Former Rep. Katie Porter, the 2026 gubernatorial candidate who has a narrow edge in the polls, raised eyebrows Tuesday when footage emerged of her apparently ending a television interview after becoming irritated by a reporter’s questions.
The footage shows CBS Sacramento reporter Julie Watts asking Porter, a Democrat, what she would say to the nearly 6.1 million Californians who voted for President Trump in 2024, and the UC Irvine law professor responding that she didn’t need their support if she competed against a Republican in the November 2026 run-off election to replace termed-out Gov. Gavin Newsom.
After Porter highlighted her experience winning a closely divided Orange County congressional district, she grew palpably irritated by Watts’ follow-up questions about her dismissiveness about needing support from voters who supported Trump.
“I feel like this is unnecessarily argumentative. What is your question?” Porter said.
Watts responded that she had asked every other candidate similar questions in relation to Proposition 50, the redistricting ballot measure that Newsom and other California Democrats put on the ballot in a special election in November.
Porter said she would seek every vote she could win, but then grew testy over follow-up questions.
“I don’t want to keep doing this. I’m going to call it,” Porter said, saying she objected to multiple follow-up questions. “I want to have a pleasant, positive conversation. … And if every question you’re going to make up a follow-up question, then we’re never going to get there.”
She later said, “I don’t want this all on camera.”
Porter, a protege of Mass. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, won election to Congress in 2018 and gained attention for grilling executives and her use of a white board to explain complex policies. The 51-year-old unsuccessfully ran for U.S. Senate in 2024 and returned to teaching law at UC Irvine.
On Tuesday night, Porter’s campaign said that the interview continued for an additional 20 minutes after the heated exchange but did not offer further comment.
The former congresswoman’s Democratic rivals in the 2026 gubernatorial race seized on her comments, and Democratic strategists not associated with any candidate in the race also cringed.
“When you’re governor, you’re governor of everyone, not just the people in your party. It’s a bad look to say you don’t want or need votes from certain Californians, even those you really disagree with,” said Elizabeth Ashford, who served as a strategist for Govs. Jerry Brown and Arnold Schwarzenegger as well as former Vice President Kamala Harris when she was the attorney general of California.
“But, also, even good candidates have bad nights,” Ashford added. “This was a miss for Katie, but not every interview is going to go great.”
I love the mat glass back and the shiny G logo, it just gives off such a confident premium vibe.
The camera bar is pretty much the same as last year too and I’m still undecided about the bulkiness of it, even though it’s quite tidy and neat.
But given the sorts of photos it takes, all that kit has to be packed in somewhere.
The display has had a noticeable upgrade this year, which is brighter and bursting with crisp detail too.
However, the Pixel 10 Pro XL hasn’t been taking a techy dose of Ozempic like Samsung and iPhone this year with thinner models – it weighs 232g, up a bit on last year.
I absolutely adore the new colours this year too, with Moonstone (the one I’m reviewing) Jade, Porcelain and Obsidian.
Sun tests Google’s 100x Pro Res Zoom on new Pixel 10 Pro phone
Google Pixel 10 Pro XL: Performance and features
Google continues to use its own Tensor chip in Pixel smartphones and this year’s Tensor G5 kit is said to be about 35 per cent faster.
It certainly operates smoothly and without any hiccups in my testing – but this chip isn’t as powerful as the Snapdragon chip found in most other top end smartphones around.
The handset runs on Android 16, the latest version of the operating system and it’s my absolute favourite around – which should be a given seeing as Google owns Android.
A lot of the features are centred on AI once again and most are photography based, which I’ll go into later.
But there are some other tools such as Voice Translate, which translates calls in real-time and sounds like each speaker’s own voice.
Having tried it with my partner in French, it was somewhat eerie to hear.
And it’s all done on device, so no sensitive call conversations are sent off to the cloud.
Google is also among the best for offering quick and fast Android upgrades for years to come, with a commitment to seven operating system versions and seven years of security upgrades.
Who offers free updates longest?
The longer you receive updates, the longer you can safely continue using your smartphone – with the latest features thrown in too for free.
Samsung Samsung offers at least seven generations of OS updates and seven years of security updates on most of its smartphones, even its latest cheaper FE model.
OnePlus At the launch of the OnePlus 13, OnePlus committed to at least four years of Android updates and five years of security updates.
Xiaomi Xiaomi offers four years off Android updates and five years security updates.
Google For the Pixel 10 series, Google said that devices would receive at least seven years of support.
Google Pixel 10 Pro XL: Battery
You can easily get a good day’s worth of use out of the Google Pixel 10 Pro XL with a good mix of browsing, messaging and Netflix as I tend to test it on.
But it’s not the best battery around – I got more out of the Galaxy S25 Ultra.
There is fast charging though, that’ll get you from zero to full in about an hour and a half with a compatible plug charger.
Google Pixel 10 Pro XL: Camera
The camera on the Google Pixel 10 Pro XL is where things get really juicy.
You have a treasure trove of powerful lenses paired up with AI power to enhance everything.
There’s a 50-megapixel main camera, 48-megapixel ultrawide and 48-megapixel 5x telephoto, as well as a 42-megapixel selfie snapper.
The photos I get on a Pixel are always super impressive with incredible detail and popping with vibrant colour.
It exudes beauty inside and out, and makes taking stunning photos effortless
This year’s shocker is the Pro Res Zoom which can get extremely detailed shots from a remarkable distance, seeing things my naked eye cannot.
It can go up to an eye-watering 100x.
Anything above 30x onward uses an AI model on the phone to recreate bits lost from digital zoom, so it does raise questions about how real the results are.
Whatever way you look at it, the images are highly convincing, as you’ll see from the snaps I took from the same position below with no zoom, a 10x zoom, a 50x zoom and a 100x zoom.
One thing to note: when using the zoom faces are automatically blurred.
6
No zoomCredit: Jamie Harris / The Sun
6
10x zoomCredit: Jamie Harris / The Sun
6
50x zoomCredit: Jamie Harris / The Sun
6
100x zoomCredit: Jamie Harris / The Sun
Google Pixel 10 Pro XL: Price
One bit of good news about the price is it hasn’t increased from last year’s models.
So the Pixel 10 Pro XL starts at £1,199.
If that’s a bit steep for you, you might want to consider the Pixel 10 Pro instead which has much of the same in a smaller physical form from £999 instead.
There’s also a freebie worth £190 included with all the Pro models.
You get access to Gemini Pro for a whole year, which is Google’s more powerful and fast AI system, capable of extra skills such as Veo 3 Fast for text-to-video generation.
Google Pixel 10 Pro XL: Verdict
The Google Pixel continues to be my favourite Android smartphone around even if little has changed.
It exudes beauty inside and out, and makes taking stunning photos effortless.
I do wish Google would focus on trying to boost the battery a bit though instead of AI features.
And although I’m not a power user myself, those who are will surely appreciate a bigger upgrade in that department too.
Rating: 4 / 5
All prices in this article were correct at the time of writing, but may have since changed.
Always do your own research before making any purchase.
This fourth “The Conjuring” movie claims to be “Last Rites” and let’s hope that’s a promise.
While it’s highly likely the wildly successful Conjuring Cinematic Universe will itself continue — whether via scary nun, creepy doll or some other cursed object — the story of Ed and Lorraine Warren has been thoroughly wrung dry at this point and there’s no juice left to squeeze, as demonstrated in the dirge that is this final movie.
Credit where it’s due: The horror franchise has turned in some spectacularly scary and entertaining entries, anchored by performances from Patrick Wilson and Vera Farmiga as the married paranormal investigators the Warrens, based on an infamous real-life couple. Thanks to their presence, these films have been the best of the Conjuring series, exploring themes of faith and seeing as believing when it comes to both God and the Devil. These films have also offered portrayals of the Warrens that skirt any of their personal controversies, presenting them as blissfully married, heroic figures. Onscreen text might indicate that they were polarizing figures, but the films itself never engage with the scandals.
The first two films, directed by James Wan, ingeniously engaged with many variations on the idea of vision: physical, psychic and through a camera’s lens. Bravura cinematography aligned the audience point of view with Lorraine’s terrifying otherworldly dreams of hauntings, possessions and demonic presence. Michael Chaves, who directed the spinoff “The Nun II” and “The Conjuring: The Devil Made Me Do It,” has mostly upheld these requirements, though his approach is more bombastic than Wan’s elegant style.
Chaves is once again behind the camera for “The Conjuring: Last Rites,” with a script by Ian B. Goldberg, Richard Naing and David Leslie Johnson-McGoldrick that promises to deliver a final Warren case that devastated the family and ended their careers on a dark note. Instead, “Last Rites,” is merely a sluggishly routine send-off for the Warren family.
If you’ve seen a “Conjuring” movie, you’ll know what to expect and “Last Rites” doesn’t break with formula. While the film starts in 1964 with the harrowing birth of the Warren’s beloved daughter Judy, the plot largely takes place in 1986, an annus horribilis for the misbegotten Smurl family from West Pittstown, Penn., haunted by an antique mirror adorned with three carved baby heads, picked up from a swap meet. After a series of unfortunate eventsand increasingly violent visitations, a media frenzy surrounds them and the Warrens turn up to rid the house of creepy crawlies.
This time there’s the added complication of wedding planning: Judy (Mia Tomlinson) is about to get married, but she just can’t shake those pesky psychic flashes she inherited from her mother. Judy is the one who ventures to the Smurl household first. Then her parents, who had been hoping to hang up their ghost-hunting spurs, reluctantly join her for one last ride. Ax-swinging ghouls, terrifying baby dolls and demonic possessions ensue.
In “Last Rites,” the thematic metaphor for seeing is the mirror itself, suggesting that we need to look at the darkest, most terrifying parts of ourselves and not shut them out. Lorraine has tried to protect her girl from the life she has led, facing down the most terrifying demons, ghosts and spooks, but she can’t stop Judy’s destiny and the only way out is to not look away.
“Last Rites” extends the concept of a new generation by incorporating Judy’s fiancé, Tony (Ben Hardy), as a fresh member of the family business. His function in the story is a bit awkward and random, but required for the Warren plotline to end on a high note (that opening bit about the family devastation never seems to come to pass).
The heart of these movies has always been Wilson and Farmiga, and without them, the “Conjuring” movies wouldn’t be worth it. With this fourth movie, the Warren lore has been so thoroughly picked over, the tropes and rhythms now so ingrained, the jump scares end up feeling routine at best. Enduring the dour drudgery of “Last Rites,” it’s never been clearer that it’s time to give up the ghost.
Katie Walsh is a Tribune News Service film critic.
The undercover journalist (L) works alongside BBC correspondent Andrew Harding (R)
The findings of a year-long undercover investigation into a violent migrant-smuggling gang were published by BBC News on 5 August – and, as a result, one person has now been arrested in Birmingham.
Here, one of our reporters who assumed a false identity and posed as a migrant, describes how he met one of the gang’s senior members in a secret forest hideout.
I am walking towards the forest near Dunkirk, thinking about the battery in my pocket. I’ve hidden the wires under two T-shirts, but is anything still showing? Is my secret camera working? Is it pointing at the right angle? I have, at most, three hours of battery life left, and I need to get to the smuggler’s secret camp, meet him, and get out safely.
This is perhaps the most dangerous and most important moment for me, the culmination of many months working on this investigation with the team.
There is a small team of high-risk advisors watching my back. With gang members monitoring everyone who enters the forest, I worry my advisors may may end up exposing me rather than protecting me. But they play it perfectly and keep a low profile.
I’m using a false name. My clothes are similar to those worn by other people trying to get a ride on a small boat to England. Scuffed, old shoes. A big, warm, dirty, jacket. A backpack that I’ve spent time trying to make look worn, as if I have travelled long, hard miles to get here.
I keep going over my cover story in my head. The excuses I might need to get away quickly. The possible scenarios. We have planned and planned, but I know nothing ever goes exactly as expected in the field.
I am an Arabic-speaking man and have gone undercover before – but each time is different, and carries different risks.
Over the past couple of years, I’ve spent a long time in northern France, trying to understand and expose the people smugglers’ complicated and shadowy operations. It was not an easy decision to infiltrate a violent criminal network.
I’m entering a world ruled by money, power and silence. But I’m not just curious – I also believe the gangs are not as untouchable as they seem and that I can play a role in exposing them and perhaps helping to stop them.
Inside the forest, my nervousness fades. I am “Abu Ahmed” now – my false identity. I don’t even feel like I’m acting a part.
I’m new in town, a Syrian refugee whose asylum bid was rejected by Germany. I’m scared, desperate, a little lost and at the beginning of an uncertain journey.
I walk down a path to the smugglers’ camp trying to remember the way I came in.
Our reporter meets and secretly films Abdullah inside his forest camp
When the smuggler, Abdullah, meets me, he is friendly but he says he needs to leave immediately. I try to sound weary. I must persuade him to wait, to talk to me quickly, while my battery is still working. Then, I can get out of there.
Abdullah suspects nothing and seems entirely at ease. But I know the smugglers have guns and knives and there is only one path that leads in and out of the camp.
A day later, away from the forest, I see online that there has been another fatal shooting there.
One of the most difficult things during my time undercover, in the weeks before I meet Abdullah, is keeping track of the phone numbers. Gang members change them often, and sometimes you can lose months of work in a second. At times I’ve lost hope, seeing everything fall apart. But I keep learning.
I spend a lot of time meeting people waiting for small boats around Calais or Boulogne, asking them which gang they are using, which phone numbers they have. Early mornings are spent at train stations, food distribution centres, or on the edge of forests and beaches. Sometimes I just watch, trying to melt into a crowd, to overhear conversations, to spot glances and gestures and to see who leads and who follows.
I must be careful. I move from place to place in different cars over the weeks, and generally try to disappear into the background. I don’t want to do or say anything that could bring me to the attention of the smugglers. They have so many eyes and ears here, and if they become suspicious, it could be dangerous for me.
Our undercover reporter receives texts from Abdullah telling him where to find the camp
Am I scared? Not too often. I have engaged with even more dangerous groups in the past. But I am worried I could make a mistake, forget a detail, and blow my cover. Or at least one of my covers.
I switch phones too, contacting smugglers using different names and back stories to try to piece together who works where and what they do. I label each phone. I have French, German, Turkish and Syrian numbers. It is slow work. I’m careful to make sure I’m in the right place whenever I make a call, in case the smuggler asks me to turn on my video or send a pin showing my location.
The smugglers always ask me, “Where did you get the number?” And, “Who is with you? Where are you staying? How did you get to France?”
Now Abdullah does the same, asking me to send photos showing my journey to the forest from a bus stop in Dunkirk.
Does he suspect me?
In person in the forest, Abdullah appears friendlier than most of the smugglers I have encountered. I notice he seems keen to make all his passengers feel at ease, always responding to calls. He strikes me as ambitious.
The camp is surrounded by trees
Over time, I learn some of the gang’s vocabulary. Migrants are “nafar”. The junior smugglers are “rebari”. The forest is always “the jungle”.
And now it is time for me to leave the jungle and to head back towards my team who are waiting, anxiously, at a nearby supermarket.
As I leave the forest and get to the road, I’m no longer “Abu Ahmed”. I’m a journalist again, tortured by questions.
Did the camera work? Did I manage to film Abdullah confirming his role as a smuggler? Is anyone following me now?
‘I don’t want this all on camera,’ gubernatorial candidate Katie Porter says in testy interview
Former Rep. Katie Porter, the 2026 gubernatorial candidate who has a narrow edge in the polls, raised eyebrows Tuesday when footage emerged of her apparently ending a television interview after becoming irritated by a reporter’s questions.
The footage shows CBS Sacramento reporter Julie Watts asking Porter, a Democrat, what she would say to the nearly 6.1 million Californians who voted for President Trump in 2024, and the UC Irvine law professor responding that she didn’t need their support if she competed against a Republican in the November 2026 run-off election to replace termed-out Gov. Gavin Newsom.
After Porter highlighted her experience winning a closely divided Orange County congressional district, she grew palpably irritated by Watts’ follow-up questions about her dismissiveness about needing support from voters who supported Trump.
“I feel like this is unnecessarily argumentative. What is your question?” Porter said.
Watts responded that she had asked every other candidate similar questions in relation to Proposition 50, the redistricting ballot measure that Newsom and other California Democrats put on the ballot in a special election in November.
Porter said she would seek every vote she could win, but then grew testy over follow-up questions.
“I don’t want to keep doing this. I’m going to call it,” Porter said, saying she objected to multiple follow-up questions. “I want to have a pleasant, positive conversation. … And if every question you’re going to make up a follow-up question, then we’re never going to get there.”
She later said, “I don’t want this all on camera.”
Porter, a protege of Mass. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, won election to Congress in 2018 and gained attention for grilling executives and her use of a white board to explain complex policies. The 51-year-old unsuccessfully ran for U.S. Senate in 2024 and returned to teaching law at UC Irvine.
On Tuesday night, Porter’s campaign said that the interview continued for an additional 20 minutes after the heated exchange but did not offer further comment.
The former congresswoman’s Democratic rivals in the 2026 gubernatorial race seized on her comments, and Democratic strategists not associated with any candidate in the race also cringed.
“When you’re governor, you’re governor of everyone, not just the people in your party. It’s a bad look to say you don’t want or need votes from certain Californians, even those you really disagree with,” said Elizabeth Ashford, who served as a strategist for Govs. Jerry Brown and Arnold Schwarzenegger as well as former Vice President Kamala Harris when she was the attorney general of California.
“But, also, even good candidates have bad nights,” Ashford added. “This was a miss for Katie, but not every interview is going to go great.”
Source link
I tested Google’s new Pixel 10 Pro XL & was horrified by how GOOD the camera is – it comes with free perk worth £190 too
GOOGLE has always excelled when it comes to smartphone cameras – but the latest effort might have gone too far.
When I tried out the new Google Pixel 10 Pro XL’s star feature I gasped and said “Good God”.
6
6
I showed friends some of the results and they were stunned – if a little disturbed – by what the device’s mega zoom was capable of.
My colleague Sean Keach has already tried the smaller Pixel 10 Pro and has given his verdict on the identical camera features on there too.
But is it all worth it?
As The Sun’s main Android smartphone reviewer I’ve been putting the Pixel 10 Pro XL through its paces and here’s what I found…
Google Pixel 10 Pro XL: Look and feel
Google has stuck to a pretty consistent, solid look on the Pixel 10 Pro XL.
As ever with annual upgrades, you may even struggle to tell the difference between last year’s Pixel 9 Pro XL which I also reviewed.
I love the mat glass back and the shiny G logo, it just gives off such a confident premium vibe.
The camera bar is pretty much the same as last year too and I’m still undecided about the bulkiness of it, even though it’s quite tidy and neat.
But given the sorts of photos it takes, all that kit has to be packed in somewhere.
The display has had a noticeable upgrade this year, which is brighter and bursting with crisp detail too.
However, the Pixel 10 Pro XL hasn’t been taking a techy dose of Ozempic like Samsung and iPhone this year with thinner models – it weighs 232g, up a bit on last year.
I absolutely adore the new colours this year too, with Moonstone (the one I’m reviewing) Jade, Porcelain and Obsidian.
Google Pixel 10 Pro XL: Performance and features
Google continues to use its own Tensor chip in Pixel smartphones and this year’s Tensor G5 kit is said to be about 35 per cent faster.
It certainly operates smoothly and without any hiccups in my testing – but this chip isn’t as powerful as the Snapdragon chip found in most other top end smartphones around.
The handset runs on Android 16, the latest version of the operating system and it’s my absolute favourite around – which should be a given seeing as Google owns Android.
A lot of the features are centred on AI once again and most are photography based, which I’ll go into later.
But there are some other tools such as Voice Translate, which translates calls in real-time and sounds like each speaker’s own voice.
Having tried it with my partner in French, it was somewhat eerie to hear.
And it’s all done on device, so no sensitive call conversations are sent off to the cloud.
Google is also among the best for offering quick and fast Android upgrades for years to come, with a commitment to seven operating system versions and seven years of security upgrades.
Who offers free updates longest?
The longer you receive updates, the longer you can safely continue using your smartphone – with the latest features thrown in too for free.
Samsung
Samsung offers at least seven generations of OS updates and seven years of security updates on most of its smartphones, even its latest cheaper FE model.
OnePlus
At the launch of the OnePlus 13, OnePlus committed to at least four years of Android updates and five years of security updates.
Xiaomi
Xiaomi offers four years off Android updates and five years security updates.
Google
For the Pixel 10 series, Google said that devices would receive at least seven years of support.
Google Pixel 10 Pro XL: Battery
You can easily get a good day’s worth of use out of the Google Pixel 10 Pro XL with a good mix of browsing, messaging and Netflix as I tend to test it on.
But it’s not the best battery around – I got more out of the Galaxy S25 Ultra.
There is fast charging though, that’ll get you from zero to full in about an hour and a half with a compatible plug charger.
Google Pixel 10 Pro XL: Camera
The camera on the Google Pixel 10 Pro XL is where things get really juicy.
You have a treasure trove of powerful lenses paired up with AI power to enhance everything.
There’s a 50-megapixel main camera, 48-megapixel ultrawide and 48-megapixel 5x telephoto, as well as a 42-megapixel selfie snapper.
The photos I get on a Pixel are always super impressive with incredible detail and popping with vibrant colour.
This year’s shocker is the Pro Res Zoom which can get extremely detailed shots from a remarkable distance, seeing things my naked eye cannot.
It can go up to an eye-watering 100x.
Anything above 30x onward uses an AI model on the phone to recreate bits lost from digital zoom, so it does raise questions about how real the results are.
Whatever way you look at it, the images are highly convincing, as you’ll see from the snaps I took from the same position below with no zoom, a 10x zoom, a 50x zoom and a 100x zoom.
One thing to note: when using the zoom faces are automatically blurred.
6
6
6
6
Google Pixel 10 Pro XL: Price
One bit of good news about the price is it hasn’t increased from last year’s models.
So the Pixel 10 Pro XL starts at £1,199.
If that’s a bit steep for you, you might want to consider the Pixel 10 Pro instead which has much of the same in a smaller physical form from £999 instead.
There’s also a freebie worth £190 included with all the Pro models.
You get access to Gemini Pro for a whole year, which is Google’s more powerful and fast AI system, capable of extra skills such as Veo 3 Fast for text-to-video generation.
Google Pixel 10 Pro XL: Verdict
The Google Pixel continues to be my favourite Android smartphone around even if little has changed.
It exudes beauty inside and out, and makes taking stunning photos effortless.
I do wish Google would focus on trying to boost the battery a bit though instead of AI features.
And although I’m not a power user myself, those who are will surely appreciate a bigger upgrade in that department too.
Rating: 4 / 5
All prices in this article were correct at the time of writing, but may have since changed.
Always do your own research before making any purchase.
Source link
Urgent hunt for missing 18-year-old girl as cops release doorbell camera image showing her leave home
COPS have released CCTV footage as part of an urgent hunt to help find a missing 18-year-old girl.
Concerns are growing for Lily Higgins, who was last seen leaving her home in Leicester, Leicestershire, yesterday afternoon.
2
2
Video taken from her doorbell camera shows the teenager leaving her address in Torridon Close at around 2.30pm.
She was reported missing by her concerned family just before 8pm.
Drones have been deployed in the area as officers urgently search for the missing teen.
The youngster is described as being 5ft 2in, of a slim build with long blonde hair.
She was last seen wearing a black puffer coat, black jogging bottoms, a checked scarf and black trainers.
Leicestershire Police confirmed specialist teams were hunting for Lily.
The force said: “Police have released an image take from the home doorbell camera that shows Lily leaving the home address.
“A specialist search team are currently out looking for Lily.
“The police drone has also been used to assist with searching.
“Anyone who has seen her or has information that could assist in the police search, call 101, quoting incident number 621 of 17 September.”
More to follow… For the latest news on this story keep checking back at The Sun Online
Thesun.co.uk is your go-to destination for the best celebrity news, real-life stories, jaw-dropping pictures and must-see video.
Like us on Facebook at www.facebook.com/thesun and follow us from our main Twitter account at @TheSun.
Source link
‘The Conjuring: Last Rites’ review: Puts a tombstone on a slackening series
This fourth “The Conjuring” movie claims to be “Last Rites” and let’s hope that’s a promise.
While it’s highly likely the wildly successful Conjuring Cinematic Universe will itself continue — whether via scary nun, creepy doll or some other cursed object — the story of Ed and Lorraine Warren has been thoroughly wrung dry at this point and there’s no juice left to squeeze, as demonstrated in the dirge that is this final movie.
Credit where it’s due: The horror franchise has turned in some spectacularly scary and entertaining entries, anchored by performances from Patrick Wilson and Vera Farmiga as the married paranormal investigators the Warrens, based on an infamous real-life couple. Thanks to their presence, these films have been the best of the Conjuring series, exploring themes of faith and seeing as believing when it comes to both God and the Devil. These films have also offered portrayals of the Warrens that skirt any of their personal controversies, presenting them as blissfully married, heroic figures. Onscreen text might indicate that they were polarizing figures, but the films itself never engage with the scandals.
The first two films, directed by James Wan, ingeniously engaged with many variations on the idea of vision: physical, psychic and through a camera’s lens. Bravura cinematography aligned the audience point of view with Lorraine’s terrifying otherworldly dreams of hauntings, possessions and demonic presence. Michael Chaves, who directed the spinoff “The Nun II” and “The Conjuring: The Devil Made Me Do It,” has mostly upheld these requirements, though his approach is more bombastic than Wan’s elegant style.
Chaves is once again behind the camera for “The Conjuring: Last Rites,” with a script by Ian B. Goldberg, Richard Naing and David Leslie Johnson-McGoldrick that promises to deliver a final Warren case that devastated the family and ended their careers on a dark note. Instead, “Last Rites,” is merely a sluggishly routine send-off for the Warren family.
If you’ve seen a “Conjuring” movie, you’ll know what to expect and “Last Rites” doesn’t break with formula. While the film starts in 1964 with the harrowing birth of the Warren’s beloved daughter Judy, the plot largely takes place in 1986, an annus horribilis for the misbegotten Smurl family from West Pittstown, Penn., haunted by an antique mirror adorned with three carved baby heads, picked up from a swap meet. After a series of unfortunate eventsand increasingly violent visitations, a media frenzy surrounds them and the Warrens turn up to rid the house of creepy crawlies.
This time there’s the added complication of wedding planning: Judy (Mia Tomlinson) is about to get married, but she just can’t shake those pesky psychic flashes she inherited from her mother. Judy is the one who ventures to the Smurl household first. Then her parents, who had been hoping to hang up their ghost-hunting spurs, reluctantly join her for one last ride. Ax-swinging ghouls, terrifying baby dolls and demonic possessions ensue.
In “Last Rites,” the thematic metaphor for seeing is the mirror itself, suggesting that we need to look at the darkest, most terrifying parts of ourselves and not shut them out. Lorraine has tried to protect her girl from the life she has led, facing down the most terrifying demons, ghosts and spooks, but she can’t stop Judy’s destiny and the only way out is to not look away.
“Last Rites” extends the concept of a new generation by incorporating Judy’s fiancé, Tony (Ben Hardy), as a fresh member of the family business. His function in the story is a bit awkward and random, but required for the Warren plotline to end on a high note (that opening bit about the family devastation never seems to come to pass).
The heart of these movies has always been Wilson and Farmiga, and without them, the “Conjuring” movies wouldn’t be worth it. With this fourth movie, the Warren lore has been so thoroughly picked over, the tropes and rhythms now so ingrained, the jump scares end up feeling routine at best. Enduring the dour drudgery of “Last Rites,” it’s never been clearer that it’s time to give up the ghost.
Katie Walsh is a Tribune News Service film critic.
‘The Conjuring: Last Rites’
Rated: R, for bloody/violent content and terror
Running time: 2 hours, 15 minutes
Playing: In wide release Friday, Sept. 5
Source link
‘Is my secret camera working?’
BBC News
The findings of a year-long undercover investigation into a violent migrant-smuggling gang were published by BBC News on 5 August – and, as a result, one person has now been arrested in Birmingham.
Here, one of our reporters who assumed a false identity and posed as a migrant, describes how he met one of the gang’s senior members in a secret forest hideout.
I am walking towards the forest near Dunkirk, thinking about the battery in my pocket. I’ve hidden the wires under two T-shirts, but is anything still showing? Is my secret camera working? Is it pointing at the right angle? I have, at most, three hours of battery life left, and I need to get to the smuggler’s secret camp, meet him, and get out safely.
This is perhaps the most dangerous and most important moment for me, the culmination of many months working on this investigation with the team.
There is a small team of high-risk advisors watching my back. With gang members monitoring everyone who enters the forest, I worry my advisors may may end up exposing me rather than protecting me. But they play it perfectly and keep a low profile.
I’m using a false name. My clothes are similar to those worn by other people trying to get a ride on a small boat to England. Scuffed, old shoes. A big, warm, dirty, jacket. A backpack that I’ve spent time trying to make look worn, as if I have travelled long, hard miles to get here.
I keep going over my cover story in my head. The excuses I might need to get away quickly. The possible scenarios. We have planned and planned, but I know nothing ever goes exactly as expected in the field.
I am an Arabic-speaking man and have gone undercover before – but each time is different, and carries different risks.
Over the past couple of years, I’ve spent a long time in northern France, trying to understand and expose the people smugglers’ complicated and shadowy operations. It was not an easy decision to infiltrate a violent criminal network.
I’m entering a world ruled by money, power and silence. But I’m not just curious – I also believe the gangs are not as untouchable as they seem and that I can play a role in exposing them and perhaps helping to stop them.
Inside the forest, my nervousness fades. I am “Abu Ahmed” now – my false identity. I don’t even feel like I’m acting a part.
I’m new in town, a Syrian refugee whose asylum bid was rejected by Germany. I’m scared, desperate, a little lost and at the beginning of an uncertain journey.
I walk down a path to the smugglers’ camp trying to remember the way I came in.
When the smuggler, Abdullah, meets me, he is friendly but he says he needs to leave immediately. I try to sound weary. I must persuade him to wait, to talk to me quickly, while my battery is still working. Then, I can get out of there.
Abdullah suspects nothing and seems entirely at ease. But I know the smugglers have guns and knives and there is only one path that leads in and out of the camp.
A day later, away from the forest, I see online that there has been another fatal shooting there.
One of the most difficult things during my time undercover, in the weeks before I meet Abdullah, is keeping track of the phone numbers. Gang members change them often, and sometimes you can lose months of work in a second. At times I’ve lost hope, seeing everything fall apart. But I keep learning.
I spend a lot of time meeting people waiting for small boats around Calais or Boulogne, asking them which gang they are using, which phone numbers they have. Early mornings are spent at train stations, food distribution centres, or on the edge of forests and beaches. Sometimes I just watch, trying to melt into a crowd, to overhear conversations, to spot glances and gestures and to see who leads and who follows.
I must be careful. I move from place to place in different cars over the weeks, and generally try to disappear into the background. I don’t want to do or say anything that could bring me to the attention of the smugglers. They have so many eyes and ears here, and if they become suspicious, it could be dangerous for me.
Am I scared? Not too often. I have engaged with even more dangerous groups in the past. But I am worried I could make a mistake, forget a detail, and blow my cover. Or at least one of my covers.
I switch phones too, contacting smugglers using different names and back stories to try to piece together who works where and what they do. I label each phone. I have French, German, Turkish and Syrian numbers. It is slow work. I’m careful to make sure I’m in the right place whenever I make a call, in case the smuggler asks me to turn on my video or send a pin showing my location.
The smugglers always ask me, “Where did you get the number?” And, “Who is with you? Where are you staying? How did you get to France?”
Now Abdullah does the same, asking me to send photos showing my journey to the forest from a bus stop in Dunkirk.
Does he suspect me?
In person in the forest, Abdullah appears friendlier than most of the smugglers I have encountered. I notice he seems keen to make all his passengers feel at ease, always responding to calls. He strikes me as ambitious.
Over time, I learn some of the gang’s vocabulary. Migrants are “nafar”. The junior smugglers are “rebari”. The forest is always “the jungle”.
And now it is time for me to leave the jungle and to head back towards my team who are waiting, anxiously, at a nearby supermarket.
As I leave the forest and get to the road, I’m no longer “Abu Ahmed”. I’m a journalist again, tortured by questions.
Did the camera work? Did I manage to film Abdullah confirming his role as a smuggler? Is anyone following me now?
The walk back seems even longer.
Source link