacteria that could cause diseases like typhoid or cholera and he also, gets assigned by the government to study oysters because oysters, they sit in this water and they're filtering all day long. And you know, if there's bacteria in there, they're going to filter it and trap it in their tissues. And oysters are incredibly popular in the early nineteen hundreds and a shocking number of people are keeling over dying of typhoid because they're eating them raw. So William is very busy, figuring out ways to save the oyster industry. How do we purify oysters and things like that? They meet, they get married in 1917.In 1918 they have a child, William Jr. nicknamed Bud. But William is not around for the birth, because he is drafted into the army, and he goes off to serve. in World War I.Carol Sutton Lewis: So Mildred is at home with Bud and William's off at the war. But ultimately, Mildred returns to science. A few years later, where she is hired as a polio detective. Can you tell me a little bit about what the state of polio knowledge was at the time and what precisely a polio detective did?Carl Zimmer: It doesn't seem like polio really was a thing in the United States until the late 1800s. And then suddenly there's this mysterious disease that can strike children with no warning. These kids can't. walk, or suddenly these kids are dying. Not only are the symptoms completely terrifying to parents, but how it spreads is a complete mystery. And so Mildred, seems to have been hired at some point in the late 1920s To basically put together everything that was known about polio to help doctors to deal with their patients and to, you know, encourage future science to try to figure out what is this disease.You know, Mildred wasn't trained in epidemiology. So it's kind of remarkable that she taught herself. And she would turn out to be a really great epidemiologist. But, in any case, She gets hired by the International Committee for the Study of Infantile Paralysis, that was the name then for polio. And she does this incredible study, where she basically looks for everything that she can find about how polio spreads. Case studies where, in a town, like this child got polio, then this child did, and did they have contact and what sort of contact, what season was it? What was the weather like? All these different factors.And one thing that's really important to bear in mind is that, at this time, the prevailing view was that diseases spread by water, by food, by sex, by close contact. Maybe like someone just coughs and sprays droplets on you, but otherwise it's these other routes.The idea that it could spread through the air was really looked at as being just obsolete superstition. for thousands of years, people talked about miasmas, somehow the air mysteriously became corrupted and that made people sick with different diseases. That was all thrown out in the late 1800s, early 1900s when germ theory really takes hold. And so public health experts would say, look, a patient's breath is basically harmless.Carol Sutton Lewis: But Mildred doesn't agree, does she?Carl Zimmer: Well, Mildred Wells is looking at all of this, data and she is starting to get an idea that maybe these public health experts have been too quick to dismiss the air. So when people are talking about droplet infections in the 1920s, they're basically just talking about, big droplets that someone might just sneeze in your face. But the epidemiology looks to her like these germs are airborne, are spreading long distances through the air.So Mildred is starting to make a distinction in her mind about what she calls airborne and droplet infections. So, and this is really the time that the Wellses collectively are thinking about airborne infection and it's Mildred is doing it. And William actually gives her credit for this later on.Carol Sutton Lewis: Right. and her results are published in a book about polio written entirely by female authors, which is quite unusual for the time.Carl Zimmer: Mm hmm. Right. The book is published in 1932, and the reception just tells you so much about what it was like to be a woman in science. The New England Journal of Medicine reviews the book, which is great. But, here's a line that they give, they say, it is interesting to note that this book is entirely the product of women in medicine and is the first book.So far as a reviewer knows. by a number of authors, all of whom are of the female sex. So it's this: Oh, look at this oddity. And basically, the virtue of that is that women are really thorough, I, guess. so it's a very detailed book. And the reviewer writes, no one is better fitted than a woman to collect data such as this book contains. So there's no okay, this is very useful.Carol Sutton Lewis: PatronizeCarl Zimmer: Yeah. Thank you very much. Reviewers were just skating over the conclusions that they were drawing, I guess because they were women. Yeah, pretty incredible.Carol Sutton Lewis: So she is the first to submit scientific proof about this potential for airborne transmission. And that was pretty much dismissed. It wasn't even actively dismissed.It was just, nah, these women, nothing's coming outta that, except William did pay attention. I believe he too had been thinking about airborne transmission for some time and then started seriously looking at Mildred's conclusion when he started teaching at Harvard.Carl Zimmer: Yeah. So, William gets a job as a low level instructor at Harvard. He's getting paid very little. Mildred has no income. He's teaching about hygiene and sanitation, but apparently he's a terrible teacher. But he is a clever, brilliant engineer and scientist; he very quickly develops an idea that probably originated in the work that Mildred had been doing on polio. that maybe diseases actually can spread long distances through the air. So there are large droplets that we might sneeze out and cough out and, and they go a short distance before gravity pulls them down. But physics dictates that below a certain size, droplets can resist gravity.This is something that's going totally against what all the, the really prominent public health figures are saying. William Wells doesn't care. He goes ahead and he starts to, invent a way to sample air for germs. Basically it's a centrifuge. You plug it in, the fan spins, it sucks in air, the air comes up inside a glass cylinder and then as it's spinning, if there are any droplets of particles or anything floating in the air, they get flung out to the sideS.And so afterwards you just pull out the glass which is coated with, food for microbes to grow on and you put it in a nice warm place. And If there's anything in the air, you'll be able to grow a colony and see it.Carol Sutton Lewis: Amazing.Carl Zimmer: It is amazing. This, this was a crucial inventionCarol Sutton Lewis: So we have William, who is with Mildred's help moving more towards the possibility of airborne infection, understanding that this is very much not where science is at the moment, and he conducts a really interesting experiment in one of his classrooms to try to move the theory forward. We'll talk more about that experiment when we come back after the break.MidrollCarol Sutton Lewis: Welcome back to Lost Women of Science Conversations. We left off as the Wellses were about to conduct an experiment to test their theories about airborne infections. Carl, can you tell us about that experiment?Carl Zimmer: Okay. it's 1934, It's a cold day. Students come in for a lecture from this terrible teacher, William Wells. The windows are closed. The doors are closed. It's a poorly ventilated room. About 20 minutes before the end of the class, he takes this weird device that's next to him, he plugs it into the wall, and then he just goes back and keeps lecturing.It's not clear whether he even told them what he was doing. But, he then takes this little pinch of sneezing powder. out of a jar and holds it in the sort of outflow from the fan inside the air centrifuge. So all of a sudden, poof, the sneezing powder just goes off into the air. You know, there are probably about a couple dozen students scattered around this lecture hall and after a while they start to sneeze. And in fact, people All the way in the [00:16:00] back are sneezing too.So now Wells turns off his machine, puts in a new cylinder, turns it on, keeps talking. The thing is that they are actually sneezing out droplets into the air.And some of those droplets contain harmless bacteria from their mouths. And he harvests them from the air. He actually collects them in his centrifuge. And after a few days, he's got colonies of these bacteria, but only after he had released the sneezing powder, the one before that didn't have any.So, you have this demonstration that William Wells could catch germs in the air that had been released from his students at quite a distance away, And other people can inhale them, and not even realize what's happening. In other words, germs were spreading like smoke. And so this becomes an explanation for what Mildred had been seeing in her epidemiology..Carol Sutton Lewis: Wow. That was pretty revolutionary. But how was it received?Carl Zimmer: Well, you know, At first it was received, With great fanfare, and he starts publishing papers in nineteen thirty he and Mildred are coauthors on these. And, Mildred is actually appointed as a research associate at Harvard, in nineteen thirty it's a nice title, but she doesn't get paid anything. And then William makes another discovery, which is also very important.He's thinking okay, if these things are floating in the air, is there a way that I can disinfect the air? And he tries all sorts of things and he discovers ultraviolet light works really well. In fact, you can just put an ultraviolet light in a room and the droplets will circulate around and as they pass through the ultraviolet rays, it kills the bacteria or viruses inside of them. So in 1936, when he's publishing these results, there are so many headlines in newspapers and magazines and stuff about this discovery.There's one headline that says, scientists fight flu germs with violet ray. And, there are these predictions that, we are going to be safe from these terrible diseases. Like for example, influenza, which had just, devastated the world not long beforehand, because you're going to put ultraviolet lights in trains and schools and trolleys and movie theaters.Carol Sutton Lewis: Did Mildred get any public recognition for her contributions to all of this?Carl Zimmer: Well not surprisingly, William gets the lion's share of the attention. I mean, there's a passing reference to Mildred in one article. The Associated Press says chief among his aides, Wells said, was his wife, Dr. Mildred Wells. So, William was perfectly comfortable, acknowledging her, but the reporters. Didn't care,Carol Sutton Lewis: And there were no pictures of herCarl Zimmer: Right. Mildred wasn't the engineer in that couple, but she was doing all the research on epidemiology. And you can tell from comments that people made about, and Mildred Wells is that. William would be nowhere as a scientist without Mildred. She was the one who kept him from jumping ahead to wild conclusions from the data he had so far. So they were, they're very much a team. She was doing the writing and they were collaborating, they were arguing with each other all the time about it And she was a much better writer than he was., but that wasn't suitable for a picture, so she was invisible.Carol Sutton Lewis: In the book, you write a lot about their difficult personalities and how that impacted their reputations within the wider scientific community. Can you say more about that?Carl Zimmer: Right. They really had a reputation as being really hard to deal with. People would politely call them peculiar. And when they weren't being quite so polite, they would talk about all these arguments that they would get in, shouting matches and so on. They really felt that they had discovered something incredibly important, but they were outsiders, you know, they didn't have PhDs, they didn't have really much formal training. And here they were saying that, you know, the consensus about infectious disease is profoundly wrong.Now, ironically, what happened is that once William Wells showed that ultraviolet light could kill germs, his superior at Harvard abruptly took an intense interest in all of this and said, Okay, you're going to share a patent on this with me. My name's going to be on the patent and all the research from now on is going to happen in my lab. I'm going to have complete control over what happens next. And Mildred took the lead saying no way we want total autonomy, get out of our face. She was much more aggressive in university politics, and sort of protecting their turf. And unfortunately they didn't have many allies at Harvard and pretty soon they were out, they were fired. And William Wells and his boss, Gordon Fair, were both named on a patent that was filed for using ultraviolet lamps to disinfect the air.Carol Sutton Lewis: So what happened when they left Harvard?Carl Zimmer: Well, it's really interesting watching them scrambling to find work, because their reputation had preceded them. They were hoping they could go back to Washington DC to the public health service. But, the story about the Wells was that Mildred, was carrying out a lot of the research, and so they thought, we can't hire William if it's his wife, who's quietly doing a lot of the work, like they, for some reason they didn't think, oh, we could hire them both.Carol Sutton Lewis: Or just her.Carl Zimmer: None of that, they were like, do we hire William Wells? His wife apparently hauls a lot of the weight. So no, we won't hire them. It's literally like written down. It’s, I'm not making it up. And fortunately they had a few defenders, a few champions down in Philadelphia.There was a doctor in Philadelphia who was using ultraviolet light to protect children in hospitals. And he was, really, inspired by the Wellses and he knew they were trouble. He wrote yes, I get it. They're difficult, but let's try to get them here.And so they brought them down to Philadelphia and Mildred. And William, opened up the laboratories for airborne infection at the University of Pennsylvania. And now actually Mildred got paid, for the first time, for this work. So they're both getting paid, things are starting to look betterCarol Sutton Lewis: So they start to do amazing work at the University of Pennsylvania.Carl Zimmer: That's right. That's right. William, takes the next step in proving their theory. He figures out how to actually give animals diseases through the air. He builds a machine that gets to be known as the infection machine. a big bell jar, and you can put mice in there, or a rabbit in there, and there's a tube connected to it.And through that tube, William can create a very fine mist that might have influenza viruses in it, or the bacteria that cause tuberculosis. And the animals just sit there and breathe, and lo and behold, They get tuberculosis, they get influenza, they get all these diseases,Now, meanwhile, Mildred is actually spending a lot of her time at a school nearby the Germantown Friends School, where they have installed ultraviolet lamps in some of the classrooms. And they're convinced that they can protect kids from airborne diseases. The biggest demonstration of what these lamps can do comes in 1940, because there's a huge epidemic of measles. In 1940, there's, no vaccine for measles. Every kid basically gets it.And lo and behold, the kids in the classrooms with the ultraviolet lamps are 10 times less likely to get measles than the kids just down the hall in the regular classrooms. And so this is one of the best experiments ever done on the nature of airborne infection and how you can protect people by disinfecting the air.Carol Sutton Lewis: Were they then finally accepted into the scientific community?Carl Zimmer: I know you keep waiting for that, that victory lap, but no. It's just like time and again, that glory gets snatched away from them. Again, this was not anything that was done in secret. Newspapers around Philadelphia were. Celebrating this wow, look at this, look at how we can protect our children from disease. This is fantastic. But other experts, public health authorities just were not budging. they had all taken in this dogma that the air can't be dangerous.And so again and again, they were hitting a brick wall. This is right on the eve of World War II.And so all sorts of scientists in World War II are asking themselves, what can we do? Mildred and William put themselves forward and say we don't want soldiers to get sick with the flu the way they did in World War I. They're both haunted by this and they're thinking, so we could put our ultraviolet lamps in the barracks, we could protect them. Soldiers from the flu, if the flu is airborne, like we think, not only that, but this could help to really convince all those skepticsCarol Sutton Lewis: mm.Carl Zimmer: But they failed. The army put all their money into other experiments, they were blackballed, they were shut out, and again, I think it was just because they were continuing to be just incredibly difficult. Even patrons and their friends would just sigh to each other, like, Oh my God, I've just had to deal with these, with them arguing with us and yelling at us. And by the end of World War II, things are bad, they have some sort of split up, they never get divorced, but it's just too much. Mildred, like she is not only trying to do this pioneering work in these schools, trying to keep William's labs organized, there's the matter of their son. Now looking at some documents, I would hazard a guess that he had schizophrenia because he was examined by a doctor who came to that conclusion.And so, she's under incredible pressure and eventually she cracks and in 1944 she resigns from the lab. She stops working in the schools, she stops collaborating with her husband, but she keeps doing her own science. And that's really amazing to me. What kinds of things did she do after this breakup? What kind of work did she conduct? And how was that received?Mildred goes on on her own to carry out a gigantic experiment, in hindsight, a really visionary piece of work. It's based on her experience in Philadelphia. Because she could see that the ultraviolet lamps worked very well at protecting children during a really intense measles epidemic. And so she thought to herself, if you want to really make ultraviolet light, and the theory of airborne infection live up to its true potential to protect people. You need to protect the air in a lot more places.So she gets introduced to the health commissioner in Westchester County, this is a county just north of New York City. And she pitches him this idea. She says, I want to go into one of your towns and I want to put ultraviolet lights everywhere. And this guy, William Holla, he is a very bold, flamboyant guy. He's the right guy to ask. He's like, yeah, let's do this. And he leaves it up to her to design the experiment.And so this town Pleasantville in New York gets fitted out with ultraviolet lamps in the train station, in the fountain shops, in the movie theater, in churches, all over the place. And she publishes a paper with Holla in 1950 on the results.The results are mixed though. You look carefully at them, you can see that actually, yeah, the lamps worked in certain respects. So certain diseases, the rates were lower in certain places, but sadly, this incredibly ambitious study really didn't move the needle. And yeah, it was a big disappointment and that was the last science that Mildred did.Carol Sutton Lewis: Even when they were working together, Mildred and William never really succeeded in convincing the scientific community to take airborne infection seriously, although their work obviously did move the science forward. So what did sway scientific opinion and when?Carl Zimmer: Yeah, Mildred dies in 1957. William dies in 1963. After the Wellses are dead, their work is dismissed and they themselves are quite forgotten. It really isn't until the early 2000s that a few people rediscover them.The SARS epidemic kicks up in 2003, for example, and I talked to a scientist in Hong Kong named Yuguo Li, and he was trying to understand how was this new disease spreading around? He's looking around and he finds references to papers by William Wells and Mildred Wells. He has no idea who they are and he sees that William Wells had published a book in 1955 and he's like, well, okay, maybe I need to go read the book.Nobody has the book. And the only place that he could find it was in one university in the United States. They photocopied it and shipped it to him in Hong Kong and he finally starts reading it. And it's really hard to read because again William was a terrible writer, unlike Mildred. But after a while it clicks and he's like, oh. That's it. I got it. But again, all the guidelines for controlling pandemics and diseases do not really give much serious attention to airborne infection except for just a couple diseases. And it's not until the COVID pandemic that things finally change.Carol Sutton Lewis: Wow. If we had listened to Mildred and William earlier, what might have been different?Carl Zimmer: Yeah, I do try to imagine a world in which Mildred and William had been taken seriously by more people. If airborne infection was just a seriously recognized thing at the start of the COVID pandemic, we would have been controlling the disease differently from the start. We wouldn't have been wiping down our shopping bags obsessively. People would have been encouraged to open the windows, people would have been encouraged to get air purifiers, ultraviolet lamps might have been installed in places with poor ventilation, masks might not have been so controversial.And instead these intellectual grandchildren of William and Mildred Wells had to reinvent the wheel. They had to do new studies to persuade people finally that a disease could be airborne. And it took a long time. It took months to finally move the needle.Carol Sutton Lewis: Carl, what do you hope people will take away from Mildred's story, which you have so wonderfully detailed in your book, rendering her no longer a lost woman of science? And what do you hope people will take away from the book more broadly?Carl Zimmer: I think sometimes that we imagine that science just marches on smoothly and effortlessly. But science is a human endeavor in all the good ways and in all the not-so-good ways. Science does have a fair amount of tragedy throughout it, as any human endeavor does. I'm sad about what happened to the Wells by the end of their lives, both of them. But in some ways, things are better now.When I'm writing about aerobiology in the early, mid, even late—except for Mildred, it's pretty much all men. But who were the people during the COVID pandemic who led the fight to get recognized as airborne? People like Linsey Marr at Virginia Tech, Kim Prather at University of California, San Diego, Lidia Morawska, an Australian researcher. Now, all women in science still have to contend with all sorts of sexism and sort of baked-in inequalities. But it is striking to me that when you get to the end of the book, the women show up.Carol Sutton Lewis: Well,Carl Zimmer: And they show up in force.Carol Sutton Lewis: And on that very positive note to end on, Carl, thank you so much, first and foremost, for writing this really fascinating book and within it, highlighting a now no longer lost woman of science, Mildred Weeks Wells. Your book is Airborne: The Hidden History of the Life We Breathe, and it's been a pleasure to speak with—Carl Zimmer: Thanks a lot. I really enjoyed talking about Mildred.Carol Sutton Lewis: This has been Lost Women of Science Conversations. Carl Zimmer's book Airborne: The Hidden History of the Life We Breathe is out now. This episode was hosted by me, Carol Sutton Lewis. Our producer was Luca Evans, and Hansdale Hsu was our sound engineer. Special thanks to our senior managing producer, Deborah Unger, our program manager, Eowyn Burtner, and our co-executive producers, Katie Hafner and Amy Scharf.Thanks also to Jeff DelViscio and our publishing partner, Scientific American. The episode art was created by Lily Whear and Lizzie Younan composes our music. Lost Women of Science is funded in part by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation and the Anne Wojcicki Foundation. We're distributed by PRX.If you've enjoyed this conversation, go to our website lostwomenofscience.org and subscribe so you'll never miss an episode—that's lostwomenofscience.org. And please share it and give us a rating wherever you listen to podcasts. Oh, and please don't forget to click on the donate button—that helps us bring you even more stories of important female scientists.I'm Carol Sutton Lewis. See you next time.HostCarol Sutton LewisProducerLuca EvansGuest Carl ZimmerCarl Zimmer writes the Origins column for the New York Times and has frequently contributed to The Atlantic, National Geographic, Time, and Scientific American. His journalism has earned numerous awards, including ones from the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the National Academies of Sciences, Medicine, and Engineering. He is the author of fourteen books about science, including Life's Edge.Further Reading:Air-Borne: The Hidden History of the Life We Breathe. Carl Zimmer. Dutton, 2025Poliomyelitis. International Committee for the Study of Infantile Paralysis. Williams & Wilkins Company, 1932 “Air-borne Infection,” by William Firth Wells and Mildred Weeks Wells, in JAMA, Vol. 107, No. 21; November 21, 1936“Air-borne Infection: Sanitary Control,” by William Firth Wells and Mildred Weeks Wells, in JAMA, Vol. 107, No. 22; November 28, 1936“Ventilation in the Spread of Chickenpox and Measles within School Rooms,” by Mildred Weeks Wells, in JAMA, Vol. 129, No. 3; September 15, 1945“The 60-Year-Old Scientific Screwup That Helped Covid Kill,” by Megan Molteni, in Wired. Published online May 13, 2021WATCH THIS NEXTScience journalist Carl Zimmer joins host Rachel Feltman to look back at the history of the field, from ancient Greek “miasmas” to Louis Pasteur’s unorthodox experiments to biological warfare.

Business Game DesignerForio SimulationsUSA (remote)2 hours agoApplyForio is looking for an innovative Business Game Designer to create engaging business simulation games that transform how students learn and make decisions. You'll join our collaborative team and work closely with our UI/UX designers, web developers, project managers, and subject matter experts to deliver high-impact, web-based simulation game experiences.What You'll Do:Collaborate with cross-functional teams to conceptualize, develop, and deliver engaging business simulation games covering leadership, competitive strategy, finance, innovation, and change management.Manage and prioritize multiple projects independently, each at different stages of production.Contribute creatively and technically to our iterative design process, refining simulation games through customer feedback and testing to ensure robust performance and user engagement.Conceptualize simulation models with developers using Python, system dynamics, discrete event modeling, and advanced Excel modeling techniques.Work independently and proactively, contributing fresh ideas and solutions to enhance gameplay dynamics, user experiences, and educational outcomes.Stay current with experiential learning and gaming industry developments, including emerging trends, popular gameplay elements, new platforms, and effective engagement strategies.What You'll Bring:Enthusiasm and passion for educational game design, focusing on creating intuitive and engaging student experiences.Experience leading game design discussions, providing constructive editorial feedback on gameplay concepts, features, and playable builds, and facilitating effective collaboration with stakeholders and partners.Strong experience in at least one technical area: Python programming, discrete event modeling, system dynamics modeling, or advanced Excel modeling.Strong communication skills to clearly explain concepts and technical solutions to diverse team members, subject matter experts, and stakeholders.Evaluate and offer practical recommendations for story structures, narrative pacing, and scripts to ensure high-quality, authentic game narratives.Bonus Skills:Experience with data visualization tools and techniques.Familiarity with business concepts, especially finance or accounting.Who We Are:Forio is a vibrant, collaborative 25-person team headquartered in San Francisco, recognized for creating sophisticated online simulations in partnership with world-leading institutions such as Harvard Business School, Stanford, MIT Sloan, and Wharton. Our ready-to-run simulations and custom development platform empower organizations worldwide. Yearly, over 800,000 learners at Fortune 500 companies, universities, and government agencies trust our solutions to transform traditional training into engaging, interactive learning experiences that stick. Check out our simulations at forio.comIf you are passionate about building immersive educational experiences and want to influence how leading organizations train, strategize, and innovate, we'd love to hear from you.ApplyPlease submit your resume and a brief note highlighting what excites you most about this role and how your unique background will enrich our team at jobs@forio.com. Create Your Profile — Game companies can contact you with their relevant job openings. Apply