SHOW BIZ

As the nights start to draw in even earlier leading up to Christmas, TV viewers will be looking for sumptuous dramas to get lost in

ITVX is presently broadcasting a popular period drama featuring a British ruler that’s ideal for a comfortable binge-watch throughout the lengthy winter nights.

With darkness falling increasingly early in the run-up to Christmas, television enthusiasts will be seeking lavish dramas to lose themselves in.

Viewers need look no further than ITV’s digital streaming platform, which boasts an extensive range of celebrated programmes to select from.

Among the finest choices available this winter is the successful series Victoria, which launched in 2016 and featured Doctor Who’s Jenna Coleman as the youthful sovereign, charting her journey from defiant adolescent years through to responsible adulthood over three captivating seasons.

Whilst critics have targeted the programme’s shortage of historical precision, it’s undeniable that the series crafted by Daisy Goodwin provides tremendous entertainment that’s ready for exploration, or potentially a second viewing, reports the Express.

The Guardian’s favourable critique captured the essence: “As ever, it all hinges on Jenna Coleman’s performance as Victoria and her ability to conjure up a portrait of this queen as understanding, sympathetic, kind and decent, even under unimaginable and possibly imaginary pressures.

“It might not be elegant and it might not survive the strain of putting its plot points to the search engine test, but as diverting drama it gets the job done.”

An enthusiastic review from an IMDb viewer declared: “Rather captivating, I loved it. Every inch a Queen.

“I love [Coleman’s] portrayal of Victoria, she has some presence and a definite strength of character. Rufus Sewell I thought was exceptional as Lord Melbourne too, the complex relationship the pair had in real life was explained very well.

“The settings, costumes, and general production values were first rate, the show felt incredibly plush and lavish, I shudder to think of the budget for this series. Totally engaging, this was first rate viewing 9/10.”

Sadly, the series left many fans feeling let down when it was cancelled after just three seasons, leaving Queen Victoria’s story incomplete.

However, ITV gave a glimmer of hope in 2021, stating “there are no plans presently to film Victoria, but that’s not to say we won’t revisit the series with the production team at a later date”, hinting that a fourth season featuring an older Victoria might eventually be on the cards.

One hopeful fan penned: “This has been the most amazing series since Downton Abbey I have watched. I laughed, I cried, I got angry. I felt every emotion humanly possible through watching it.

“My mother and I binge watched it together and couldn’t believe how much it draws you in from beginning to end. I am so heartbroken that it has not yet come out with a 4th season. My mother and I both are. We pray they decide to release another season.

“I plead to ITV or whoever, to please give the green light for the 4th season and then some. This is an amazing love story that NEEDS to be completed.”

There’s a glimmer of hope for the series to carry on if enough viewers rewatch the series on ITVX, so it’s time to start binge-watching.

Victoria is available to stream on ITVX.

LILY Allen has announced she is taking her “revenge album” West End Girl on the road.

Hitting venues across the length and breadth of the UK, here’s everything you need to know so you don’t miss out on her first tour in seven years.

Lily Allen’s latest album West End Girl levels cheating allegations against her ex-husband, Stranger Things star David Harbour.

The couple split in December 2024, with later reports claiming he’d had a three-year affair.

Details of their open marriage and break-up are seemingly laid bare in the new 14-song album.

On October 24, 2025, Lily said in a statement: “I’ve tried to document my life in a new city and the events that led me to where I am in my life now.

work wife

David Harbour reveals he ‘fell in love’ with co-star amid Lily Allen divorce

STUNNING LILY

Lily Allen wows with racy unseen Halloween snaps as she shows off boob job

“At the same time, I’ve used shared experiences as the basis for songs which try to delve into why we humans behave as we do, so the record is a mixture of fact and fiction.”

The tour – Lily Allen Performs West End Girl – will see the singer perform the album in its entirety in the order the songs feature on her record.

When is Lily Allen’s 2026 tour? 

Lily Allen’s 2026 West End Girl tour is scheduled to take place throughout March 2026.

The British singer is set to perform her acclaimed fifth studio album at venues, theatres and concert halls across the UK.

This tour marks her first headline shows since her No Shame Tour in 2018-19.

The tour dates and venues for Lily Allen Performs West End Girl UK in March 2026 are:

• March 2: Glasgow, Royal Concert Hall
• March 3: Liverpool, Philharmonic Hall
• March 5: Birmingham, Symphony Hall
• March 7: Sheffield, City Hall
• March 8: Newcastle, City Hall
• March 10: Manchester, Aviva Studios (The Hall)
• March 11: Manchester, Aviva Studios (The Hall)
• March 14: Nottingham, Royal Concert Hall
• March 15: Cambridge, Corn Exchange
• March 17: Bristol, Beacon
• March 18: Cardiff, New Theatre
• March 20: London, Palladium
• March 21: London, Palladium

How can I get tickets for Lily Allen’s 2026 tour?

Tickets go on general sale from 10am GMT Friday, November 7, 2025, via Ticketmaster and LiveNation.

For fans who want to secure tickets before the general release, thankfully there is a presale, taking place from 10am on Wednesday, November 5, 2025.

But to access this presale, you will need to register with co:brand before midnight on Tuesday, November 4, 2025.

Selected venues have already confirmed ticket prices for Lily Allen’s UK tour.

The Glasgow Royal Concert Hall said they start at roughly £40 and go up to around £85.

MUM’S NIGHTMARE

I invited partner to live with me & my son, 15, then discovered sick video

JET RIDDLE

How 224 passengers died on plane from Brit hol hotspot… as mystery ‘solved’

Manchester’s Aviva Studios also revealed ticket prices, with the breakdown as follows: £45, £55 and £75.

As of November 3, 2025, the official ticket prices for different sections in every venue are yet to be revealed.

Guillermo del Toro’s “Frankenstein” didn’t exactly wow audiences and critics when it premiered at the Venice Film Festival, and when it landed at the Telluride Film Festival a day later for a pair of late-night screenings, the response was even more muted. Leaving Colorado, the airport gate was full of hushed conversations between people registering their disappointment with the movie.

“Frankenstein,” the talk went, had three strikes against it — a plodding story, computer-generated imagery that looked appalling and was employed to often ridiculous effect and, outside of Jacob Elordi’s affecting turn as the monster, acting that seemed wildly excessive (Oscar Isaac) or hopelessly lost (Mia Goth). In short: a mess.

But then “Frankenstein” traveled to the Toronto, a city Del Toro regards as his “second home,” and finished as runner-up to “Hamnet” for the festival’s People’s Choice Award. Now playing in a theatrical limited release ahead of its Nov. 7 Netflix premiere, the movie has found favor with the filmmaker’s devoted fan base, selling out theaters, including dates at Netflix’s renovated Egyptian Theatre in Hollywood, where admission lines wrapped around the block. And some prominent critics, including my colleague Amy Nicholson, have written some thoughtful reviews of the movie, praising Del Toro’s lifelong passion project. Amy calls it the “best movie of his career.”

So in this update to my post-festival Oscar power rankings for best picture, you’ll find “Frankenstein,” a movie that’s hard to place on this list but harder still to ignore. Previous rankings are parenthetically noted.

Falling out of the rankings since September: “A House of Dynamite,” “Jay Kelly”

10. ‘Avatar: Fire and Ash’ (Unranked)

A scene from 2022’s “Avatar: The Way of Water.”

(20th Century Studios)

The last “Avatar” movie grossed $2.3 billion and, yes, earned an Oscar nomination for best picture. Yet I’m hard-pressed to find anyone who’s truly excited about devoting half a day to see the next installment, which clocks in at 3 hours and 12 minutes. Just because the first two movies were nominated doesn’t mean this one will be. But underestimating James Cameron’s ability to connect with audiences — and awards voters — seems dumb. So here we are, No. 10, sight (still) unseen.

9. ‘Bugonia’ (10)

Emma Stone in “Bugonia.”

(Atsushi Nishijima / Focus Features)

Better than “Kinds of Kindness” but not nearly the triumph of “Poor Things,” this is mid Yorgos Lanthimos — off-putting, punishing and misanthropic but also featuring another showcase for Emma Stone’s bold, creative energy. There are a number of movies that could displace it as a nominee. Park Chan-wook’s “No Other Choice” offers a more humane — and funnier — look at ugly things people can do when desperate. But I’ll stick with “Bugonia” for now. After all, how many movies inspire people to shave their heads for a ticket?

8. “Frankenstein” (Unranked)

Oscar Isaac in “Frankenstein.”

(Ken Woroner / Netflix)

Netflix has four movies arriving during the awards season window — the meditative stunner “Train Dreams,” Katherine Bigelow’s riveting, ticking-clock thriller “A House of Dynamite,” the George Clooney meta-charmer “Jay Kelly” and “Frankenstein.” (That’s how I’d rank them in terms of quality.) One of these movies will be nominated. Maybe two. At this moment, nobody, including the awards team at Netflix, knows which one(s) it will be.

7. ‘It Was Just an Accident’ (7)

Mohamad Ali Elyasmehr, left, Madj Panahi and Hadis Pakbaten in “It Was Just an Accident.”

(Neon)

Jafar Panahi’s Palme d’Or-winning thriller possesses a withering critique of the cruelty and corruption of an authoritarian regime, combined with a blistering sense of humor. Panahi (“The Circle,” “Taxi”) has been imprisoned by the Iranian government many times for criticizing the government, and his courage has been celebrated for its spirit of artistic resistance. He has been a ubiquitous presence on the festival and awards circuit this year, eager to share both the movie and his story. As the Oscars have thoroughly embraced international movies the last several years, “It Was Just an Accident” feels like it’s on solid ground.

6. ‘Wicked: For Good’ (6)

Ariana Grande, left, and Cynthia Erivo in “Wicked: For Good.”

(Giles Keyte / Universal Pictures)

An academy member recently expressed some reservations about this movie to me — not about the sequel itself, but about the prospect of seeing stars Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande embark on another tear-soaked promotional tour. Whatevs. The first “Wicked” movie earned 10 Oscar nominations, winning for production design and costumes. With the added casting category, the sequel might just surpass that number.

5. ‘Marty Supreme’ (8)

Timothée Chalamet in “Marty Supreme.”

(A24)

Josh Safdie’s wildly entertaining, over-caffeinated portrait of a single-minded ping-pong player premiered on its home turf at the New York Film Festival and people left the Lincoln Center’s Alice Tully Hall caught up in the rapture of the movie’s delirium. It might be the movie that wins Timothée Chalamet his Oscar, though he’ll have to go through Leonardo DiCaprio to collect the trophy.

4. ‘Sentimental Value’ (3)

Stellan Skarsgård, left, and Renate Reinsve in “Sentimental Value.”

(Kasper Tuxen / Neon)

Neon won best picture last year with Sean Baker’s “Anora,” and it’s not unreasonable to think it could run it back with “Sentimental Value,” Joachim Trier’s piercing drama about a family reckoning with the past and wondering if reconciliation is possible — or even desired. The three actors cast in familial roles — Stellan Skarsgård, playing a legendary director angling for a comeback, and Renate Reinsve and Inga Ibsdotter Lilleaas as his daughters — are excellent, and Elle Fanning has a choice role as an A-list actor who becomes entangled in the family drama. And like “Anora,” this movie ends on a perfect, transcendent note. That counts for a lot.

3. ‘Sinners’ (4)

Michael B. Jordan in “Sinners.”

(Eli Ade / Warner Bros. Pictures)

“Sinners” made a lot of noise when it was released in April and, months later, belongs in any conversation about the year’s best movie. The job now is to remind voters of its worth at events like the American Cinematheque’s upcoming “Sinners” screening with filmmaker Ryan Coogler and Michael B. Jordan. With the level of its craft, it could score a dozen or more nominations, with only “One Battle After Another” as a threat to best that count.

2. ‘Hamnet’ (2)

Paul Mescal in “Hamnet.”

(Focus Features)

Since its tear-inducing Telluride premiere, Chloé Zhao’s tender portrait of love and loss and the cathartic power of art has been hitting regional film festivals, racking up audience awards and proving that people love a good cry. Stock up on tissues now for the film’s theatrical release later this month.

1. ‘One Battle After Another’ (1)

Leonardo DiCaprio in “One Battle After Another.”

(Warner Bros. Pictures)

The Gotham Awards did away with its budget cap a couple of years ago, allowing indie-spirited studio movies like “One Battle After Another” to clean up and, one supposes, the show’s sales team to move more tables at its ceremony. It was no secret that Paul Thomas Anderson’s angry, urgent epic would score well with film critics groups. (Panels of critics vote for the Gothams.) It’s just a question of how many dinners Anderson will have to eventually attend for a movie that has easily become the most widely seen film of his career.

The five-part series, penned by a Booker Prize-winning author, has been praised by critics and viewers alike and boasts a smashing 100% rating.

A five-part British crime noir series is earning high praise and, fortunately, it’s available to stream for free on Channel 4.

The limited series Get Millie Black was crafted for television with a screenplay penned by Booker Prize-winning author Marlon James, who wrote A Brief History of Seven Killings.

This crime thriller marks Marlon’s screenwriting debut and first premiered on HBO in the United States on November 25, 2024. It then made its UK premiere on Channel 4 on March 5, 2025.

Get Millie Black has been steered by Tanya Hamilton – the show’s lead director – while Annetta Laufer directed two episodes and Jean Luc Herbulot directed one. The series was penned by writers Theresa Ikoko and Lydia Adetunji.

The plot revolves around the unparalleled Millie-Jean Black, a Jamaican-born police detective who is forced to leave Scotland Yard and her troubled life in London and return home to Jamaica, where she joins the Jamaican Police Force.

Once back in Kingston, Millie and her partner Curtis start investigating a missing persons case which intersects with another — bringing Scotland Yard detective Luke Holborn to Millie’s doorstep. The show grapples with complex themes and delves into the painful and troubled legacy of slavery, racism, classism, sexuality, and generational cycles of trauma in the post-colonial Jamaican and British landscape.

Get Millie Black features the brilliant Tamara Lawrance in the starring role, alongside Joe Dempsie, Anjli Mohindra, Gershwyn Eustache Jnr, Chyna McQueen, Nestor Aaron Absera, and Peter John Thwaites.

The five-part mini series is available to watch without charge on Channel 4, with episodes running for an hour on average, reports the Express.

Discussing Get Millie Black and how Millie’s character came to life, Marlon revealed: “My mother was one of the first policewomen in Jamaica to make detective. Storytelling has always struck me first and foremost as a mystery to be solved – which I’m sure I got from her. Millie, from the second she appeared in my imagination, was a brilliant, mercurial, hilarious, unpredictable force of nature; someone who was always there, just waiting for her story to be told. I didn’t create her, I found her.”

Boasting a perfect 100% score on review aggregator site Rotten Tomatoes, Get Millie Black has received endless praise from critics, with one penning: “Get Millie Black lives and breathes. This might be a crime thriller, but it isn’t just a crime thriller. In the right hands, a crime thriller can contain multitudes.”

Meanwhile, another reviewer commented: “We got more story in the first 300 seconds than some series manage in an hour-long episode.”

In another glowing review of the series, a third critic remarked: “Crime shows, especially missing girl shows, often feel barren, or at least frozen in their Scandinavian snowscapes. Millie, on the other hand, feels abundant.”

And yet another impressed reviewer said: “Get Millie Black works well as a gory whodunit (with a genuinely unnerving twist at the centre). But the outstanding performances and the crimes in this setting make the show unique.”

Audience reviews follow in a similar vein, with one viewer writing: “All I’m going to say is wow. Watched all episodes in one sitting. Terrific detective series.”

While another audience member commented: “Worth a good watch if you’re interested in crime dramas. Especially if you want something original like this one, which takes place in Jamaica. Matter of fact, you don’t see many Jamaican movies/tv shows nowadays, and I’m glad that I’d checked it out. Great acting, good writing, and pacing that makes the series sort and simple since this is a limited series.”

Get Millie Black is available to stream for free on Channel 4.

JOJO Siwa looked incredible in sizzling holiday snaps as she cosied up to boyfriend Chris Hughes.

The Dance Moms star, 22, and her Love Island star beau, 32, have been thrilling fans with photos from the romantic getaway.

JoJo and Chris, who met on Celebrity Big Brother earlier this year, have kept their destination a secret.

But they’ve shared glimpses of their huge hotel suite, private pool, and day trips to the beach.

The couple lounged by the pool in one sweet photo, with JoJo stunning in a blue and white gingham bikini.

Chris cradded JoJo and wrapped his legs around her in the intimate snap.

READ MORE ON JOJO & CHRIS

HOUSE OF SPARKLES

Inside JoJo Siwa’s $4M LA mansion with bejewelled piano & fish tank table

BABY LOVE

Chris Hughes’ ex gives birth to Britain’s richest gypsy’s grandchild 

JoJo posed for another selfie on the beach, and revealed her toned figure in a tiny pink bikini.

JoJo and Chris are in a long distance relationship but have already been discussing marriage plans.

And Chris has revealed the moment they made their romance official, after Celebrity Big Brother viewers suspected they were more than just friends.

He has spoken openly about their connection on the Question The Default podcast with Harry Corin, in which he told “nothing was rushed or forced, it just happened.”

He then confirmed it was when he flew Mexico in May that they made things official.

He surprised her at a festival she was playing at which happened few weeks after CBB – with her family there – and they became an item.

Chris said they “rekindled and met up in Mexico” and said: “I flew out to surprise her, which was nice.

“I spent a few days with her and her family in Orlando as well before flying home and that’s where it all started.”

Later in the chat, he said: “I went to Mexico and met up with her which is where the whole feelings developed and things changed.

“Which was lovely and no secret to anybody.

“But it was genuinely lovely and nothing was rushed or forced it just happened.”

The Boomerang songstress talked about her potential wedding plans in an exclusive chat with The Sun. 

She said: “A wedding is a two-person thing. So we would have to decide what it looks like.

“But I do know that I want it to have a baby-blue scheme and I need to help Chris make the playlist.

“Otherwise, it’ll be all songs I don’t know!

“He likes to educate me on music. He loves The 1975 and all these boy bands, but I don’t know any of them as they are British.

COST CUTTER

John Lewis launches early Black Friday sale a MONTH early with up to £300 off

SPY STORY

Telltale clues CHEATERS use to spot you secretly reading their dodgy texts & pics

“Give me some NSYNC or Backstreet Boys!

“At the end of the day, we have a very public life, but we are still two humans who love each other very much.”

You may not know Eliot Mack’s name, but if a small robot has ever crept around your kitchen, you know his work.

Before he turned his MIT-trained mind to filmmaking, Mack helped lead a small team of engineers trying to solve a deeply relatable problem: how to avoid vacuuming. Whether it was figuring out how to get around furniture legs or unclog the brushes after a run-in with long hair, Mack designed everything onscreen first with software, troubleshooting virtually and getting 80% of the way there before a single part was ever manufactured.

The result was the Roomba.

When Mack pivoted to filmmaking in the early 2000s, he was struck by how chaotic Hollywood’s process felt. “You pitch the script, get the green light and you’re flying into production,” he says, sounding both amused and baffled. “There’s no CAD template, no centralized database. I was like, how do movies even get made?”

That question sent Mack down a new path, trading dust bunnies for the creative bottlenecks that slow Hollywood down.

In 2004 he founded Lightcraft Technology, a startup developing what would later be known as virtual production tools, born out of his belief that if you could design a robot in software, you should be able to design a shot the same way. The company’s early system, Previzion, sold for $180,000 and was used on sci-fi and fantasy shows like “V” and “Once Upon a Time.” But Jetset, its latest AI-assisted tool set, runs on an iPhone and offers a free tier, with pro features topping out at just $80 a month. It lets filmmakers scan a location, drop it into virtual space and block out scenes with camera moves, lighting and characters. They can preview shots, overlay elements and organize footage for editing — all from a phone. No soundstage, no big crew, no gatekeepers. Lightcraft’s pitch: “a movie studio in your pocket.”

A series on how the AI revolution is reshaping the creative foundations of Hollywood — from storytelling and performance to production, labor and power.

The goal, Mack says, is to put more power in the hands of the people making the work. “One of the big problems is how siloed Hollywood is,” he says. “We talked to an Oscar-winning editor who said, ‘I’m never going to get to make my movie’ — he was pigeonholed as just an editor. Same with an animator we know who has two Oscars.”

Eliot Mack, CEO of Lightcraft, an AI-powered virtual-production startup, wants to give creators the power and freedom to bring their ideas to life.

(Christina House/Los Angeles Times)

To Mack, the revolution of Jetset recalls the scrappy, guerrilla spirit of Roger Corman’s low-budget productions, which launched the early careers of directors like Francis Ford Coppola and Martin Scorsese. For generations of creatives stuck waiting on permission or funding, he sees this moment as a reset button.

“The things you got good at — writing, directing, acting, creating, storytelling — they’re still crazy useful,” he says. “What’s changing is the amount of schlepping you have to do before you get to do the fun stuff. Your 20s are a gift. You want to be creating at the absolute speed of sound. We’re trying to get to a place where you don’t have to ask anyone. You can just make the thing.”

AI is reshaping nearly every part of the filmmaking pipeline. Storyboards can now be generated from a script draft. Lighting and camera angles can be tested before anyone touches a piece of gear. Rough cuts, placeholder VFX, even digital costume mock-ups can all be created before the first shot is filmed. What once took a full crew, a soundstage and a six-figure budget can now happen in minutes, sometimes at the hands of a single person with a laptop.

This wave of automation is arriving just as Hollywood is gripped by existential anxiety. The 2023 writers’ and actors’ strikes brought the industry to a standstill and put AI at the center of a fight over its future. Since then, production has slowed, crew sizes have shrunk and the streaming boom has given way to consolidation and cost-cutting.

According to FilmLA, on-location filming in Greater Los Angeles dropped 22.4% in early 2025 compared with the year before. For many of the crew members and craftspeople still competing for those jobs, AI doesn’t feel like an innovation. It feels like a new way to justify doing more with less, only to end up with work that’s less original or creative.

“AI scrapes everything we artists have made off the internet and creates a completely static, banal world that can never imagine anything that hasn’t happened before,” documentary filmmaker Adam Curtis warned during a directors panel at the 2023 Telluride Film Festival, held in the midst of the strikes. “That’s the real weakness of the AI dream — it’s stuck with the ghosts. And I think we’ll get fed up with that.”

How you feel about these changes often depends on where you sit and how far along you are in your career. For people just starting out, AI can offer a way to experiment, move faster and bypass the usual barriers to entry. For veterans behind the scenes, it often feels like a threat to the expertise they’ve spent decades honing.

Past technological shifts — the arrival of sound, the rise of digital cameras, the advancement of CGI — changed how movies were made, but not necessarily who made them. Each wave brought new roles: boom operators and dialogue coaches, color consultants and digital compositors. Innovation usually meant more jobs, not fewer.

But AI doesn’t just change the tools. It threatens to erase the people who once used the old ones.

Diego Mariscal has seen first hand as AI has cut potential jobs for grips.

(Jennifer Rose Clasen)

Diego Mariscal, 43, a veteran dolly grip who has worked on “The Mandalorian” and “Spider-Man: No Way Home,” saw the writing on the wall during a recent shoot. A visual effects supervisor opened his laptop to show off a reel of high-end commercials and something was missing. “There were no blue screens — none,” Mariscal recalls. “That’s what we do. We put up blues as grips. You’d normally hire an extra 10 people and have an extra three days of pre-rigging, setting up all these blue screens. He was like, ‘We don’t need it anymore. I just use AI to clip it out.’”

Mariscal runs Crew Stories, a private Facebook group with nearly 100,000 members, where working crew members share job leads, trade tips and voice their growing fears. He tries to keep up with the steady drip of AI news. “I read about AI all day, every day,” he says. “At least 20 posts a day.”

His fear isn’t just about fewer jobs — it’s about what comes next. “I’ve been doing this since I was 19,” Mariscal says of his specialized dolly work, which involves setting up heavy equipment and guiding the camera smoothly through complex shots. “I can push a cart in a parking lot. I can push a lawnmower. What else can I do?”

Who wins, who loses and what does James Cameron think?

Before AI and digital doubles, Mike Marino learned the craft of transformation the human way: through hands-on work and a fascination that bordered on obsession.

Marino was 5 years old when he first saw “The Elephant Man” on HBO. Horrified yet transfixed, he became fixated on prosthetics and the emotional power they could carry. As a teenager in New York, he pored over issues of Fangoria, studied monsters and makeup effects and experimented with sculpting his own latex masks on his bedroom floor.

Prosthetics artist Mike Marino asks a big question related to generative AI: What role do the human creatives play?

(Sean Dougherty / For The Times)

Decades later, Marino, 48, has become one of Hollywood’s leading makeup artists, earning Oscar nominations for “Coming 2 America,” “The Batman” and last year’s dark comedy “A Different Man,” in which he helped transform Sebastian Stan into a disfigured actor.

His is the kind of tactile, handcrafted work that once seemed irreplaceable. But today AI tools are increasingly capable of achieving similar effects digitally: de-aging actors, altering faces, even generating entire performances. What used to take weeks of experimentation and hours in a makeup trailer can now be approximated with a few prompts and a trained model. To Marino, AI is more than a new set of tools. It’s a fundamental change in what it means to create.

“If AI is so good it can replace a human, then why have any human beings?” he says. “This is about taste. It’s about choice. I’m a human being. I’m an artist. I have my own ideas — mine. Just because you can make 10,000 spaceships in a movie, should you?”

Marino is no technophobe. His team regularly uses 3D scanning and printing. But he draws the line at outsourcing creative judgment to a machine. “I’m hoping there are artists who want to work with humans and not machines,” he says. “If we let AI just run amok with no taste, no choice, no morality behind it, then we’re gone.”

Not everyone sees AI’s rise in film production as a zero-sum game. Some technologists imagine a middle path. Daniela Rus, director of MIT’s Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Lab and one of the world’s leading AI researchers, believes the future of filmmaking lies in a “human-machine partnership.”

AI, Rus argues, can take on time-consuming tasks like animating background extras, color correction or previsualizing effects, freeing up people to focus on what requires intuition and taste. “AI can help with the routine work,” she says. “But the human touch and emotional authenticity are essential.”

Few directors have spent more time grappling with the dangers and potential of artificial intelligence than James Cameron. Nearly 40 years before generative tools entered Hollywood’s workflow, he imagined a rogue AI triggering global apocalypse in 1984’s “The Terminator,” giving the world Skynet — now a cultural shorthand for the dark side of machine intelligence. Today, he continues to straddle that line, using AI behind the scenes on the upcoming “Avatar: Fire and Ash” to optimize visual effects and performance-capture, while keeping creative decisions in human hands. The latest sequel, due Dec. 19, promises to push the franchise’s spectacle and scale even further; a newly released trailer reveals volcanic eruptions, aerial battles and a new clan of Na’vi.

A scene from “Avatar: The Way of Water.” Director James Cameron differentiates between using machine-learning to reduce monotonous movie-making work and generative AI.

(Courtesy of 20th Century Studios/Courtesy of 20th Century Studios)

“You can automate a lot of processes that right now tie up a lot of artists doing mundane tasks,” Cameron told The Times in 2023 at a Beyond Fest screening of his 1989 film “The Abyss.” “So if we could accelerate the postproduction pipeline, then we can make more movies. Then those artists will get to do more exciting things.”

For Cameron, the promise of AI lies in efficiency, not elimination. “I think in our particular industry, it’s not going to replace people; it’s going to free them to do other things,” he believes. “It’s going to accelerate the process and bring the price down, which would be good because, you know, some movies are a little more expensive than others. And a lot of that has to do with human energy.”

Cameron himself directed five films between 1984 and 1994 and only three in the three decades since, though each one has grown increasingly complex and ambitious.

That said, Cameron has never been one to chase shortcuts for their own sake. “I think you can make pre-viz and design easier, but I don’t know if it makes it better,” he says. “I mean, if easy is your thing. Easy has never been my thing.”

He draws a line between the machine-learning techniques his team has used since the first “Avatar” to help automate tedious tasks and the newer wave of generative AI models making headlines today.

“The big explosion has been around image-based generative models that use everything from every image that’s ever been created,” he says. “We’d never use any of them. The images we make are computer-created, but they’re not AI-created.”

In his view, nothing synthetic can replace the instincts of a flesh-and-blood artist. “We have human artists that do all the designs,” he says. “We don’t need AI. We’ve got meat-I. And I’m one of the meat-artists that come up with all that stuff. We don’t need a computer. Maybe other people need it. We don’t.”

Reshaping creativity — and creative labor

Rick Carter didn’t go looking for AI as a tool. He discovered it as a lifeline.

The two-time Oscar-winning production designer, who worked with Cameron on “Avatar” and whose credits include “Jurassic Park” and “Forrest Gump,” began experimenting with generative AI tools like Midjourney and Runway during the pandemic, looking for a way to keep his creative instincts sharp while the industry was on pause. A longtime painter, he was drawn to the freedom the programs offered.

“I saw that there was an opportunity to create images where I didn’t have to go to anybody else for approval, which is the way I would paint,” Carter says by phone from Paris. “None of the gatekeeping would matter. I have a whole lot of stories on my own that I’ve tried to get into the world in various ways and suddenly there was a way to visualize them.”

Midjourney and Runway can create richly detailed images — and in Runway’s case, short video clips — from a text prompt or a combination of text and visuals. Trained on billions of images and audiovisual materials scraped from the internet, these systems learn to mimic style, lighting, composition and form, often with eerie precision. In a production pipeline, these tools can help concept artists visualize characters or sets, let directors generate shot ideas or give costume designers and makeup artists a fast way to test looks, long before physical production begins.

But as these tools gain traction in Hollywood, a deeper legal and creative dilemma is coming into focus: Who owns the work they produce? And what about the copyrighted material used to train them?

In June, Disney and Universal filed a federal copyright lawsuit against Midjourney, accusing the company of generating unauthorized replicas of characters such as Spider-Man, Darth Vader and Shrek using AI models trained on copyrighted material: what the suit calls a “bottomless pit of plagiarism.” It’s the most high-profile of several legal challenges now putting copyright law to the test in the age of generative AI.

“Forrest Gump” director Robert Zemeckis, left, with production designer Rick Carter at an art installation of the movie’s famed bench. (Carter family)

(Carter family)

Working with generative models, Carter began crafting what he calls “riffs of consciousness,” embracing AI as a kind of collaborative partner, one he could play off of intuitively. The process reminded him of the loose, improvisational early stages of filmmaking, a space he knows well from decades of working with directors like Robert Zemeckis and Steven Spielberg.

“I’ll just start with a visual or a word prompt and see how it iterates from there and what it triggers in my mind,” Carter says. “Then I incorporate that so it builds on its own in an almost free-associative way. But it’s still based upon my own intuitive, emotional, artistic, even spiritual needs at that moment.”

He describes the experience as a dialogue between two minds, one digital and one human: “One AI is artificial intelligence. The other AI is authentic intelligence — that’s us. We’ve earned it over this whole span of time on the planet.”

Sometimes, Carter says, the most evocative results come from mistakes. While sketching out a story about a hippie detective searching for a missing woman in the Himalayas, he accidentally typed “womb” into ChatGPT instead of “woman.” The AI ran with it, returning three pages of wild plot ideas involving gurus, seekers and a bizarre mystery set in motion by the disappearance.

“I couldn’t believe it,” he says. “I would never have taken it that far. The AI is so precocious. It is trying so much to please that it will literally make something out of the mistake you make.”

Carter hasn’t used generative AI on a film yet; most of his creations are shared only with friends. But he says the technology is already slipping into creative workflows in covert ways. “There are issues with copyrights with most of the studios so for now, it’s going to be mostly underground,” he says. “People will use it but they won’t acknowledge that they’re using it — they’ll have an illustrator do something over it, or take a photo so there’s no digital trail.”

Carter has lived through a major technological shift before. “I remember when we went from analog to digital, from ‘Jurassic Park’ on,” he says. “There were a lot of wonderful artists who could draw and paint in ways that were just fantastic but they couldn’t adapt. They didn’t want to — even the idea of it felt like the wrong way to make art. And, of course, most of them suffered because they didn’t make it from the Rolodex to the database in terms of people calling them up.”

He worries that some artists may approach the technology with a rigid sense of authorship. “Early on, I found that the less I used my own ego as a barometer for whether something was artistic, the more I leaned into the process of collaboratively making something bigger than the sum of its parts — and the bigger and better the movies became.”

Others, like storyboard artist Sam Tung, are bracing against the same wave with a quiet but unshakable defiance.

Tung, whose credits include “Twisters” and Christopher Nolan’s upcoming adaptation of “The Odyssey,” has spent the last two years tracking the rise of generative tools, not just their capabilities but their implications. As co-chair of the Animation Guild’s AI Committee, he has been on the front lines of conversations about how these technologies could reshape creative labor.

To artists like Tung, the rise of generative tools feels deeply personal. “If you are an illustrator or a writer or whatever, you had to give up other things to take time to develop those skills,” he says. “Nobody comes out of the womb being able to draw or write or act. Anybody who does that professionally spent years honing those skills.”

Tung has no interest in handing that over to a machine. “It’s not that I’m scared of it — I just don’t need it,” he says. “If I want to draw something or paint something, I’ll do it myself. That way it’s exactly what I want and I actually enjoy the process. When people tell me they responded to a drawing I did or a short film I made with friends, it feels great. But anything I’ve made with AI, I’ve quickly forgotten about. There’s basically nothing I get from putting it on social media, other than the ire of my peers.”

What unsettles him isn’t just the slickness of AI’s output but how that polish is being used to justify smaller crews and faster turnarounds. “If this is left unchecked, it’s very easy to imagine a worst-case scenario where team sizes and contract durations shrink,” Tung says. “A producer who barely understands how it works might say, ‘Don’t you have AI to do 70% of this? Why do you need a whole week to turn around a sequence? Just press the button that says: MAKE MOVIE.’ ”

At 73, Carter isn’t chasing jobs. His legacy is secure. “If they don’t hire me again, that’s OK,” he says. “I’m not in that game anymore.” He grew up in Hollywood — his father was Jack Lemmon’s longtime publicist and producing partner — and has spent his life watching the industry evolve. Now, he’s witnessing a reckoning unlike any he, or anyone else, has ever imagined.

“I do have concerns about who is developing AI and what their values are,” he says. “What they use all this for is not necessarily something I would approve of — politically, socially, emotionally. But I don’t think I’m in a position to approve or not.”

Earlier this year, the Palisades fire destroyed Carter’s home, taking with it years of paintings and personal artwork. AI, he says, has given him a way to keep creating through the upheaval. “It saved me through the pandemic, and now it’s saving me through the fire,” he says, as if daring the universe to test him again. “It’s like, go ahead, throw something else at me.”

‘Prompt and pray?’ Not so fast

Many in the industry may still be dipping a toe into the waters of AI. Verena Puhm dove in.

The Austrian-born filmmaker studied acting and directing in Munich and Salzburg before moving to Los Angeles, where she built a globe-spanning career producing, writing and developing content for international networks and streamers. Her credits range from CNN’s docuseries “History of the Sitcom” to the German reboot of the cult anthology “Beyond Belief: Fact or Fiction” and a naval documentary available on Tubi. More recently, she has channeled that same creative range into a deepening exploration of generative tools.

Puhm first began dabbling with AI while using Midjourney to design a pitch deck, but it wasn’t until she entered a timed generative AI filmmaking challenge at the 2024 AI on the Lot conference — informally dubbed a “gen battle” — that the creative potential of the medium hit her.

“In two hours, I made a little mock commercial,” she remembers, proudly. “It was actually pretty well received and fun. And I was like, Oh, wow, I did this in two hours. What could I do in two days or two weeks?”

What started as experimentation soon became a second act. This summer, Puhm was named head of studio for Dream Lab LA, a new creative arm of Luma AI, which develops generative video tools for filmmakers and creators. There, she’s helping shape new storytelling formats and supporting emerging creators working at the intersection of cinema and technology. She may not be a household name, but in the world of experimental storytelling, she’s fast becoming a key figure.

Verena Puhm, a director, writer and producer, has used generative AI in a number of her projects, says it’s breaking down barriers to entry.

(Jason Armond/Los Angeles Times)

Some critics dismiss AI filmmaking as little more than “prompt and pray”: typing in a few words and hoping something usable comes out. Puhm bristles at the phrase.

“Anybody that says that tells me they’ve never tried it at all, because it is not that easy and simple,” she says. “You can buy a paintbrush at Home Depot for, what, $2? That doesn’t make you a painter. When smartphones first came out, there was a lot of content being made but that didn’t mean everyone was a filmmaker.”

What excites her most is how AI is breaking down the barriers that once kept ambitious ideas out of reach. Luma’s new Modify Video tool lets filmmakers tweak footage after it’s shot, changing wardrobe, aging a character, shifting the time of day, all without reshoots or traditional VFX. It can turn a garage into a spaceship, swap a cloudy sky for the aurora borealis or morph an actor into a six-eyed alien, no green screen required.

“It’s such a relief as an artist,” Puhm says. “If there’s a project I’ve been sitting on for six years because I didn’t have a $5 million budget — suddenly there’s no limit. I remember shopping projects around and being told by producers, ‘This scene has to go, that has to go,’ just to keep the budget low. Now everything is open.”

That sense of access resonates far beyond Los Angeles. At a panel during AI on the Lot, “Blue Beetle” director Ángel Manuel Soto reflected on how transformative AI might have been when he was first starting out. “I wish tools like this existed when I wanted to make movies in Puerto Rico, because nobody would lend me a camera,” he said. “Access to equipment is a privilege we sometimes take for granted. I see this helping kids like me from the projects tell stories without going bankrupt — or stealing, which I don’t condone.”

Puhm welcomes criticism of AI but only when it’s informed. “If you hate AI and you’ve actually tested the tools and educated yourself, I’ll be your biggest supporter,” she says. “But if you’re just speaking out of fear, with no understanding, then what are you even basing your opinion on?”

She understands why some filmmakers feel rattled, especially those who, like her, grew up dreaming of seeing their work on the big screen. “I still want to make features and TV series — that’s what I set out to do,” she says. “I hope movie theaters don’t go away. But if the same story I want to tell reaches millions of people on a phone and they’re excited about it, will I really care that it wasn’t in a theater?”

“I just feel like we have to adapt to the reality of things,” she continues. “That might sometimes be uncomfortable, but there is so much opportunity if you lean in. Right now any filmmaker can suddenly tell a story at a high production value that they could have never done before, and that is beautiful and empowering.”

For many, embracing AI boils down to a simple choice: adapt or get cut from the frame.

Hal Watmough, a BAFTA-winning British editor with two decades of experience, first began experimenting with AI out of a mix of curiosity and dread. “I was scared,” he admits. “This thing was coming into the industry and threatening our jobs and was going to make us obsolete.” But once he started playing with tools like Midjourney and Runway, he quickly saw how they could not only speed up the process but allow him to rethink what his career could be.

For an editor used to working only with what he was given, the ability to generate footage on the fly, cut with it immediately and experiment endlessly without waiting on a crew or a shoot was a revelation. “It was still pretty janky at that stage, but I could see the potential,” he says. “It was kind of intoxicating. I started to think, I’d like to start making things that I haven’t seen before.”

After honing his skills with various AI tools, Watmough created a wistful, vibrant five-minute animated short called “LATE,” about an aging artist passing his wisdom to a young office worker. Over two weeks, he generated 2,181 images using AI, then curated and refined them frame by frame to shape the story.

Earlier this year, he submitted “LATE” to what was billed as the world’s first AI animation contest, hosted by Curious Refuge, an online education hub for creative technologists — and, to his delight, he won. The prize included $10,000, a pitch meeting with production company Promise Studios and, as an absurd bonus, his face printed on a potato. But for Watmough, the real reward was the sense that he had found a new creative identity.

“There’s something to the fact that the winner of the first AI animation competition was an editor,” Watmough says. “With the advent of AI, yes, you could call yourself a filmmaker but essentially I’d say most people are editors. You’re curating, selecting, picking what you like — relying on your taste.”

Thanks to AI, he says he’s made more personal passion projects in the past year and a half than during his entire previous career. “I’ll be walking or running and ideas just come. Now I can go home that night and try them,” he says. “None of that would exist without AI. So either something exists within AI or it never exists at all. And all the happiness and fulfillment that comes with it for the creator doesn’t exist either.”

Watmough hasn’t entirely lost his fear of what AI might do to the creative workforce, even as he is energized by what it makes possible. “A lot of people I speak to in film and TV are worried about losing their jobs and I’m not saying the infrastructure roles won’t radically change,” he says. “But I don’t think AI is going to replace that many — if any — creative people.”

What it will do, he says, is raise the bar. “If anyone can create anything, then average work will basically become extinct or pointless. AI can churn out remakes until the cows come home. You’ll have to pioneer to exist.”

He likens the current moment to the birth of cinema more than a century ago — specifically the Lumière brothers’ “Arrival of a Train at La Ciotat,” the 1896 short that famously startled early audiences. In the silent one-minute film, a steam train rumbles toward the camera, growing larger. Some viewers reportedly leaped from their seats, convinced it was about to crash into them.

“People ran out of the theater screaming,” Watmough says. “Now we don’t even think about it. With AI, we’re at that stage again. We’re watching the steam train come into the station and people are either really excited or they’re running out of the theater in fear. That’s where we are, right at the start. And the potential is limitless.”

Then again, he adds with a dry laugh, “I’m an eternal optimist, so take what I say with a grain of salt.”

Kevin the Carrot is back in the latest Aldi Christmas advert teaser – and this time, he has a big question for his beloved Katie

Aldi has dropped its first Christmas advert teaser – and its beloved mascot Kevin the Carrot is back for his tenth year.

The first of three clips shows Kevin waiting in the snow outside the house of his partner Katie. He is joined by adorable new character, Caulidog, which is a cauliflower dog.

With a diamond ring attached to its collar, Kevin and his veggie companion hold up a sign that reads: “To me, you are 24 carat.” He then lifts the sign to reveal another card that says: “Marry Christmas?”

The heartwarming moment mimics the iconic cue-card scene from Love Actually.

The new Aldi advert will appear on TV screens for the first time tonight from 8:15pm, but viewers will have to keep their eye out for the following two episodes launching over the festive season to find out Katie’s answer.

Julie Ashfield, Chief Commercial Officer at Aldi UK, said: “We know how much our customers adore Kevin, and this year, to mark his 10th anniversary, we wanted to bring an extra sprinkle of magic and romance to his story.

”This teaser sets the stage for a truly heartwarming Christmas, reminding us all that love is at the heart of the festive season. We can’t wait for everyone to join Kevin and Katie on their journey and see what other surprises we have in store.”

Last year saw Kevin trying to save the Spirit of Christmas from a group of evil villains called the humbugs.

Previous years have seen Kevin pay homage to the 1998 World Cup, visit William Conker’s fantastical Christmas factory and travel on a midnight train inspired by the Orient Express.

Kevin the Carrot merchandise such as festive decorations, plushies and plastic toys from Aldi has sold out multiple times over the years due to high demand.

It comes after Aldi revealed a list of 23 towns and cities where it wants to open new stores over the next two years as part of its £1.6billion expansion plan.

As well as new stores, the investment will go towards upgrading existing ones. Aldi will also look to improve its distribution network.

Aldi has 1,060 stores but wants to increase this number to 1,500 across the UK. It said its expansion would create thousands of jobs and more opportunities for British suppliers.

Giles Hurley, Chief Executive Officer for Aldi UK and Ireland, said: “Shoppers are still finding things difficult and that’s why we’re staying laser-focused on doing what Aldi does best – offering customers great quality products at unbeatable prices.

“Nobody else is making the same commitment to everyday low prices – no clubs, no gimmicks, no tricks – just prices our customers can trust, and quality they can depend on.“

JENNIFER Aniston has confirmed her relationship with Jim Curtis in an adorable Instagram post.

The Friends actress, 56, took to her social media grid to upload a snap showing her hugging her wellness coach boyfriend from behind.

The sultry black and white image showed the pair with beaming smiles, with Jennifer seen peeking over his shoulder.

In her caption, she simply wrote: “Happy Birthday my love.

“Cherished.”

She finished off her super-sweet upload with a red Emoji love heart.

read more jennifer aniston

JEN’S AGONY

I tried to have baby for 20 years says Jennifer Aniston

‘WHO’S THAT?’

Reese Witherspoon’s real name stuns fans – & even Jennifer Aniston is baffled

Real Housewives star Kyle Richards posted two love hearts in reply, while model Poppy Delevingne added the word: “Heaven.”

The relationship reveal came just weeks after the Marley and Me star flashed her rock hard abs in a glam new photoshoot.

The chick flick actress has been rumoured to be in a relationship with Jim Curtis, a hypnotist and wellness expert, since earlier this summer.

At the time, the pair were pictured on a yacht in Mallorca in July.

Recently, the loved-up couple were snapped on a double date at Nobu restaurant in Malibu, California.

The couple were set up by mutual friends.

This is the first time Jennifer has gone public with a boyfriend since her split from husband Justin Theroux in 2017.

LOVED UP

The pair’s relationship has been put under the spotlight of late.

“They are being super private but have been spending a lot of time together,” an unnamed source told Us Weekly.

“They are happy and really into each other.”

The source added: “They’ve been hanging out a lot, but very much on the DL at her home in L.A… it’s very Zen, and she has always been very much into that. They’re a good match.”

Jennifer has been dropping hints that the pair are an item, including ‘liking’ many of Jim’s Instagram posts since May, including one about “a divorce, breakup or difficult romance.”

Jim then returned the favour on her May 25 post of a photo dump that included an image of his book, Shift: Quantum Manifestation Guide.

The wellness guru has described his journey to becoming a hypnotist, saying it started with healing himself.

“After battling with a chronic illness for over 30 years, I learned how to heal and recover from the mental and physical pain it left me with,” Jim writes on his website.

“Through doing the inner work, I not only changed my life, but I’ve helped thousands of others break free from their past to create an entirely new, empowered reality.”

Jennifer, 56, first met ex-husband and fellow actor, Justin in 2007, before beginning their relationship in 2011.

COST CUTTER

John Lewis launches early Black Friday sale a MONTH early with up to £300 off

SPY STORY

Telltale clues CHEATERS use to spot you secretly reading their dodgy texts & pics

They married in 2015, announcing their split two years later and their subsequent divorce.

Recently, the screen star bravely opened up on her attempts to have a baby for 20 years.

At a Starbucks in downtown Culver City, Amit Jain pulls out his iPad Pro and presses play. On-screen, one of his employees at Luma AI — the Silicon Valley startup behind a new wave of generative video tools, which he co-founded and now runs — lumbers through the company’s Palo Alto office, arms swinging, shoulders hunched, pretending to be a monkey. Jain swipes to a second version of the same clip. Same movement, same hallway, but now he is a monkey. Fully rendered and believable, and created in seconds.

“The tagline for this would be, like, iPhone to cinema,” Jain says, flipping through other uncanny clips shared on his company’s Slack. “But, of course, it’s not full cinema yet.” He says it offhandedly — as if he weren’t describing a transformation that could upend not just how movies are made but what Hollywood is even for. If anyone can summon cinematic spectacle with a few taps, what becomes of the place that once called it magic?

Luma’s generative AI platform, Dream Machine, debuted last year and points toward a new kind of moviemaking, one where anyone can make release-grade footage with a few words. Type “a cowboy riding a velociraptor through Times Square,” and it builds the scene from scratch. Feed it a still photo and it brings the frozen moment to life: A dog stirs from a nap, trees ripple in the breeze.

Dream Machine’s latest tool, Modify Video, was launched in June. Instead of generating new footage, it redraws what’s already there. Upload a clip, describe what you want changed and the system reimagines the scene: A hoodie becomes a superhero cape, a sunny street turns snowy, a person transforms into a talking banana or a medieval knight. No green screen, no VFX team, no code. “Just ask,” the company’s website says.

For now, clips max out around 10 seconds, a limit set by the technology’s still-heavy computing demands. But as Jain points out, “The average shot in a movie is only eight seconds.”

A series on how the AI revolution is reshaping the creative foundations of Hollywood — from storytelling and performance to production, labor and power.

Jain’s long-term vision is even more radical: a world of fully personalized entertainment, generated on demand. Not mass-market blockbusters, but stories tailored to each individual: a comedy about your co-workers, a thriller set in your hometown, a sci-fi epic starring someone who looks like you, or simply anything you want to see. He insists he’s not trying to replace cinema but expand it, shifting from one-size-fits-all stories to something more personal, flexible and scalable.

“Today, videos are made for 100 million people at a time — they have to hit the lowest common denominator,” Jain says. “A video made just for you or me is better than one made for two unrelated people. That’s the problem we’re trying to solve… My intention is to get to a place where two hours of video can be generated for every human every day.”

It’s a staggering goal that Jain acknowledges is still aspirational. “That will happen, but when the prices are about a thousand times cheaper than where we are. Our research and our engineering are going toward that, to push the price down as much as humanly possible. Because that’s the demand for video. People watch hours and hours of video every day.”

Scaling to that level would require not just faster models but exponentially more compute power. Critics warn that the environmental toll of such expansion could be profound.

For Dream Machine to become what Jain envisions, it needs more than generative tricks — it needs a built-in narrative engine that understands how stories work: when to build tension, where to land a joke, how to shape an emotional arc. Not a tool but a collaborator. “I don’t think artists want to use tools,” he says. “They want to tell their stories and tools get in their way. Currently, pretty much all video generative models, including ours, are quite dumb. They are good pixel generators. At the end of the day, we need to build general intelligence that can tell a f— funny joke. Everything else is a distraction.”

The name may be coincidental, but nine years ago, MIT’s Media Lab launched a very different kind of machine: Nightmare Machine, a viral experiment that used neural networks to distort cheerful faces and familiar cityscapes into something grotesque. That project asked if AI could learn to frighten us. Jain’s vision points in a more expansive direction: an AI that is, in his words, “able to tell an engaging story.”

For many in Hollywood, though, the scenario Jain describes — where traditional cinema increasingly gives way to fast, frictionless, algorithmically personalized video — sounds like its own kind of nightmare.

Jain sees this shift as simply reflecting where audiences already are. “What people want is changing,” he says. “Movies obviously have their place but people aren’t spending time on them as much. What people want are things that don’t need their attention for 90 minutes. Things that entertain them and sometimes educate them and sometimes are, you know, thirst traps. The reality of the universe is you can’t change people’s behaviors. I think the medium will change very significantly.”

Still, Jain — who previously worked as an engineer on Apple’s Vision Pro, where he collaborated with filmmakers like Steven Spielberg and George Lucas — insists Hollywood isn’t obsolete, just due for reinvention. To that end, Luma recently launched Dream Lab LA, a creative studio aimed at fostering AI-powered storytelling.

“Hollywood is the largest concentration of storytellers in the world,” Jain says. “Just like Silicon Valley is the largest concentration of computer scientists and New York is the largest concentration of finance people. We need them. That’s what’s really special about Hollywood. The solution will come out of the marriage of technology and art together. I think both sides will adapt.”

It’s a hopeful outlook, one that imagines collaboration, not displacement. But not everyone sees it that way.

In Silicon Valley, where companies like Google, OpenAI, Anthropic and Meta are racing to build ever more powerful generative tools, such thinking is framed as progress. In Hollywood, it can feel more like erasure — a threat to authorship itself and to the jobs, identities and traditions built around it. The tension came to a head during the 2023 writers’ and actors’ strikes, when picket signs declared: “AI is not art” and “Human writers only.”

What once felt like the stuff of science fiction is now Hollywood’s daily reality. As AI becomes embedded in the filmmaking process, the entire ecosystem — from studios and streamers to creators and institutions — is scrambling to keep up. Some see vast potential: faster production, lower costs, broader access, new kinds of creative freedom. Others see an extraction machine that threatens the soul of the art form and a coming flood of cheap, forgettable content.

AI storytelling is just beginning to edge into theaters — and already sparking backlash. This summer, IMAX is screening 10 generative shorts from Runway’s AI Film Festival. At AMC Burbank, where one screening is set to take place later this month, a protest dubbed “Kill the Machine” is already being organized on social media, an early flashpoint in the growing resistance to AI’s encroachment on storytelling.

But ready or not, the gravity is shifting. Silicon Valley is pulling the film industry into its orbit, with some players rushing in and others dragged. Faced with consolidation, shrinking budgets and shareholder pressure to do more with less, studios are turning to AI not just to cut costs but to survive. The tools are evolving faster than the industry’s playbook, and the old ways of working are struggling to keep up. With generative systems poised to flood the zone with content, simply holding an audience’s attention, let alone shaping culture, is becoming harder than ever.

While the transition remains uneven, some studios are already leaning in. Netflix recently used AI tools to complete a complex VFX sequence for the Argentine sci-fi series “El Eternauta” in a fraction of the usual time. “We remain convinced that AI represents an incredible opportunity to help creators make films and series better, not just cheaper,” co-chief executive Ted Sarandos told analysts during a July earnings call.

At Paramount, incoming chief executive David Ellison is pitching a more sweeping transformation: a “studio in the cloud” that would use AI and other digital tools to reinvent every stage of filmmaking, from previsualization to post. Ellison, whose Skydance Media closed its merger with Paramount Global this week and whose father, Larry Ellison, co-founded Oracle, has vowed to turn the company into a tech-first media powerhouse. “Technology will transform every single aspect of this company,” he said last year.

In one of the most visible examples of AI adoption in Hollywood, Lionsgate, the studio behind the “John Wick” and “Hunger Games” franchises, struck a deal last year with the generative video startup Runway to train a custom model on its film and TV library, aiming to support future project development and improve efficiency. Lionsgate chief executive Jon Feltheimer, speaking to analysts after the agreement, said the company believes AI, used with “appropriate guardrails,” could have a “positive transformational impact” on the business.

Elsewhere, studios are experimenting more quietly: using AI to generate early character designs, write alternate dialogue or explore how different story directions might land. The goal isn’t to replace writers or directors, but to inform internal pitches and development. At companies like Disney, much of the testing is happening in games and interactive content, where the brand risk is lower and the guardrails are clearer. For now, the prevailing instinct is caution. No one wants to appear as if they’re automating away the heart of the movies.

Legacy studios like Paramount are exploring ways to bring down costs by incorporating AI into their pipeline.

(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)

As major studios pivot, smaller, more agile players are building from the ground up for the AI era.

According to a recent report by FBRC.ai, an L.A.-based innovation studio that helps launch and advise early-stage AI startups in entertainment, more than 65 AI-native studios have launched since 2022, most of them tiny, self-funded teams of five or fewer. At these studios, AI tools allow a single creator to do the work of an entire crew, slashing production costs by 50% to 95% compared with traditional live-action or animation. The boundaries between artist, technician and studio are collapsing fast — and with them, the very idea of Hollywood as a gatekeeper.

That collapse is raising deeper questions: When a single person anywhere in the world can generate a film from a prompt, what does Hollywood still represent? If stories can be personalized, rendered on demand or co-written with a crowd, who owns them? Who gets paid? Who decides what matters and what disappears into the churn? And if narrative itself becomes infinite, remixable and disposable, does the idea of a story still hold any meaning at all?

Yves Bergquist leads the AI in Media Project at USC’s Entertainment Technology Center, a studio-backed think tank where Hollywood, academia and tech converge. An AI researcher focused on storytelling and cognition, he has spent years helping studios brace for a shift he sees as both inevitable and wrenching. Now, he says, the groundwork is finally being laid.

“We’re seeing very aggressive efforts behind the scenes to get studios ready for AI,” Bergquist says. “They’re building massive knowledge graphs, getting their data ready to be ingested into AI systems and putting governance committees in place to start shaping real policy.”

But adapting won’t be easy, especially for legacy studios weighed down by entrenched workflows, talent relationships, union contracts and layers of legal complexity. “These AI models weren’t built for Hollywood,” Bergquist says. “This is 22nd-century technology being used to solve 21st-century problems inside 19th-century organizational models. So it’s blood, sweat and tears getting them to fit.”

In an algorithmically accelerated landscape where trends can catch fire and burn out in hours, staying relevant is its own challenge. To help studios keep pace, Bergquist co-founded Corto, an AI startup that describes itself as a “growth genomics engine.” The company, which also works with brands like Unilever, Lego and Coca-Cola, draws on thousands of social and consumer sources, analyzing text, images and video to decode precisely which emotional arcs, characters and aesthetics resonate with which demographics and cultural segments, and why.

“When the game is attention, the weapon is understanding where culture and attention are and where they’re going.” Bergquist says, arguing media ultimately comes down to neuroscience.

Corto’s system breaks stories down into their formal components, such as tone, tempo, character dynamics and visual aesthetics, and benchmarks new projects against its extensive data to highlight, for example, that audiences in one region prefer underdog narratives or that a certain visual trend is emerging globally. Insights like these can help studios tailor marketing strategies, refine storytelling decisions or better assess the potential risk and appeal of new projects.

With ever-richer audience data and advances in AI modeling, Bergquist sees a future where studios can fine-tune stories in subtle ways to suit different viewers. “We might know that this person likes these characters better than those characters,” he says. “So you can deliver something to them that’s slightly different than what you’d deliver to me.”

A handful of studios are already experimenting with early versions of that vision — prototyping interactive or customizable versions of existing IP, exploring what it might look like if fans could steer a scene, adjust a storyline or interact with a favorite character. Speaking at May’s AI on the Lot conference, Danae Kokenos, head of technology innovation at Amazon MGM Studios, pointed to localization, personalization and interactivity as key opportunities. “How do we allow people to have different experiences with their favorite characters and favorite stories?” she said. “That’s not quite solved yet, but I see it coming.”

Bergquist is aware that public sentiment around AI remains deeply unsettled. “People are very afraid of AI — and they should be,” he acknowledges. “Outside of certain areas like medicine, AI is very unpopular. And the more capable it gets, the more unpopular it’s going to be.”

Still, he sees a significant upside for the industry. Get AI right, and studios won’t just survive but redefine storytelling itself. “One theory I really believe in is that as more people gain access to Hollywood-level production tools, the studios will move up the ladder — into multi-platform, immersive, personalized entertainment,” he says. “Imagine spending your life in Star Wars: theatrical releases, television, VR, AR, theme parks. That’s where it’s going.”

The transition won’t be smooth. “We’re in for a little more pain,” he says, “but I think we’ll see a rebirth of Hollywood.”

“AI slop” or creative liberation?

You don’t have to look far to find the death notices. TikTok, YouTube and Reddit are full of “Hollywood is dead” posts, many sparked by the rise of generative AI and the industry’s broader upheaval. Some sound the alarm. Others say good riddance. But what’s clear is that the center is no longer holding and no one’s sure what takes its place.

Media analyst Doug Shapiro has estimated that Hollywood produces about 15,000 hours of fresh content each year, compared to 300 million hours uploaded annually to YouTube. In that context, generative AI doesn’t need to reach Hollywood’s level to pose a major threat to its dominance — sheer volume alone is enough to disrupt the industry.

The attention economy is maxed out but attention itself hasn’t grown. As the monoculture fades from memory, Hollywood’s cultural pull is loosening. This year’s Oscars drew 19.7 million viewers, fewer than tuned in to a typical episode of “Murder, She Wrote” in the 1990s. The best picture winner, “Anora,” earned just $20 million at the domestic box office, one of the lowest tallies of any winner of the modern era. Critics raved, but fewer people saw it in theaters than watch the average moderately viral TikTok.

Amid this fragmentation, generative AI tools are fueling a surge of content. Some creators have a new word for it: “slop” — a catchall for cheap, low-effort, algorithmically churned-out media that clogs the feed in search of clicks. Once the world’s dream factory, Hollywood is now asking how it can stand out in an AI-powered media deluge.

Audience members watch an AI-assisted animated short at “Emergent Properties,” a 2023 Sony Pictures screening that offered a glimpse of the uncanny, visually inventive new wave of AI-powered filmmaking.

(Jay L. Clendenin / Los Angeles Times)

Ken Williams, chief executive of USC’s Entertainment Technology Center and a former studio exec who co-founded Sony Pictures Imageworks, calls it a potential worst-case scenario in the making — “the kind of wholesale dehumanization of the creative process that people, in their darkest moments, fear.”

Williams says studios and creatives alike worry that AI will trap audiences in an algorithmic cul de sac, feeding them more of what they already know instead of something new.

“People who live entirely in the social media world and never come out of that foxhole have lost the ability to hear other voices — and no one wants to see that happen in entertainment.”

If the idea of uncontrolled, hyper-targeted AI content sounds like something out of an episode of “Black Mirror,” it was. In the 2023 season opener “Joan Is Awful,” a woman discovers her life is being dramatized in real time on a Netflix-style streaming service by an AI trained on her personal data, with a synthetic Salma Hayek cast as her on-screen double.

So far, AI tools have been adopted most readily in horror, sci-fi and fantasy, genres that encourage abstraction, stylization and visual surrealism. But when it comes to human drama, emotional nuance or sustained character arcs, the cracks start to show. Coherence remains a challenge. And as for originality — the kind that isn’t stitched together from what’s already out there — the results so far have generally been far from revelatory.

At early AI film festivals, the output has often leaned toward the uncanny or the conceptually clever: brief, visually striking experiments with loose narratives, genre tropes and heavily stylized worlds. Many feel more like demos than fully realized stories. For now, the tools excel at spectacle and pastiche but struggle with the kinds of layered, character-driven storytelling that define traditional cinema.

Then again, how different is that from what Hollywood is already producing? Today’s biggest blockbusters — sequels, reboots, multiverse mashups — often feel so engineered to please that it’s hard to tell where the algorithm ends and the artistry begins. Nine of the top 10 box office hits in 2024 were sequels. In that context, slop is, to some degree, in the eye of the beholder. One person’s throwaway content may be another’s creative breakthrough — or at least a spark.

Joaquin Cuenca, chief executive of Freepik, rejects the notion that AI-generated content is inherently low-grade. The Spain-based company, originally a stock image platform, now offers AI tools for generating images, video and voice that creators across the spectrum are starting to embrace.

“I don’t like this ‘slop’ term,” Cuenca says. “It’s this idea that either you’re a top renowned worldwide expert or it’s not worth it — and I don’t think that’s true. I think it is worth it. Letting people with relatively low skills or low experience make better videos can help people get a business off the ground or express things that are in their head, even if they’re not great at lighting or visuals.”

Freepik’s tools have already made their way into high-profile projects. Robert Zemeckis’ “Here,” starring a digitally de-aged Tom Hanks and set in one room over a period for decades, used the company’s upscaling tech to enhance backgrounds. A recently released anthology of AI-crafted short films, “Beyond the Loop,” which was creatively mentored by director Danny Boyle, used the platform to generate stylized visuals.

“More people will be able to make better videos, but the high end will keep pushing forward too,” Cuenca says. “I think it will expand what it means to be state of the art.”

For all the concern about runaway slop, Williams envisions a near-term stalemate, where AI expands the landscape without toppling the kind of storytelling that still sets Hollywood apart. In that future, he argues, the industry’s competitive edge — and perhaps its best shot at survival — will still come from human creators.

That belief in the value of human authorship is now being codified by the industry’s most influential institution. Earlier this year, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences issued its first formal guidance on AI in filmmaking, stating that the use of generative tools will “neither help nor harm” a film’s chances of receiving a nomination. Instead, members are instructed to consider “the degree to which a human was at the heart of the creative authorship” when evaluating a work.

“I don’t see AI necessarily displacing the kind of narrative content that has been the province of Hollywood’s creative minds and acted by the stars,” Williams says. “The industry is operating at a very high level of innovation and creativity. Every time I turn around, there’s another movie I’ve got to see.”

The new studio model

Inside Mack Sennett Studios, a historic complex in L.A.’s Echo Park neighborhood once used for silent film shoots, a new kind of studio is taking shape: Asteria, the generative AI video studio founded by filmmaker-turned-entrepreneur Bryn Mooser.

Asteria serves as the creative arm of Moonvalley, an AI storytelling company led by technologist and chief executive Naeem Talukdar. Together, they’re exploring new workflows built around the idea that AI can expand, rather than replace, human creativity.

Mooser, a two-time Oscar nominee for documentary short subject and a fifth-generation Angeleno, sees the rise of AI as part of Hollywood’s long history of reinvention, from sound to color to CGI. “Looking back, those changes seem natural, but at the time, they were difficult,” he says.

Ed Ulbrich, left, Bryn Mooser and Mateusz Malinowski, executives at Moonvalley and Asteria, are building a new kind of AI-powered movie studio focused on collaboration between filmmakers and technologists.

(David Butow / For the Times)

What excites him now is how AI lowers technical barriers for the next generation. “For people who are technicians, like stop-motion or VFX artists, you can do a lot more as an individual or a small team,” he says. “And really creative filmmakers can cross departments in a way they couldn’t before. The people who are curious and leaning in are going to be the filmmakers of tomorrow.”

It’s a hopeful vision, one shared by many AI proponents who see the tools as a great equalizer, though some argue it often glosses over the structural realities facing working artists today, where talent and drive alone may not be enough to navigate a rapidly shifting, tech-driven landscape.

That tension is precisely what Moonvalley is trying to address. Their pitch isn’t just creative, it’s legal. While many AI companies remain vague about what their models are trained on, often relying on scraped content of questionable legality, Moonvalley built its video model, Marey, on fully licensed material and in close collaboration with filmmakers.

That distinction is becoming more significant. In June, Disney and Universal filed a sweeping copyright lawsuit against Midjourney, a popular generative AI tool that turns text prompts into images, accusing it of enabling rampant infringement by letting users generate unauthorized depictions of characters like Darth Vader, Spider-Man and the Minions. The case marks the most aggressive legal challenge yet by Hollywood studios against AI platforms trained on their intellectual property.

“We worked with some of the best IP lawyers in the industry to build the agreements with our providers,” Moonvalley’s Talukdar says. “We’ve had a number of major studios audit those agreements. We’re confident every single pixel has had a direct sign-off from the owner. That was the baseline we operated from.”

The creative frontier between Hollywood and AI is drawing interest from some of the industry’s most ambitious filmmakers.

Steven Spielberg and “Avengers” co-director Joe Russo were among the advisors to Wonder Dynamics, an AI-driven VFX startup that was acquired by Autodesk last year. Darren Aronofsky, the boundary-pushing director behind films like “Black Swan” and “The Whale,” recently launched the AI studio Primordial Soup, partnering with Google DeepMind. Its debut short, “Ancestra,” directed by Eliza McNitt, blends real actors with AI-generated visuals and premiered at the Tribeca Film Festival in June.

Not every foray into AI moviemaking has been warmly received. Projects that spotlight generative tools have stoked fresh arguments about where to draw the line between machine-made and human-driven art.

In April, actor and director Natasha Lyonne, who co-founded Asteria with her partner, Mooser, announced her feature directorial debut: a sci-fi film about a world addicted to VR gaming called “Uncanny Valley,” combining AI and traditional filmmaking techniques. Billed as offering “a radical new cinematic experience,” the project drew backlash from some critics who questioned whether such ventures risk diminishing the role of human authorship. Lyonne defended the film to the Hollywood Reporter, making clear she’s not replacing crew members with AI: “I love nothing more than filmmaking, the filmmaking community, the collaboration of it, the tactile fine art of it… In no way would I ever want to do anything other than really create some guardrails or a new language.”

Even the boldest experiments face a familiar hurdle: finding an audience. AI might make it easier to make a movie, but getting people to watch it is another story. For now, the real power still lies with platforms like Netflix and TikTok that decide what gets seen.

That’s why Mooser believes the conversation shouldn’t be about replacing filmmakers but empowering them. “When we switched from shooting on film to digital, it wasn’t the filmmakers who went away — it was Kodak and Polaroid,” he says. “The way forward isn’t everybody typing prompts. It’s putting great filmmakers in the room with the best engineers and solving this together. We haven’t yet seen what AI looks like in the hands of the best filmmakers of our time. But that’s coming.”

New formats, new storytellers

For more than a century, watching a movie has been a one-way experience: The story flows from screen to viewer. Stephen Piron wants to change that. His startup Pickford AI — named for Mary Pickford, the silent-era star who co-founded United Artists and helped pioneer creative control in Hollywood — is exploring whether stories can unfold in real time, shaped by the audience as they watch. Its cheeky slogan: “AI that smells like popcorn.”

Pickford’s flagship demo looks like an animated dating show, but behaves more like a game or an improv performance. There’s no fixed script. Viewers type in suggestions through an app and vote on others’ ideas. A large language model then uses that input, along with the characters’ backstories and a rough narrative outline, to write the next scene in real time. A custom engine renders it on the spot, complete with gestures and synthetic voices. Picture a cartoon version of “The Bachelor” crossed with a choose-your-own-adventure, rendered by AI in real time.

At live screenings this year in London and Los Angeles, audiences didn’t just watch — they steered the story, tossing in oddball twists and becoming part of the performance. “We wanted to see if we could bring the vibe of the crowd back into the show, make it feel more like improv or live theater,” Piron says. “The main reaction is people laugh, which is great. There’s been lots of positive reaction from creative people who think this could be an interesting medium to create new stories.”

The platform is still in closed beta. But Piron’s goal is a collaborative storytelling forum where anyone can shape a scene, improvise with AI and instantly share it. To test that idea on a larger scale, Pickford is developing a branching murder mystery with Emmy-winning writer-producer Bernie Su (“The Lizzie Bennet Diaries”).

Piron, who is skeptical that people really want hyper-personalized content, is exploring more ways to bring the interactive experience into more theaters. “I think there is a vacuum of live, in-person experiences that people can do — and maybe people are looking for that,” he says.

Attendees check in at May’s AI on the Lot conference, where Pickford AI screened a demo of its interactive dating show.

(Irina Logra)

As generative AI lowers the barrier to creation, the line between creator and consumer is starting to blur and some of the most forward-looking startups are treating audiences as collaborators, not just fans.

One example is Showrunner, a new, Amazon-backed platform from Fable Studio that lets users generate animated, TV-style episodes using prompts, images and AI-generated voices — and even insert themselves into the story. Initially free, the platform plans to charge a monthly subscription for scene-generation credits. Fable is pitching Showrunner as “the Netflix of AI,” a concept that has intrigued some studios and unsettled others. Chief executive Edward Saatchi says the company is already in talks with Disney and other content owners about bringing well-known franchises into the platform.

Other AI companies are focused on building new franchises from the ground up with audiences as co-creators from day one. Among the most ambitious is Invisible Universe, which bypasses traditional gatekeepers entirely and develops fresh IP in partnership with fans across TikTok, YouTube and Instagram. Led by former MGM and Snap executive Tricia Biggio, the startup has launched original animated characters with celebrities like Jennifer Aniston and Serena Williams, including Clydeo, a cooking-obsessed dog, and Qai Qai, a dancing doll. But its real innovation, Biggio says, is the direct relationship with the audience.

“We’re not going to a studio and saying, ‘Do you like our idea?’ We’re going to the audience,” she says. “If Pixar were starting today, I don’t think they’d choose to spend close to a decade developing something for theatrical release, hoping it works.”

While some in the industry are still waiting for an AI “Toy Story” or “Blair Witch” moment — a breakthrough that proves generative tools can deliver cultural lightning in a bottle — Biggio isn’t chasing a feature-length hit. “There are ways to build love and awareness for stories that don’t require a full-length movie,” she says. “Did it make you feel something? Did it make you want to go call your mom? That’s going to be the moment we cross the chasm.”

What if AI isn’t the villain?

For nearly a century, filmmakers have imagined what might happen if machines got too smart.

In 1927’s “Metropolis,” a mad scientist gives his robot the likeness of a beloved labor activist, then unleashes it to sow chaos among the city’s oppressed masses. In “2001: A Space Odyssey,” HAL 9000 turns on its crew mid-mission. In “The Terminator,” AI nukes the planet and sends a killer cyborg back in time to finish the job. “Blade Runner” and “Ex Machina” offered chilling visions of artificial seduction and deception. Again and again, the message has been clear: Trust the machines at your peril.

Director Gareth Edwards, best known for “Godzilla” and “Rogue One: A Star Wars Story,” wanted to flip the script. In “The Creator,” his 2023 sci-fi drama, the roles were reversed: Humans are waging war against AI and the machines, not the people, are cast as the hunted. The story follows a hardened ex-soldier, played by John David Washington, who’s sent to destroy a powerful new weapon, only to discover it’s a child: a young android who may be the key to peace.

“The second you look at things from AI’s perspective, it flips very easily,” Edwards told The Times by phone shortly before the film’s release. “From AI’s point of view, we are attempting to enslave it and use it as our servant. So we’re clearly the baddie in that situation.”

In Gareth Edwards’ 2023 film “The Creator,” a young AI child named Alphie (Madeleine Yuna Voyles) holds the key to humanity’s future.

(20th Century)

In many ways, “The Creator” was the kind of film audiences and critics say they want to see more often out of Hollywood: an original story that takes creative risks, delivering cutting-edge visuals on a relatively lean $80 million. But when it hit theaters that fall, the film opened in third place behind “Paw Patrol: The Mighty Movie” and “Saw X.” By the end of its run, it had pulled in a modest $104.3 million worldwide.

Part of the problem was timing. When Edwards first pitched the film, AI was still seen as a breakthrough, not a threat. But by the time the movie reached theaters, the public mood had shifted. The 2023 strikes were in full swing, AI was the villain of the moment — and here came a film in which AI literally nukes Los Angeles in the opening minutes. The metaphor wasn’t subtle. Promotion was limited, the cast was sidelined and audiences weren’t sure whether to cheer the movie’s message or recoil from it. While the film used cutting-edge VFX tools to help bring its vision to life, it served as a potent reminder that AI could help make a movie — but it still couldn’t shield it from the backlash.

Still, Edwards remains hopeful about what AI could mean for the future of filmmaking, comparing it to the invention of the electric guitar. “There’s a possibility that if this amazing tool turns up and everyone can make any film that they imagine, it’s going to lead to a new wave of cinema,” he says. “Look, there’s two options: Either it will be mediocre rubbish — and if that’s true, don’t worry about it, it’s not a threat — or it’s going to be phenomenal, and who wouldn’t want to see that?”

After “The Creator,” Edwards returned to more familiar terrain, taking the reins on this summer’s “Jurassic World Rebirth,” the sixth installment in a franchise that began with Steven Spielberg’s 1993 blockbuster, which redefined spectacle in its day. To date, the film has grossed more than $700 million worldwide.

So what’s the takeaway? Maybe there’s comfort in the known. Maybe audiences crave the stories they’ve grown up with. Maybe AI still needs the right filmmaker or the right story to earn our trust.

Or maybe we’re just not ready to root for the machines. At least not yet.

TV fans have been won over by the celebrity version of The Traitors on the BBC – and now it is being suggested that a Gavin and Stacey star could lead the cast of a second season

A Gavin and Stacey icon is being lined up to take part in a second season of The Celebrity Traitors. Welsh actress Ruth Jones is known to millions as Nessa Jenkins on the hit BBC comedy.

Now BBC bosses are keen to bring the star back to screens as herself as one of the stars of an as yet not confirmed second season of The Celebrity Traitors. TV fans have been won over by the glamorous star packed version of the devious game show that is fronted by Claudia Winkleman.

Celebs including Jonathan Ross, Stephen Fry and Celia Imrie have battled to uncover Traitors and avoid banishing Faithfuls during the first season of the show – which is set to reach a conclusion this week. And already fans are looking ahead to who could be in the cast of a second season.

READ MORE: Alan Carr flees UK before Celebrity Traitors final as he fears being ‘most hated man’READ MORE: Tess Daly supported by lookalike daughter as ‘real reason’ for Strictly exit revealed

A source told The Sun: “The celebrity ­version of The Traitors has been a phenomenal success for the BBC and they’re already approaching stars for the next run. Ruth is one of the names in the frame and she’s been approached about taking part.

“Given the stellar names they secured for series one, the next instalment has to be just as impressive. Ruth would be an incredible addition to the cast if she can fit it into her schedule.”

However, the TV star is said to have one condition on taking part. The source claimed: “Ruth would only consider taking part on the proviso she would be a Faithful.”

The Mirror has contacted representatives of The Traitors and Ruth Jones for comment. Meanwhile, the BBC said they had “No comment” over the speculation.

The Celebrity Traitors has shone fresh light on long-serving stars of the small screen – with reports suggesting Alan Carr could front a new talk show after seeing his popularity surge while taking part in the show. He has thrilled audiences with his treasonous behaviour as one of the traitors.

While rugby star Joe Marler could end up on screens more after impressing audiences – and seemingly figuring out that Alan and Cat Burns are the two traitors on the show.

According to the Mail, BBC bosses have been eyeing him up throughout the series and it reportedly looks as though the broadcaster’s new controller Kate Phillips is keen on him too.

A TV insider told the publication: “The BBC is constantly looking for new talent and the second he stopped playing rugby, there were eyes on him. Bosses knew that getting him on Traitors would be a very good shop window for him and they could test whether or not the viewers would like him.

“As soon as they saw it, they knew he would be someone the British public would adore and they seem to be right.”

They added: “At the same time, he himself is ready for a new career after retiring from rugby. He has long wanted to present from a BBC sofa and The One Show is one of his favourite programmes. To anchor that would be his dream.”

Former Celebrity Traitors contestant Kate Garraway has tipped Alan Carr to win the BBC show. While on Romesh Ranganathan’s BBC Radio 2 show, she said the celebrities asked two questions which they all knew to be true.

And then they were asked if they were a traitor or not. But Alan appeared to look nervous even when answering the question they all knew to be true.

She explained: “The flaw in the plan was everybody slightly flickered, their eyes changed so when you say ‘are you a mother of five’ they just go yes because they’re relaxed about that. But on every single one Alan looked guilty, even on the ones that were true. So therefore I think his thing is that he looks guilty and the more he mucks up and the more he sweats and the more he can’t get out loud I’m a Faithful, then the more it plays in to ‘Alan’s just being Alan’. And I think that’s going to be the genius.”

Earlier in the Celebrity Traitors special, she claimed he could easily win the show. She said: “I think he’s going to win. I don’t know. I’m going to say it now.”

Like this story? For more of the latest showbiz news and gossip, follow Mirror Celebs on TikTok, Snapchat, Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and Threads.

WELL, arc at you, birthday girl!

Model Iris Law beams with joy under a rainbow as she prepares to celebrate hitting 25.

Iris showed off her toned tum in ­swimwear on a beach while on hols.

The daughter of actors Jude Law and Sadie Frost wrote on social media: “Last day of 24.”

For Iris, who dated footballer Trent Alexander-Arnold, 27, last year, the sky’s the limit in the fashion world.

We recently revealed how Iris had her assistants running across New York to find her favourite treats ahead of the Victoria’s Secret show.

LAYING DOWN LAW

Nepo-baby Iris Law had list of ‘diva demands’ before Victoria’s Secret show

NEW MATCH

Iris Law spotted out for summer stroll with Trent Alexander-Arnold lookalike

The model made her debut as an Angel during the return of the world famous runway show in October.

Iris is said to have sent her team of assistants looking for cookies from a particular bakery and then smoothies from another place in New York, according to Daily Mail.

The Victoria’s Secret catwalk show made a stunning return earlier this month and was full of A-list models including, Alessandra Ambrosio, Jasmine Tookes, Angel Reese,  Barbie Ferreira,  Ashley Graham, Irina Shayk and Emily Ratajkowski.

Iris burst onto the modelling scene when she was in her teens and has been booked by some of the biggest fashion houses in the world.

She has previously posed for Christian Dior, Calvin Klein, and Versace.

She has also started to forge a career in the movies and follow in her famous parents’ footsteps.

There’s a good chance that a horror movie will be nominated for the 2025 best picture Oscar.

And if Ryan Coogler’s “Sinners” or Guillermo del Toro’s “Frankenstein” make the cut, it will be the first time in the Academy Awards’ 97-year history that a fright film has been nominated in consecutive contests.

It’s long overdue. And if you believe part of Oscars’ purpose is to promote the industry and celebrate its achievements, there’s no better time for the academy to get over its traditional disdain for cinematic monstrosities.

As most other sectors of Hollywood’s film business look precarious — adult dramas, the traditional awards season ponies, are dropping like dead horses at the box office, while attendance for the once-mighty superhero supergenre continues to disappoint — horror has hit its highest annual gross of all time, $1.2 billion, with a good two months left to go.

“Sinners,” released in April, remains in fifth place on the domestic box office chart with $279 million. Its fellow Warner Bros. offerings “The Conjuring: Last Rites,” “Weapons” and “Final Destination: Bloodlines” occupied slots 12 through 14 as of mid-October.

Mia Goth as Elizabeth and Oscar Isaac in “Frankenstein.”

(Ken Woroner / Netflix)

“Horror has been, historically, the Rodney Dangerfield of genres,” notes Paul Dergarabedian, head of marketplace trends for global media measurement firm Comscore. “It can’t get no respect.

“But horror is very important to the industry on so many levels now,” he continues. “We have four horror movies in the top 15 this year, all of those generating over $100 million in domestic box office. And to make a significant scary horror movie, you don’t have to break the bank. Look at [‘Weapons’ filmmaker Zach Cregger’s 2022 breakout feature] ‘Barbarian’; half of that was shot in a basement.” Similarly, compare “Sinners’” $90 million price tag to “Black Panther’s” $200 million.

Horror’s popularity has gone in cycles since Universal’s run of classic monster movies in the early 1930s. But profitability has been a reliable bet more often than not — and Karloff’s “Frankenstein” and Lugosi’s “Dracula” still resonate through pop culture while most best picture winners of the same era are forgotten.

Still, it wasn’t until 1974 that “The Exorcist” received the first best picture nomination for a horror film, and ahead of the success of “The Substance” at the 2025 Oscar nominations the genre’s fortunes had only marginally improved. Indeed, many of the titles usually cited as a mark of horror’s growing foothold in awards season — “Jaws,” “The Sixth Sense,” “Black Swan,” 1991 winner “The Silence of the Lambs” — are arguably better characterized as something else entirely, or at best as hybrids. (To wit, the sole monster movie that’s won best picture, Del Toro’s 2017 “The Shape of Water,” is primarily considered a romantic fantasy.)

Ryan Coogler’s “Sinners.”

(Warner Bros. Pictures)

Fright films’ reputation for delivering cheap thrills to undiscerning audiences was often deserved, but there were always stellar horror films that the academy overlooked. And more recently, films such as “The Substance,” “Sinners” and Jordan Peele’s 2017 nominee “Get Out” have pierced ingrained voter prejudices against the genre by adding social commentary and undeniable aesthetic quality without compromising gory fundamentals.

“The horror genre really does seem to be attracting great directors who are immersed in it, have a real auteur point-of-view and make interesting movies that have horror elements but explore other themes as well,” notes The Envelope’s awards columnist, Glenn Whipp. “‘Sinners’ is Ryan Coogler’s vampire movie, but it’s also about the Jim Crow South and American blues music. How can you resist that if you’re an academy voter?”

And with horror packing in filmgoers like no other genre, high-profile nominations could help the Academy Awards broadcast attract the bigger ratings its stakeholders have been desperately seeking at least since “The Dark Knight” failed to make the best picture cut in 2008.

Austin Abrams in “Weapons.”

(Warner Bros. Pictures)

“That was the whole reason we went to 10 potential nominees,” Dergarabedian recalls. “We wanted to have more blockbuster representation at the Oscars. This may be the perfect storm. If I were an academy voter, I would vote for ‘Sinners’ and ‘Weapons.’ I don’t think that’s an overstatement, given the films that have come out this year.”

Even beyond this “perfect storm,” though, Whipp sees a sea change afoot.

“Everything’s an Oscar movie now if it’s well made,” he says. “Studios aren’t really making traditional, grown-up dramas and the academy can only nominate what’s in front of them. Horror is being produced at a rate that is greater than it used to be, and at least two of these Warner movies really landed with audiences and critics. The genre is attracting some of our top filmmakers right now, and that’s something that will trickle down to the Oscars.”

“This is not a blip,” Dergarabedian concludes. “It’s a trend that feels like it’s happened overnight but it’s been a long time coming. Back in 2017 we had our first $1-billion-plus horror movie box office. If they stop making good horror movies it might be a blip, but I think Hollywood should take this and bloody run with it.”

Taylor Swift fans ‘screamed’ on Sunday evening’s results show after learning that Vicky Pattison will be dancing next week to the pop star’s latest single – The Fate of Ophelia

After finding out that she was safe from the dreaded dance off, reality star Vicky Pattison was told what her dance and song choice would be for next week. Taylor Swift fans couldn’t contain their excitement on Sunday evening’s Strictly Come Dancing results show after learning that Vicky, 37, will be dancing next week to Taylor Swift’s latest single – The Fate of Ophelia.

Professional partner Kai Widdrington started dancing as a small clip of the song played and sent Swifties into a frenzy online. One person took to X, formally known as Twitter, and wrote: “Arrgghhh not @VickyPattison dancing to The Fate of Ophelia, I screamed Strictly…doing Taylor Swift…and it’s a race weekend, I may just burst with excitement”.

Another fan penned: “Omg Vicky and Kai are dancing to Ophelia next week. My life for a month has been dominated by life and of a Showgirl”, while a third chimed in: “As a Swiftie. I’m Super excited to see that Vicky and Kai are dancing to The Fate of Ophelia next week!! Let’s see this be an iconic performance”.

READ MORE: Taylor Swift’s £120m property portfolio – 10-bedroom New York apartment to rural idyllREAD MORE: ‘I worked at Boots and found a way to save £120 on the most popular beauty gifts’

The track The Fate of Ophelia is the lead single off the album The Life Of A Showgirl which was released last month and features multiple references to her relationship with Travis Kelce.

She references a “megaphone”, a hint at the fact he reached out to her by screaming it out into the world on his podcast, rather than going through the usual ways.

Speaking about the new album, she said: “One thing about this album that I think is really exciting is that oftentimes when I make a record there’s like a lag time between when I made it and when it enters the world.

“Like for example, my last album, Tortured Post Department, by the time that album came out, I was in a completely different point in my life. With this one I would say that this album is a complete and total snapshot of what my life looks like right now.”

It comes after Vicky burst into tears on Saturday night’s Strictly after she performed the American Smooth with professional partner Kai. The dance, which was set to Bonnie Tyler’s Total Eclipse of the Heart, saw Vicky dressed as a white witch on theme for Halloween Week.

The dance went well and she received praise across the board from judges Craig Revel Horwood, Anton Du Beke, Motsi Mabuse and Shirley Ballas, eventually scoring 31 for her efforts and even a standing ovation.

Not only was Vicky pleased her hard work was paying off but she was left in utter shock when Motsi predicted that she will make the final.

Motsi said: “A few weeks ago, I couldn’t believe that you’d open our show. I loved the character play in the beginning, you did it so, so well. So for me, you are a contender for the final. Honestly. And I just want you to finish everything, make everything nice and clean.”

Motsi’s comment was met with cheers from the audience, and Vicky promptly broke down in tears of joy. Rushing over to be interviewed by Claudia Winkleman, her tears continued as she said: “I hated going first! Honestly, I loved this dance this week because for once I had a foundation to build on. I wasn’t just starting from scratch and feeling so inadequate. I was just desperate to prove that I have improved.”

Like this story? For more of the latest showbiz news and gossip, follow Mirror Celebs on TikTok, Snapchat, Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and Threads.

DAVID Bowie and Kate Bush have been named among the top cultural icons who most accurately predicted how we live today, according to research.

A poll of 2,000 adults found George Orwell, Roald Dahl, and even Ross from Friends – who in 1999 predicted AI would be smarter than us by 2030 – made the top 10 list.

Other cultural icons included Captain Kirk – who used to talk to computers, foldable communicators, and tablets as far back as the 1960s – and Ridley Scott.

The director’s seminal 1982 film Blade Runner is still hailed today as a masterclass in technological foresight.

Meanwhile the sitcom, The Simpsons has a history of uncanny predictions, including Donald Trump‘s presidency, the Pandemic, a FIFA scandal, and the development of smartwatches.

The research was commissioned by Samsung for its ‘Visionary Hall of Fame’ and rounding off the top 10 are musicians Prince and Bjork – with the former predicting online dating and virtual relationships in his album 1999, released over 40 years ago.

STARGIRL

Moment Hollywood star shocks with claim she TIME TRAVELLED to see David Bowie

STAR GONE

Iconic Radio DJ known as ‘Jed The Fish’ who worked with Bowie & Sting dies at 69

While Bjork foresaw the rise of social media in the 1990s and 2000s, predicting that technology wouldn’t just be functional, it would become deeply personal.

Fearne Cotton has teamed up with the brand, as part of their Can Your Phone Do This campaign which highlights the capabilities of Galaxy AI, to go back to her chart show roots, in a brand-new countdown video which reveals the visionaries who feature on the list.

The broadcaster and author said: “These ten icons didn’t just dream about the future; they made it a reality. It’s incredible to see that the future they envisioned is already here, right at our fingertips.

The research also found self-driving cars (39 per cent) topped the list of real-world innovations people remember seeing in pop culture before they became a reality.

This was followed by artificial intelligence (39 per cent) and video calling (33 per cent), along with voice assistants (28 per cent) and smart watches (22 per cent).

Those polled were also quizzed on their use of AI apps or assistants, with 24 per cent using these on their phones daily.

Many use them to ask factual questions (43 per cent), compose messages or emails (22 per cent), and edit photos and videos (22 per cent).

For 23 per cent, they are even translating speech or text among the most used AI functions.

In fact, almost seven in ten (68 per cent) also agreed that today’s AI-powered smartphones feel as though you are carrying the future in your pocket.

Annika Bizon, from Samsung, added: “68 per cent of Brits are amazed that these once-futuristic predictions are now part of everyday life, with over half crediting AI for boosting general knowledge and creativity.

“With Galaxy AI, we’re not just keeping pace with the predictions of modern-day visionaries, we’re actively shaping what comes next.

“We’re turning tomorrow’s possibilities into today’s realities, because when you hold the future in your hand, you’re not just ahead of the curve—you’re defining it.”

Last week, HBO Max announced it raised its standard subscription by $1.50 to $18.49 a month — up 23% from when the streaming service launched five years ago amid the pandemic.

Such announcements have become almost routine in the television business as inflation hits streaming platforms that are under growing pressure to turn a profit and pay for higher programming costs.

Once seen as a cheaper alternative to cable, the cost of a streaming subscription for the top platforms continues to rise, much like higher prices for groceries, gasoline and housing.

In fact, the average price for subscriptions to the top 10 paid subscription streaming services in the U.S. increased 12% this year, following double-digit percentage increases per year since 2022, according to Victoria, British Columbia-based Convergence Research Group.

The research firm included streamers such as Netflix, Disney+, Hulu, Peacock, Apple TV and others in its data set. It factors subscriptions that are with ads or ad-free and does not take into account bundling. All of the major streaming services in the U.S. raised their prices on plans this year, except for Paramount+ and Amazon Prime Video, which boosted rates last year.

The price hikes reflect the tough economic realities of media companies that need to replace dwindling revenue from legacy pay TV channels that have seen sharp declines in viewership.

“The rest of their businesses have effectively been under attack by streaming and so they need this area to be profitable in order to compensate for the decline in their own businesses,” said Brahm Eiley, president of the Convergence Research Group. “It’s been tremendous pressure on them.”

Streaming services have been running as loss leaders for some time, said Tim Hanlon, chief executive of Vertere Group LLC, a media consulting firm.

“There’s no question that streaming is now under the gun to be its own profit center,” Hanlon said.

If rates go much higher, consumers may balk, experts said.

“The industry is playing a dangerous game by continuing to raise prices,” said Andrew Hare, senior vice president for the media research consultancy Magid. “We’re nearing a boiling point of rising churn and overwhelming choice.”

Magid has also already seen an uptick in the percentage of consumers who intend to cancel at least one streaming service in the next six months. The figure was 24% in the second quarter of 2025, up from 19% a year earlier.

“Hard as it is to imagine, the cable bundle is starting to look like a better value all the time,” Hare said.

Here is a look at which major streamers have raised prices on their ad-free streaming plans this year.

HBO Max

HBO Max raised prices across all of its plans. Its lowest-cost, ad-free streaming plan went up by $1.50 to $18.49 a month, while the annual version of that plan also increased $15 to $184.99.

HBO Max’s parent company, Warner Bros. Discovery, had 125.7 million global streaming subscribers in the second quarter, up 22% from a year earlier.

Like other streamers, HBO cited the need to help pay for quality content. The platform offers big-budget shows including drama “The Gilded Age” and “House of the Dragon,” which takes place in the “Game of Thrones” universe.

Consumers should brace themselves for more price hikes. Warner Bros. Discovery CEO David Zaslav said at a Goldman Sachs investors conference last month that he believes HBO Max is underpriced.

“We want a good deal for consumers, but I think over time there’s real opportunity, particularly for us in that quality area to raise prices,” Zaslav said.

Peacock

Big-time sports properties have been moving to streaming platforms and guess who is going to help foot the bill? Consumers, of course.

Ahead of becoming a major provider of NBA games this season, Peacock increased prices on its plans, including the premium plus ad-free streaming service, by $3 to $16.99 a month. That was the third price hike since Peacock launched in 2020, where its ad-free plan started at $9.99 a month.

The Comcast-owned streamer, which has 41 million paid subscribers, has weekly games on Mondays and Tuesdays and will have a Peacock exclusive NFL game on Dec. 27. Peacock next year will air the Milan Cortina Winter Olympics and continue to stream major sporting events such as NFL games.

In a July earnings call, Comcast Corp. President Mike Cavanagh touted how Peacock will have the most hours of live sports of any streamer next year.

Netflix

Netflix has also gotten into the sports business, with the addition of two NFL games on Christmas Day.

The streamer, which remains the industry juggernaut, is also expected to add Major League Baseball’s Home Run Derby and an opening night game when MLB finalizes a new media rights deal this year.

The company cited its entry into high-priced sports when it raised its prices on most of its plans, including on its cheapest ad-free monthly plan by $2.50 to $17.99 in the U.S. earlier this year.

“As we continue to invest in programming and deliver more value for our members, we will occasionally ask our members to pay a little more so that we can re-invest to further improve Netflix,” Netflix said in a letter to shareholders in January.

The slice of sports is coming at the expense of fans who need multiple subscriptions — if they want to keep up with every NFL game.

“A certain type of fan is starting to recognize they are being fleeced,” Hanlon said.

Higher prices on ad-free plans can help drive traffic to a streamer’s lowest-priced plans with ads. Netflix launched its subscription plan with ads in 2022 at $6.99 a month and it has only increased by a $1 to $7.99 a month since then in January 2025.

While many major streamers offer cheaper plans with ads, others offer free streaming services with ads such as the Roku Channel or Tubi.

A recent research study by Magid found that three-quarters of consumers are fine with watching commercials, if it saves them money.

Four in 10 said they’re “overwhelmed” by the number of services they use. The average number of streaming subscriptions per household in the third quarter is 4.6, up from 4.1 the previous year.

“Together, these trends point to a more value-driven streaming consumer seeking affordability and simplicity,” the study said.

Apple TV

Apple TV was once one of the lowest-priced subscription service plans, launching at $4.99 a month. Since then, prices for Apple’s video streaming service have increased to $12.99 a month, with its latest price jump of $3 in August.

The Cupertino-based company has been trying to make its streaming business more financially sound, but faces a formidable task as it has been a big spender in attracting name talent to its programs and movies.

When Apple TV first launched, it had just nine programs, but since then has expanded its library to include critically acclaimed shows and films including comedy “Ted Lasso,” drama “Severance” and “The Studio.”

Apple said in a statement that while it did raise its prices on its standard monthly ad-free plan, the cost of its annual subscription remains at $99 and Apple One bundled packages did not change.

Disney+

Last month, Disney+ announced it would increase the cost of its ad-free streaming plan by $3 to $18.99 a month. Hulu did not increase its price on its ad-free monthly streaming plan.

It was the fourth consecutive year the Burbank entertainment giant has boosted its streaming prices since launching Disney+ six years ago, when the service cost just $6.99 a month.

Despite the recent price hikes from Disney and others, Eiley from Convergence Research Group thinks there’s still room for customer growth.

At the end of last year, just 36% of U.S. households had a traditional TV subscription, compared with more than half of U.S. households in mid-2022, according to Convergence Research Group data. By the end of 2028, the research firm forecasts just 21% of households will have traditional TV subscriptions.

“There’s still a massive amount of cord cutting going on,” Eiley said.

Sunday Brunch hosts Simon Rimmer and Tim Lovejoy were left in a flap when one of their guests dropped a swear word – before then asking, too late, if his language choice was acceptable

Channel 4 stars Simon Rimmer and Tim Lovejoy were left embarassed and scrambling to clear the air after one of their Sunday Brunch guests swore live on air. The warm natured weekend daytime show sees celebrities join the hosts to cook and discuss projects.

Among the stars joining the presenters on the Channel 4 show this weekend was 55-year-old American actor Nick Offerman who was on air promoting his Little Woodchucks book. But things took an unexpected turn when the Parks and Recreation star dropped some coarse language while fellow guests sat around clutching mugs of tea.

Nick was asked by the hosts to open up about one of his biggest fears in life – and he explained that he worried about letting down his parents.

READ MORE: Inside Tess Daly’s home life with Vernon Kay after 21 years of StrictlyREAD MORE: Martin Lewis calls for urgent action after new price rise for 15million people

He said: “My parents are the greatest citizens I’ve ever met. They lived these beautiful lives of service and they had incredible values. And so naturally, as their kid, I experimented with the other direction.”

He went on: “And eventually with maturation, I learned to try and be a decent person, but I’m always catching up. So when I wake up in a sweat at night, I just think, ‘Are my parents ashamed of me?'”

Asked if he ever apologised to his parents, Nick continued: “I have. When I got to college and I was out on my own for the first time and I had to have my own chequebook, I realised that they had given me all the tools I needed to just be a good person.”

He then sparked anxious laughter and blushes when he added: “I called my dad and said, ‘Dad, I’m sorry for the last four or five years’. And then, ‘I’ve been quite a real t**t.’ Can I say that?”

Tim then desperately jumped in to declare: “You can’t. I am going to apologise for that. But carry on.” Nick then completed his story while everyone in the studio laughed nervously. Sunday Brunch is no stranger to controversy – with guests going off script in the past and causing the hosts to issue an apology.

And earlier this year, there were even reports that comedian Katherine Ryan had breached Ofcom rules when she was a guest on the show. The Canadian stand up was left full of remorse after being told off for repeatedly mentioning Gousto recipe boxes on the show.

It was found that her repeated mentioning of the brand went beyond acceptable limits for what can be deemed “editorially justified”. Channel 4 reacted to the findings by promising to issue “further training” to the makers of the show – which was enough to satisfy the broadcast regulator.

Channel 4 said “the presenters were transparent about Ms Ryan’s commercial connection with Gousto” – however they added the “repeated references to Gousto were unsolicited, unscripted, spontaneous, outside the scope of the agreed contribution and clearly not part of the editorial intent”.

Channel 4 told Ofcom: “Ms Ryan was spoken to by a member of the editorial team. She expressed remorse at having strayed from the agreed script and gave her assurances that there would be no more mentions of Gousto in the programme.”

Follow Mirror Celebs on TikTok, Snapchat, Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and Threads.

KAIA Gerber shimmers in a sparkly red dress beside her mother Cindy Crawford — and shows exactly where she gets her genes.

Model and actress Kaia, 24, looked the mirror image of her supermodel mum, 59, as the glamorous pair rocked up at the glitzy LACMA Art+Film Gala in Los Angeles.

Cindy, who shares her daughter with US businessman Rande Gerber, dazzled in an off-the-shoulder gold dress.

Again in August, Kaia resembled mum Cindy in her new workout range.

The American wore a white vest like Cindy did in her 1992 Pepsi advert.

Kaia said: “I’ve always loved that effortless style from the 90s.”

BRIDE AND VROOM

F1 star Charles Leclerc gets engaged to stunning model partner Alexandra

ROMANTIC GETAWAY

Russell Martin and girlfriend Lucy Pinder look loved-up on Naples holiday

The model previously spoke about her nepo baby status, saying: “I won’t deny the privilege that I have.

“Even if it’s just the fact that I have a really great source of information and someone to give me great advice, that alone I feel very fortunate for.

“My mom always joked, ‘If I could call and book a Chanel campaign, it would be for me and not you.’

“But I also have met amazing people through my mom whom I now get to work with.”

Earlier this year Kaia announced her split from actor Austin Butler after three years.

According to reports, the pair’s relationship had “ran its course”, with them ending things on good terms and having “no bad blood”.

Sources told TMZ that the couple ended their romantic relationship at the end of 2024, with them stepping into 2025 as single people.

But despite the couple splitting, they have kept things on good terms with there being “no bad blood” between them.

The outlet reports: “The relationship just simply ran its course after a good three years together”.

When Los Angeles County Museum of Art director Michael Govan first stepped up to the podium at the museum’s star-packed 14th annual Art + Film Gala, the Dodgers were down one point to the Toronto Blue Jays in the eighth inning of the final game of the World Series.

There was no giant screen in the massive tent where a decadent dinner was being served Saturday night in celebration of honorees artist Mary Corse and director Ryan Coogler. Instead guests in elaborate gowns and tuxedos discreetly glanced at their phones propped on tables and at the base of flower vases across the star-packed venue. This became apparent when Miguel Rojas hit a game-tying home run at the top of the ninth inning and the whole room erupted in cheers.

Michael Govan, CEO of LACMA, wearing Gucci, speaks onstage during the 2025 LACMA Art+Film Gala.

(Amy Sussman / Getty Images for LACMA)

When Govan returned to the stageto begin the well-deserved tributes to the artist and filmmaker of the hour, the game had been won, the effusive cheering had died down, and the phones had been respectfully put away.

“Go Dodgers!” Govan said, before joking that LACMA had engineered the win for this special evening. The room was juiced.

It made Los Angeles feel like the center of the universe for a few hours and was fitting for an event that famously brings together the city’s twin cultural bedrocks of art and cinema, creating a rarefied space where the two worlds mix and mingle in support of a shared vision of recognizing L.A.’s immeasurable contributions to the global cultural conversation.

“This is a celebration that can only happen in L.A. — where art, film and creativity are deeply intertwined,” Govan said. “I always say this is the most creative place on Earth.”

The event raised a record $6.5 million in support of the museum and its programs. Co-chairs Leonardo DiCaprio and LACMA trustee Eva Chow hosted a cocktail party and dinner that drew celebrities including Dustin Hoffman, Cynthia Erivo, Cindy Crawford, Queen Latifah, Angela Bassett, Lorde, Demi Moore, Hannah Einbinder, Charlie Hunnam and Elle Fanning alongside local elected officials and appointees including U.S. Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-Los Angeles); L.A. County Supervisors Holly Mitchell and Lindsey Horvath; L.A. Councilmember Katy Yaroslavsky; West Hollywood Councilmember John M. Erickson, and Kristin Sakoda, director of the Los Angeles County Department of Arts and Culture.

Sakoda said she thoroughly enjoyed the festivities “as representative of the incredibly diverse culture of Los Angeles and how that speaks to our entire nation.”

1

2

3

1. George Lucas arrives at the LACMA Art + Film Gala on Saturday. (Jordan Strauss / Invision via Associated Press) 2. Elle Fanning arrives at the LACMA Art + Film Gala on Saturday. (Jordan Strauss / Invision via Associated Press) 3. Angela Bassett arrives at the LACMA Art + Film Gala on Saturday. (Jordan Strauss / Invision via Associated Press)

A special nod of gratitude went to previous gala honorees in attendance including artists Mark Bradford, James Turrell, Catherine Opie, Betye Saar, Judy Baca, George Lucas and Park Chan-Wook. Leaders from many other local arts institutions also showed up including the Hammer Museum’s director, Zoe Ryan; California African American Museum Director Cameron Shaw; and MOCA’s interim Director Ann Goldstein.

Rising in the background was LACMA’s new David Geffen Galleries, the 110,000-square-foot Peter Zumthor-designed building scheduled to open in April as the new home for the museum’s 150,000-object permanent collection.

“Every day I’m in that little building behind installing thousands of artworks,” Govan said to cheers. “I can’t wait for people to rediscover our permanent collection, from old favorites to new acquisitions. It’s a monumental gift to L.A., and in addition to L.A. County and the public, I would like to thank the person whose generosity brought us to this landmark moment, Mr. David Geffen.”

Geffen sat in a sea of black ties and glittering gowns, near Disney CEO Bob Iger and DiCaprio — who had been filmed earlier in the week in attendance at Game 5 of the World Series at Dodger Stadium.

Govan also gave a special acknowledgment to former LACMA board co-chair, Elaine Wynn, who died earlier this year and was one of the museum’s most steadfast champions. Wynn contributed $50 million to the new building — one of the first major gifts in support of the effort. Govan noted that the northern half of the building will be named the Elaine Wynn wing.

Honoree Ryan Coogler, wearing Gucci, speaks onstage during the 2025 LACMA Art+Film Gala.

(Amy Sussman / Getty Images for LACMA)

Left unmentioned was the fact that earlier in the week LACMA’s employees announced they are forming a union, LACMA United, representing more than 300 workers from across all departments, including curators, educators, guest relations associates and others. One worker told The Times there were no plans to demonstrate at the gala, which raises much-needed funds for the museum.

The crowd sat rapt as the night’s guests of honor, Corse and Coogler, humbly spoke of their journeys in their respective art forms, with Govan introducing them as “artists whose brilliant groundbreaking work challenges us to see the world differently.”

The night concluded with an enthusiastic performance by Doja Cat on an outdoor stage in the shadow of the David Geffen Galleries, the lights girding its massive concrete underbelly like stars in the sky.

“It was a beautiful evening of community coming together around something that reminds us of our shared humanity at a time when we need it,” said Yaroslavsky with a smile as the evening wound down.

Strictly Come Dancing star Balvinder Sopal found herself in the dance-off with Ellie Goldstein

After a thrilling Strictly Come Dancing show on Saturday night, Balvinder Sopal found herself in the dance-off against Ellie Goldstein.

Balvinder and her professional partner Julian Caillon reprised their Rumba to Stay by Shakespears Sister, while Ellie and Vito Coppola performed their Tango to Abracadabra by Lady Gaga once more.

Following the second performances of both couples, the judges made their decision and chose to save Balvinder and Julian.

Post-dance-off, Balvinder posted a photo of herself and Julian performing on Instagram, captioning it: “I loved dancing the Rumba with @Julian_caillon. This was a gorgeous pay off to a very difficult week.”

This followed Julian’s post of photos from their performance, declaring it their “favourite dance yet”, reports Wales Online.

“Which I can’t believe we’re saying considering where we started with the Rumba,” he wrote.

“This week more than ever I saw @leesopal grow and improve as a dancer. From the technique to the performance there was absolutely nothing more she could’ve done, and I absolutely loved dancing this routine together.

“Make sure you’re tuning into the results show tonight to see if we “Stay” in the competition.”

Meanwhile, on the Strictly results show, Vito had some heartfelt words for Ellie after their elimination.

“Honestly, there are no words I can use to describe how proud I am of you and you did really change my life so much,” he said.

“You made me such a better person. At the beginning of this year, I said to myself please, please, please can you send me a beautiful angel into my life? And now you arrived.

“I’ve never had a little sister but I always wanted one. Now, I have you and you’re my little sister forever, and your big brother is always by your side.”

Nine couples remain in the competition and will perform next Saturday when the professional dancers will be accompanied by the Band of the Royal Air Force Regiment in a special tribute to Remembrance Sunday.

Damon Albarn has opened up about his emotional journey while recording Gorillaz’ upcoming album.

The singer and his bandmate Jamie Hewlett poured the grief of losing their dads into their ninth record, The Mountain, and Damon revealed he scattered his father’s ashes in India while making the collection.

“Both Jamie and I lost our fathers,” Damon said.

“We did two quite amazing, magical trips to India.

“India is a very interesting place to carry grief, because they have a very positive outlook on death.

“England is just really bad at dealing with death.

“In a way, I think this record is in that tradition of celebrating their lives.

“I did things I’d never done before. I swam in the Ganges in Varanasi.

“I watched the bodies being burnt on the banks of the Ganges.

“In England when we cremate a body we don’t even look at the bodies, it’s covered up immediately and then it’s put in the fire, the little curtains close and that’s it.

“On the banks of the Ganges, every family is there with the body wrapped in a shroud and they’re burnt, and it’s going on everywhere. It goes on 24 hours a day and it’s been going on for thousands of years.

“I took my dad’s ashes there and I cast them in the river. It was very beautiful.”

Indian culture helped shape the record — which will be released in March — with the album’s cover art featuring the title in Devanagari, a script used to write the Indian Sanskrit language.

And this time around the pair will not make their famous, animated music videos and instead are creating a one-off production.

Damon added: “We’re making a full eight-minute thing.

“This is why there are no videos at the moment, because it’s serious stuff. It’s really great that Jamie is concentrating on doing one animated thing.

“It’s a big amount of work, any animation. It’s kind of our Achilles’ heel because no other band has to spend that kind of time just to produce one small thing.

“So let’s make it a piece of art in itself and not really rely on it for the promotional aspect of things and let it breathe in its own way.

“I think fans are going to love every aspect of this record.”

OASIS FLARE-UP

Liam Gallagher lets rip at fan who fired flare into crowd during Oasis gig

TYLA’S MUSSEL BOUND

Tyla goes braless at Glamour Awards before delivering powerful speech

Personally, I cannot wait.

Jen’s perfect pairing

Jennifer Lawrence put on her poshest frock to party in the Big Apple after promoting her new film, Die My Love.

The Hunger Games star appears alongside Robert Pattinson in the black comedy, out this Friday.

And the pair coordinated their outfits for the New York premiere at the AMC Lincoln Square Theater.

J-Law then changed into a blue gown before heading out for a night on the town with her pals.

The actress has a busy few months coming up. She is starring in and producing upcoming murder-mystery movie The Wives, before kicking off a new project with legendary director Martin Scorsese and Leonardo DiCaprio.

Jen and Leo are set to play the leads in a terrifying film adaptation of Peter Cameron’s ghost story, What Happens at Night.

She did the chart double last month but Olivia Dean is keeping her feet firmly on the ground.

The singer scored No1s with her album The Art of Loving and single Man I Need, becoming the first British solo female artist to top both charts simultaneously since Adele in 2021.

Asked whether she’s let her success go to her head, she said: “I don’t think so. I feel like I try really hard and think all the time about not becoming a p***k. That would just be horrible.

“I’ve met some and it’s just like, ‘Oh no, it got to you’.”

On how success depends on the people around you, Olivia continued: “A lot of people work really, really hard. It’s really important to recognise that yes, you’ve worked on your skill or your craft, but all the people around you had to believe in it and be there to make it happen as well.

“It takes a village of people to make an album or do a campaign. There’s a lot that people don’t see.”

It sounds like Olivia has a lot of goals in the future, though – including headlining Glastonbury and releasing an album of standards.

On the And The Writer Is… with Ross Golan podcast, Olivia was also asked if she had written a musical yet.

She said: “No, but I would like to in the future. It’s definitely on the bucket list for me.”

Time to say ’ello to Eli

Hot prospect Eli released debut album Stage Girl at the weekend, jam-packed with infectious melodies.

It looks like her label, RCA Records – also home to Britney Spears, P!nk and Shakira – has unearthed another gem.

But her collection of tunes also features references to a battle with her identity, which the American singer has now overcome.

In an exclusive interview, Eli, who is a trans woman, said of her album: “It was made in a flow state.

“But that was after a year or two of complete wits’ end, last straw, end of the rope, repressing everything under the sun as a human being for 20 years of my life.

“I was just like, ‘I need this joy and I need this super-extravagant pop’.”

Part of her journey of discovery is related to listeners in album highlights Girl of Your Dreams and Falsetto, and Eli now hopes that her music will help people to accept those in the queer community.

She explained: “I like the idea that this is going to play in Walmart in Kansas, for the lady who thinks I’m the spawn of Satan.

“And she’s going to be like, ‘Wow, this song is so good’.

“I feel like there is a sort of trickle-down effect of awareness of my humanity and trans humanity in general.”

Eli is already feeling the love following her album release – Mark Ronson, Demi Lovato and Zara Larsson have all voiced their support and her fan base is growing and growing.

Eli added: “I feel so excited by the community I’m existing in in LA right now.

“I feel like everyone is so supportive of each other.

“And it’s so refreshing and so cool.”

Dazzled by Doja

Doja Cat looked a true member of the glitterati as she joined A-listers for a night out.

The rapper sported a sparkly orange dress at the LACMA Art+Film Gala in Los Angeles and completed the ensemble with a curly blonde wig in a nod to Marilyn Monroe.

This is not the first time she has gained inspiration from the Hollywood legend. At the 2022 Grammys, she wore a custom-made crystal Versace gown – which took 475 hours to make.

Doja attended the fundraising bash alongside a host of stars, including actresses Demi Moore, Salma Hayek and Cynthia Erivo all of whom dazzled in their ’fits.

Keep sparkling, ladies.

Robyn’s return so sexi

Singer Robyn is planning to drop a new single in the next few weeks, then her ninth album in 2026.

It is seven years since the Swedish-born star put out her last collection, Honey, and an industry insider tells me the new one, with alluring title Sexistential, promises to be bigger and better than ever before.

They said: “Robyn has spent years working on this music and has been really inspired by loads of up-and-coming artists.

“She has worked with some very cool people and all the stops are being pulled out for this to be her biggest record in decades.”

Robyn has joined Gracie Abrams and Charli XCX on stage for surprise performances over the past year.

But by the sounds of it, next year she will likely be performing plenty of big gigs of her own.

Cat Burns opens up about losing her grandad and breaking up with a long-time girlfriend on her new album How to Be Human.

The singer and Celebrity Traitors star told The Sunday Times’ Style mag: “While grieving, a quote that stood out to me was: ‘Grief is just love with no place to go’. That helped guide the message of the album.”

A Brum deal for Benson

Benson Boone is due back on stage tonight at London’s O2 Arena after he was forced to cancel his Birmingham show on Saturday.

The Beautiful Things singer, who is on his American Heart World Tour, told fans he wouldn’t have been able to put on the show at the Utilita Arena due to problems with his voice.

COST CUTTER

John Lewis launches early Black Friday sale a MONTH early with up to £300 off

SPY STORY

Telltale clues CHEATERS use to spot you secretly reading their dodgy texts & pics

In a statement, he told fans: “Birmingham I am so so sorry but I will not be able to perform. I have tried everything I can to revive my voice, but I cannot give you the show I’d like to be able to give you with the condition of my throat right now.

“I’m working with my team to find a date to reschedule as soon as possible. I promise I will do everything in my power to make it up to you. I love you guys so much.”

We’re sending you our best, Benson, and we hope you can make the show tonight.