place

As Jasmine Harman addresses her husband’s heart attack in her brand new series, the Mirror takes a look at the A Place In The Sun star’s family heartbreaks, including the devastating loss of her sister-in-law

A Place In The Sun star Jasmine Harman has opened up about her husband’s heart attack horror, and it’s sadly not the first family struggle she’s endured.

While filming a recent episode of Jasmine’s Renovations In The Sun, 46-year-old cameraman Jon Boast, whom Jasmine met on the set of A Place In The Sun, began suffering persistent chest pains while renovating their family home in Estepona, Spain.

In dramatic scenes that aired yesterday, Jasmine, who will this week celebrate her 50th birthday, told viewers: “So, we’re at the hospital now. Jon had a funny turn at home, and I had to call an ambulance, but he’s sleeping now, having a little rest. Hopefully it’s nothing serious, but we’re just waiting for some test results.”

Giving an update from his hospital bed, brave Jon said: “Just when we thought we were getting back to normal life, or as normal as life could be, mid-renovation, and I was getting back on my feet.

“This afternoon, when we were with one of the builders, I got sort of pains in my chest and tight chested, aching arms. We called an ambulance and now I’m in hospital, and the blood test results suggest that I’ve had a mild heart attack.”

Speaking out for the first time about the ordeal, Jasmine told The Mirror that Jon has recovered and is back working. She said: “I know this sounds strange, but even with the background of what could have happened and worrying he could have died, it makes you feel lucky he just had a mild heart attack and everything is fine. But the challenges life throws at you has made me take things in my stride a lot better than I used to.”

Here, the Mirror takes a look at some of the painful heartbreaks mum-of-two Jasmine and her family have had to deal with over the years…

READ MORE: Jasmine Harman breaks silence after husband’s heart attack horror

Tragic loss of sister-in-law

Back in 2016, Jon tragically lost his sister, Joanne ‘Jo’ White, who died suddenly after going into cardiac arrest. Jo was just 40 years old, and her death came as a terrible shock to loved ones. In the years since, Jon has thrown himself into supporting CRY, a charity which helps to screen for cardiac risk among young people.

A video previously shared via Jasmine’s Instagram sees a tearful Jon announce: “I support CRY in memory of my amazing sister, Joanne White. [She] passed away suddenly in the night in 2016, from sudden cardiac death.

“Jo was an amazing mother, daughter, auntie, wife and sister. The reason I support CRY is they were there for her family when she was taken so suddenly, offering us guidance and immediate screening.”

Asserting that Jo would have wanted her story to be used to raise awareness, Jon continued: “CRY continue to support us with yearly heart screenings of myself and some of Jo’s family. […] Any funds raised will continue to support the amazing work CRY do in their research, the screening of young people for potential heart problems and raising awareness of young, unexplained cardiac deaths.”

In her new series, Jasmine explained that she and Jon had decided to move to Spain partly because of the shock of losing Jo. She said: “She was fit, well and very healthy. It was a very big shock.”

Baby agony

Jasmine and Jon share two children together, Joy and Albion, but their road to a happy family life was far from easy. Opening up in an interview with Fabulous magazine, Jasmine, whose two children were both welcomed via IVF, spoke candidly about the heartache she and Jon faced when trying to expand their family.

Back in 2017, the couple had tried for baby number three, only for their hopes to be dashed when the embryo didn’t implant. Jasmine shared: “Sadly, when we tried for a third baby in 2017, our embryo didn’t implant. This came so soon after losing Jon’s sister, Jo, who died suddenly at 40 from an unexplained heart problem.”

She continued: “We’d hoped that welcoming a new baby might have lifted the family and brought fresh joy after such a painful time, but instead we were reminded how fragile and precious life can be.”

Mum’s extreme condition

Although Jasmine is well used to looking around beautiful homes, she faced a very different sort of challenge in 2011, having set about helping her extreme hoarder mother clear away 30 years’ worth of clutter. This emotional journey was highlighted in the BBC doc My Hoarder Mum & Me, which resonated with many viewers.

In a candid 2023 episode of This Morning, the property guru gave a heartfelt joint interview with mum Vasoulla, admitting that she previously found her condition “embarrassing”, and feared it would affect the career she’d worked so hard for.

Speaking with Dermot O’Leary and Allison Hammond, Jasmine shared: “In fact, when I started working in television, it was my biggest fear that someone would find out about the way I’d grown up and the way that we lived at the time.”

However, gaining a deeper understanding of her mother’s hoarding and where it stems from has helped her prioritise “having a loving relationship” with Vasoulla, putting aside the fights they once had.

Recognised as a mental health disorder as of 2013, the World Health Organisation (WHO) defines hoarding as “an accumulation of possessions due to excessive acquisition of, or difficulty discarding possessions, regardless of their actual value”.

During the same interview, Vasoulla explained that the 1958 murder of her father, Evangelos, who was just 32 when he died, triggered her anxiety-based disorder. After the killing, Vasoulla and her mother Maria fled their home country of Cyprus for England, and it’s then that the hoarding started.

According to Vasoulla: “We moved from Cyprus when I was about three, so I left my baby things back home and started collecting trinkets in bombed-out houses that were still about in the early Sixties, after the war – trinkets that I treasured.

“Then we moved back to Cyprus for a couple of years, and those things all got lost. Then we moved back to England and all my new ties got lost – so I just had lots of upheaval, lots of loss.”

She continued: “It’s more the loss, like a bereavement. Losing your father is a big thing, moving country …you lose everything, and you get a new place to live. The trauma of loss [is] something that a lot of people have as the onset of their hoarding behaviour.”

Jasmine’s Renovation In The Sun is now available to watch on Channel 4.

Do you have a story to share? Email me at [email protected]

READ MORE: ‘Lush launches skin-friendly make-up and this product exceeded all my expectations’

The Norwegian Fjords have been named the world’s most beautiful cruise destination, boasting picture-perfect landscapes, dramatic rocky coastlines, and charming fishing villages

Cruise fans have crowned the world’s most picturesque cruise destination, and it’s a stone’s throw away for Brits – nestled right here in Europe. The Norwegian Fjords are already a must-see on any travel enthusiast’s list.

In the spring and summer months, passengers can feast their eyes on the breathtaking views of the dramatic rocky landscapes, lush greenery, quaint fishing villages and idyllic waterfront towns that could easily grace a postcard. As winter sets in, the Fjords transform into a magical winter wonderland. Additionally, from October to February, certain regions offer the opportunity to witness the mesmerizing Northern Lights.

In fact, the night skies are set to become even more spectacular.

If you’ve always dreamt of ticking the Aurora Borealis off your bucket list, then a cruise in January or February 2026 might be just the ticket. This is because 2026 is predicted to be the best year in a decade for viewing the Northern Lights, thanks to a once-in-a-decade phenomenon known as the solar maximum.

This rare event occurs when the Sun’s heightened magnetic activity releases charged particles that collide with Earth’s atmosphere, resulting in brighter and more frequent auroras, reports the Express.

READ MORE: Everything Disneyland’s dress code bans including strict costume rulesREAD MORE: Three new TUI routes to beautiful island with 24C November weather and £3.50 beer

Scientists anticipate this spectacle to peak by March 2026, before gradually fading again until the mid-2030s.

The closer you are to the Arctic Circle, the better your chances of seeing the Northern Lights. So, if you’re looking to maximise your chances, consider heading to Tromsø, the Lofoten Islands, Alta, or Svalbard.

But if you’re after more than just chasing the Aurora, the Norwegian Fjords could be the perfect blend of adventure and opportunity to see those mesmerising green skies.

Even without the Northern Lights, there’s plenty to see and do in this stunning region. The breathtaking landscapes have been a source of inspiration for poets, novelists, and artists for generations.

Nestled among awe-inspiring mountains and valleys, these narrow fjords boast everything from stunning waterfalls to incredible glaciers. It’s this abundance of natural beauty that has led the Norwegian Fjords to be named the world’s most beautiful cruise destination by Cruise118.com.

Sharon Hodgkiess, Sales and Customer Experience Director for the brand, said: “Seeing Norway from the deck of a ship is a once-in-a-lifetime experience. Each fjord has its own charm, including sights such as mountains, waterfalls, hamlets and mountainside farms.”

If you’re considering a cruise for your next holiday, Sharon has some advice.

She suggests: “Think carefully about what you want from your cruise and select one that aligns with your travel style and interests. If you love nature and scenery, Norway or Alaska are unbeatable. If you’re after sun and relaxation, lean more towards destinations such as the East and West Mediterranean.”

Got a travel tale to tell? Drop us an email at [email protected]

It was going to make California count, make it a contender after decades spent watching all those other pipsqueak states decide who among the legions of presidential candidates got to move into the Oval Office.

When California legislators–and Gov. Pete Wilson–agreed two years ago to move the state’s 1996 presidential primary forward from June to March, you could almost hear the silent chortles: Take that, New Hampshire! Back to the farm, Iowa!

And now that the state’s early presidential primary is a mere six months away, the nation’s most delegate-rich state can witness the result:

Nothing.

Sure, the candidates still plumb the state for money, just as they did in the old days. But apart from President Clinton’s trips, there are precious few actual campaign visits and little attention given to the issues peculiar to California. Even Wilson spent more than twice as much time out of state last month than he did tending to matters in Sacramento.

Some candidates still believe that California could ultimately play a big role in selecting the Republican nominee, even given the current dearth of activity. The state, after all, controls about 16%–or 163 of the 991–delegates needed to win the Republican nomination.

Scenarios abound, with California either putting a runaway victor over the top or deciding between two strong candidates. Then again, it could also add to a muddle of results that would force the nomination to be decided weeks later.

“California is going to play a significant role,” said Mark Helmke, communications director for Indiana Sen. Richard Lugar, who announced his candidacy in April. “It’s just that none of us could speculate on what that role is.”

Others in the perennially optimistic corps of campaign activists insist that California won’t matter because the front-runner (their candidate, of course) will have it all sewn up beforehand.

“The problem is that California is too late. This thing is going to end in the industrial Midwest,” said Mike Murphy, a senior aide in the campaign of former Tennessee Gov. Lamar Alexander. Murphy was referring to a ring of primaries to be held the week before California’s.

This underwhelming outcome was utterly predictable, according to campaign seers. And there are both logical and logistic reasons.

California moved its primary up, but only to March 26, six weeks after the campaign-opening Iowa caucuses. Not eager to be left in the dust, a host of other states began to clamor.

New York, with the third-largest delegate pool, moved from early April to early March. Pennsylvania and Ohio moved from late spring to March 19, where they will join Illinois, Michigan and Wisconsin in the massive Rust Belt regional primary.

The New England states of Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Vermont and Maine similarly coalesced into a Yankee primary on March 5–three weeks before California’s primary.

All the movement left California in 32nd place in the 1996 campaign chronology, only slightly better positioned than if it had left the primary in June.

“We were dead last, along with New Jersey and a few other states,” said state Sen. Jim Costa (D-Fresno), who lobbied for an early primary for 14 long years. “We’re better off than we were then. We’re just not significantly better off.”

Because the early primary is a one-year experiment, legislators will have to take up its fate after next year. Costa said that he may propose moving it up even further for the 2000 election.

The state senator initially wanted to set this year’s primary for March 5, which would have made California the first big state on the election calendar. But he compromised with others in the Legislature, who argued that the state is so big that it would swallow up all but the richest candidates. Give the poorer candidates a chance to make their mark in earlier, smaller states, the argument went, and then their momentum could offset their lack of funds in California.

The upshot is this: Candidates are still cozying up to Iowa, whose caucuses are scheduled for Feb. 12, and New Hampshire, whose first-in-the-nation primary will be held eight days later.

They are patting backs and kissing babies in South Carolina, whose primary will be held March 2, on the grounds that it will serve either as a fire wall to block a surging campaign or will redouble the momentum of an earlier winner.

They are courting voters elsewhere in the South, where the Super Tuesday primary will be held March 12 and where voters will decide the fates of at least two of their own, Texas’ Phil Gramm and Tennessee’s Alexander.

All of this makes compelling strategic sense.

“The first focus has to be the first caucus and primaries,” said Charles Robbins, a spokesman for Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter. “They come first and if you don’t perform, you’re out of the game.”

Put another way, it would be political malpractice for a candidate to hang out in California when his time is better spent in the earlier states. Compounding matters is California’s status as a winner-take-all primary. That means a candidate who put all his marbles into the state and pulled, say, 48% of the vote would walk away without a delegate. Many other states dispense their delegates proportionally.

“No candidate is going to make a serious commitment to resources in a March primary simply because there’s no guarantee you’re going to get that far,” said an adviser to one of the campaigns. “It’s a huge gamble to put up that money and risk walking away with nothing.”

Another hindrance to actively campaigning in California is the fact that the state is so far from Washington, where no less than six of the nine Republican candidates are based.

One recent Thursday, for example, Specter jetted from Washington to Boston, held two campaign events and was back in the Capitol for Senate business by lunchtime.

“You can’t do that to California,” said his aide Robbins. “Just because of the geography, all the way on the other side of the country, it’s a real project.”

While the Republican candidates have not spent much time in California, their campaigns are starting to lay the foundations of an effort here.

Wilson’s campaign is rebuilding his longstanding organization, despite prominent defections to other camps and surveys that show the governor losing the state to front-runner Bob Dole of Kansas.

Besides having the only full-fledged campaign office in the state, Wilson’s operation has staffers specifically working to buoy his standing here, said spokesman Dan Schnur.

“For all their talk, none of the other campaigns are putting any time or energy into California at all,” he said. “They file in and out for fund-raisers, but beyond that there’s no indication of any serious organizational effort on the part of any of them.”

Wilson does have a leg up, but his opponents argue that his campaign may have folded by late March or, even if he stays in the race, they may be able to build enthusiasm here from the momentum of earlier victories.

Gramm has made the biggest splash, garnering the support of Republican legislative leaders Curt Pringle and Rob Hurtt, both of Orange County, and a host of activists. U.S. Rep. Christopher Cox of Newport Beach, who is heading Gramm’s California campaign, said the effort so far is a “very well-organized, low dollar” effort.

It will remain entirely a volunteer effort through the end of the year, he said.

“When you’re running statewide in California, it’s important to have money when it counts, not lavishly throw it around months in advance,” Cox said.

Dole has been here infrequently, but has tried to make a big splash when he has come. He salted one Los Angeles fund-raising trip with a high-profile assault on the entertainment industry.

Overall, the Dole campaign said, it has raised $1.5 million in its visits to California.

“Some analysts are suggesting that it will all be over before California,” said Dole spokesman Nelson Warfield. “Our attitude is that we are contesting every state very vigorously. We’re proceeding on the assumption that it is up for grabs.”

Former television commentator Patrick J. Buchanan has made three multi-day fund-raising trips to California since March–the same time frame in which he has visited Iowa 11 times and New Hampshire eight times. His aides say they are putting together networks of volunteers who will fan out in support of Buchanan.

Lugar and Alexander have raised money in California, and Lugar aides said they had particular luck with a direct mail drive that touted his proposal to abolish the Internal Revenue Service and replace income taxes with a national sales tax. Like the latter two, Specter has had a low profile here.

At some point, the Republican nominee will begin fighting the general election war here–one that President Clinton is already waging. Mindful that he needs to win the state in order to be reelected, Clinton has visited California 19 times in less than three years, more than any other state.

FOR one city in the UK, Christmas has come early as it’s been transformed into a wintry delight for a Hollywood movie.

Stars of the screen have been spotted in one of the country’s most famous streets to film scenes for the upcoming blockbuster.

York, known for being one of UK’s oldest cities, was also named the top place in the country for the best quality of life according to the Good Growth for Cities Index.

And now it is being turned into a winter wonderland for an upcoming movie.

The film is called ‘Merry Christmas Aubrey Flint’ and is due for release in 2026.

Spotted filming was Richard E Grant, known for his roles in Withnail and I, and Star Wars.

Game of Thrones star John Bradley, who plays the titular character Aubrey Flint, was spotted filming scenes, along with fellow actor Kiell Smith-Bynoe.

Actress and more recently The Celebrity Traitors star Celia Imrie is also in the film.

According to production company WestEnd Films, the movie tells the story of a reclusive model soldier painter with a lifelong hatred of Christmas who ends up assisting with a care home production of A Christmas Carol.

Shopkeepers and passers by watched on as the stars filmed on Colliergate, a street very near The Shambles. 

One of the shops used as a filming location was Barnitts, a department store that sells everything from Christmas decorations to homeware and DIY tools.

Totally Awesome Toy Shop, will also make an appearance in the film, and the owner, Jo Patton, told the BBC: “To have a film star stood literally on your doorstep, in some ways wasn’t too strange, because in York you expect the unexpected.”

The cast and crew also filmed scenes outside an empty shop on Colliergate.

It was transformed from being empty to a miniature model shop and outside table salt lined the edges of the windows to create the illusion of snow.

York was founded by the Romans in 71AD making it one of the oldest cities in the country.

It’s possibly most famous for its 233ft tall York Minster that dates back to the 7th century.

Visitors are welcome to explore the cathedral whether you fancy a guided tour, or a trip up the tower – tickets for general admission starts at £20pp.

The Shambles, which was used to film the Christmas movie, is full of independent shops selling everything from gifts to baked treats or toys,

Lots of visitors compare the street to Harry Potter’s Diagon Alley which has towering timber-framed shop fronts.

It’s not just all mooching about seeing the sights, visitors can settle in one of York’s 365 pubs.

One writer who visited suggested popping into House of Trembling Madness which serves a selection of local beers and huge sharing boards of meats and cheeses.

One travel expert even named the city the ‘best for families’ – Travel guide creator Peter Naldrett, who has visited all 76 cities in the UK, raved about York.

He said: “York is the best UK city for families because it has so many captivating activities and attractions.

“There’s enough in York to keep both junior and secondary school children entertained, from the Viking Museum to York Chocolate Story and Harry Potter-style streets and a cold war bunker.

“The Viking Museum has interactive activities for children, the Castle Museum has recreated Victorian Streets and there’s also the Shambles, the inspiration behind JK Rowling‘s Diagon Alley.”

“There’s so much to keep kids busy in York, families will be spoilt for choice.”

IF you are seeking snow this Christmas without heading to Lapland, there is one place that is guaranteed to have it.

The UK’s SnowDome is celebrating its 20 years of Santa’s Wonder Wonderland.

Being a ski and snowboarding attraction, this means there is real snow inside, all year round.

Returning from November 15, this includes a Winter Wonderland trail with 1000 tonnes of real snow.

There will also be a Christmas Village with alpacas, a carousel and festival games.

Guests will be able to meet Santa and the elves as well as watch down go down the Summit Slide and have snowball fights.

New this year is a live pantomime show of Beauty and the Beast, running for 25 minutes so little guests won’t get bored.

Also new this year is the immersive attraction SledEx HQ.

Families can explore Santa’s post headquarters, complete with a letter writing station to send to Father Christmas.

Otherwise if you need a food break, there is the woodland lodge-style Aspen’s Bar and Kitchen as well as The Lifthouse Coffee Co with everything from festive snacks to hot chocolate

Launching from next week, the festive experience runs until January 3, 2026.

Tickets start from £20 and it is advised to book ahead, with the experience lasting around two hours.

SnowDome Director, Isabelle Chadbourne said they were “delighted” to be returning for their 20th year.

She added: “With our new SledEx HQ, expanded layout and continued focus on immersive fun, families are in for an unforgettable experience.

“It’s a joy to see so many return year after year – and we cannot wait to welcome new visitors to the magic.”   

Families have previously raved about the experience.

One mum wrote last year: “This is our 8th year visiting Winter Wonderland at the Snowdome and I’m yet to be disappointed.”

Another commented: “Santa’s Winter Wonderland at SnowDome is truly enchanting.

“The magical atmosphere, adorned with twinkling lights and festive decorations, creates a perfect holiday escape. 

If you still want to go to Lapland, one mum revealed how you can actually do it in a day.

Otherwise here are seven long-stay winter sun destinations where you can abroad for just £25 a night.

Gabby Logan has been a mainstay of the BBC Sport presenting team for many years, but she was given a reality check by her daughter when she tried to push her into certain sports

Few individuals could be better suited to front BBC Sport than self-proclaimed sports fanatic Gabby Logan.

Gabby, who competed for Wales in rhythmic gymnastics at the 1990 Commonwealth Games, has remained a familiar face for decades through her contributions to ITV and BBC, presenting World Cups, Olympic Games, Six Nations and countless other sporting occasions.

Following Gary Lineker’s exit from the corporation’s premier football programme, Match of the Day, she has joined the presenting roster tipped to succeed him. However, Gabby was decisively “put in her place” by her daughter Lois when she tried to guide her towards the sports she herself was most passionate about.

She explained to The Telegraph: “I always used to say to Lois, when she first got into horses at the age of nine: ‘Oh, if you played golf, I would play with you every night. If you played tennis, I’d play with you all the time.’

“And she’s like: ‘Mummy, those are your dreams, not mine.’ So I was very much put in my place… I used to tell Clare Balding that I’d had her love child.”

Gabby’s Clare Balding reference proved rather fitting.

Now aged 20, Lois works as a show jumper and recently took part in her first horse race as a jockey.

Lois’s twin brother Reuben has also inherited the family’s athletic streak, featuring as a back-row forward for Sale Sharks.

As a mum, Gabby admits she finds it challenging watching both her children pursue physically demanding and potentially dangerous sports. “They’ve not made it easy for me, have they?” she quipped.

“Or for Kenny, in terms of a nice, sedate sport – something a little less frenetic and potentially fraught with danger.

“Still, for me it was important that they had a passion and did something they wanted to do in life, and they both love sport.”

Reuben may have regretted his choice to go into professional rugby on one particular occasion, though.

One of his regular gym sessions at the club turned into a toe-curlingly embarrassing experience when one of his mum’s podcasts was played over the PA system.

It happened to be the episode in which Gabby, 50, was discussing changes in her sex life since her husband – former rugby international Kenny Logan – had his prostate removed following a cancer diagnosis in 2022.

Gabby has been outspoken about reconnecting with intimacy after menopause. She told The Sun: “Taking HRT saw my libido returning. I started with a very small dose of oestrogen and testosterone gels, and progesterone in tablet form. I noticed massive changes within a few weeks. It was a lovely feeling – like myself again.

“My libido came back within about a week. I felt a massive improvement there, and that was important to me and also to Kenny. Once I was on HRT and my libido returned, our sex life was back on track – even to the extent of having daytime sex. There are plus points to becoming empty nesters!”

I’ve visited 26 places in ten countries over the past 12 months. A number I’d argue is a few more than ideal, at least if you want to avoid the sensation of constantly rushing around, and being stuck in a loop of packing and unpacking a toiletries bag.

Over the past year, I’ve managed to tick off 10 countries and 26 destinations from my travel list. A number that’s a tad more than ideal if you’re not keen on the constant hustle and bustle, and the never-ending cycle of packing and unpacking toiletries.

Among these destinations are some that still leave me in awe. The alien-like landscape of Deception Island in Antarctica, a whale graveyard, is undoubtedly the highlight.

Likewise, the sight of condors soaring above as I trekked up an Andes mountain following a gaucho’s trail is something I won’t forget anytime soon.

Closer to home, this was the year I finally set foot on Lindisfarne in Northumberland. This tidal island, which recently featured in Danny Boyle’s zombie film, 28 Years Later, is truly magical.

READ MORE: I asked travel experts the worst area to sit on a plane — they all said to avoid 1 spot

My visit last midsummer was particularly memorable with the sun shining, beetles scurrying in the grass, and seals serenading across the bay. However, it’s not any of these places that I’m eager to revisit next year, fingers crossed. That honour goes to Catania.

I had a fleeting, 12-hour visit to this Sicilian city in August and now, I’m resolved to go back.

If you’ve been to this Italian island, chances are you landed in the much larger and more famous Palermo. It’s a captivating city, brimming with attractions like a sprawling botanical garden, the beautifully restored Palazzo Butera, and a top-notch puppet museum.

Despite its charm, there’s a sense that Palermo has perhaps overindulged the tourist trade. Its renowned Capo Market has shifted from selling fresh produce to street food, and the daily queue for a baked goodie at the former monastery, Santa Caterina, often stretches to 100 people.

READ MORE: ‘I’m a Brit living in Dubai – little-known WhatsApp rule could land you in jail’READ MORE: UK beach with stunning views tops TripAdvisor’s rankings and is a ‘hidden gem’

In contrast, Catania, located roughly 200 km east of Palermo on Sicily’s coast, exudes an authenticity and tranquillity that sets it apart from its older sibling.

While Palermo is large, audacious and rough around the edges, Catania is neater, more stylish and refined. The city, home to 300,000 residents, was established by the Greeks in the 8th century BC and has been shaped by centuries of conquest and natural disasters, most notably the catastrophic earthquake of 1693.

This rebuilding led to the creation of its stunning Baroque architecture, now recognised as a UNESCO World Heritage Site. A stroll through the historic centre leads you to Piazza del Duomo, where the grand Catania Cathedral and the famous Fontana dell’Elefante, a lava-stone elephant statue that has become the city’s emblem, reside.

The Via dei Crociferi, adorned with ornate churches and monasteries, is frequently hailed as one of Sicily’s most beautiful streets.

One of the most captivating reasons to visit Catania, and why I’m so eager to go back, is its breathtaking location. The city is nestled between the Ionian Sea and Mount Etna, Europe’s most active volcano. After an evening spent sipping spritz and carafes of light table wine, our group climbed onto the roof of our apartment block and looked north.

Illuminating the dark sky above us was a burst of orange. Lava was erupting from the top of Etna.

Vibrant buses bound for the volcano regularly set off from Catania, transporting daring tourists up the volcano and through lava fields, craters, and even vineyards that flourish in the fertile volcanic soil.

For those not captivated by volcanoes and stunning architecture, spending a week just eating and drinking is arguably just as satisfying. Street food plays a significant role in daily life there and has a rich history.

READ MORE: Colourful and arty seaside town is perfect for winter breaks and is ‘just like Brighton’

If arancini balls, cannoli, and granita (a refreshing Sicilian sorbet sometimes served in a warm brioche) didn’t originate here, they’ve certainly been perfected.

The fun carries on at the La Pescheria market, situated near Piazza del Duomo, where Sicilian-speaking stallholders will sell you a cone of deep-fried seafood.

The great news for those, like me, planning a trip to Catania is that there are direct flights from London Gatwick, Stansted, Luton, and Manchester airports, with airlines such as British Airways, easyJet, Jet2, and Ryanair providing services. One-way tickets this month start from just £19.

Perhaps a bargain too tempting to pass up….

Just when it seemed the Washington Commanders’ night couldn’t get much worse, it actually got much, much worse.

With his team trailing the Seattle Seahawks by 31 points midway through the fourth quarter Sunday night, Commanders quarterback Jayden Daniels suffered a gruesome injury to his non-throwing arm that will likely keep him off the field for several weeks.

After Washington’s 38-14 loss, coach Dan Quinn had little information on his second-year quarterback, saying only that Daniels had a “left arm injury” and that he hoped to provide an update in the morning.

Multiple media outlets are reporting that Daniels dislocated his elbow and will undergo an MRI on Monday to determine the severity of the injury.

A former star at Cajon High, Daniels won the Heisman Trophy at Louisiana State in 2023 and was selected at No. 2 overall by the Commanders in the 2024 NFL draft. He immediately took the league by storm, earning Pro Bowl and offensive rookie of the year honors while leading Washington to an unlikely appearance in the NFC championship game.

Season 2 has been a disappointment. Going into this weekend, Daniels had already missed three games with knee and hamstring injuries and the Commanders had struggled to a 3-5 record.

Then came Sunday night. Down by four scores in the fourth quarter, Washington drove to the Seattle 2-yard-line and was looking to make a slight dent in the deficit when disaster struck. On second-and-goal with 7:39 remaining in the game, Daniels faked a handoff and scrambled to his right before being spun down by Seattle’s Drake Thomas for a 2-yard loss.

As he was being taken to the ground, Daniels put out his left arm to brace himself. His elbow bent the wrong way. Commanders guard Sam Cosmi called the scene “gut-wrenching.”

“I didn’t see what happened exactly. I just heard a pause and I kind of put my head down and prayed for him,” Cosmi said. “You just don’t want to see that happen.”

A similar scene took place nearly 13 years ago for Washington, when another rising young star at quarterback, Robert Griffin III, re-injured his knee during a home game against the Seahawks. His career was never the same afterward.

Griffin was one of several people who took to social media Sunday night to comment on the matter. He seemed to speak for the majority of them when he wrote on X, “WHY WAS JAYDEN DANIELS EVEN STILL IN THE GAME?!?!?!”

“The Seattle Seahawks had the game won,” a visbly distraught Griffin said in a video also posted to X. “I understand you want to play to the end, but with the injuries that he’s already had this year, and the injuries he had last year, why is he in the game? Doesn’t make sense.”

Griffin, who currently works as a college football analyst on Fox Sports, added: “You can’t say a knee and a hamstring leads to an elbow injury like that. It was a freak accident, freak play. But I can’t help but feel for Jayden Daniels. Man, I can’t help but feel for Washington Commanders fans. Just a demoralizing blow, man.”

Asked by reporters after the game whether any consideration was given to removing Daniels before that series, Quinn seemed to indicate that the plays being called didn’t seem to present a high injury risk.

“Obviously in hindsight, you don’t want to think that way, where injury could take place,” Quinn said. “Obviously, we’re more concerned in that spot to run and hand off and not have reads to go, but just the end result, obviously I’m bummed.”

Later in the news conference, in response to a similar question, Quinn gave a similar answer.

“Yeah, obviously, I’m just gutted by this, bummed,” Quinn said. “The one that he was on injured is usually a runner or throwing the flats, not a scramble. So it wasn’t a designed read or play into that spot. If we run it 50 times, it’s either hand off or throw, say, 50 times. So it’s a bummer, man, in a big way.”

Backup quarterback Marcus Mariota has led the Commanders to a 1-2 record starting in place of Daniels this season.

EVERY year an enormous – and free – parade takes place in London with floats and live bands – and something new is launching this year.

The Lord or Lady Mayor’s Show dates back to the 13^th century and is full of of celebratory entertainment, and this year is a very special one.

Dame Susan Langley DBE will be appointed as the Lady Mayor, which makes her only the third woman to hold the post in over 800 years, and the 697th Mayor of the City of London.

She will also be the first ever to be titled the ‘Lady Mayor of London‘.

To celebrate her inauguration, there will be a traditional parade of bands and 50 floats throughout the city.

Over 7,000 people take part in the event from all over the world – and the procession is over three miles long, which is longer than the actual route.

The event is completely free and you’ll get to see marching bands, a huge Cinderella carriage, dancers, even a resorted Bluebird K7 (a hydroplane) will make an appearance.

There are representatives of all three armed forces there too, Taiko drummers and mounted knights.

This year, the Lady Mayor’s Show will be held on November Saturday 8, 2025 between 11AM and 2.30PM.

Roads will be closed as people line up in the streets to see the event underway – so don’t travel by car as you’ll meet lots of no entry signs.

In the morning, the Lady Mayor’s Show will begin at Mansion House and go towards the Royal Courts through St Paul’s.

In the afternoon, the parade will come back through Embankment and Victoria Street.

The official website suggests for a ‘full experience’, to watch the outward procession between 11AM and 12PM between Bank and St Paul’s.

For a quieter experience with fewer crowds, watch the parade on its return to Mansion House between 1.15PM and 2.30PM around Embankment.

Historically, the Lord Mayor’s Show is the oldest and longest civic procession in the world.

It started as early as the 13th century when King John granted that the City of London could appoint its own Mayor.

The condition being that each new Mayor would have to pledge loyalty to the Crown.

The journey then became a huge event that has been held for around 800 years and was eventually named the Lord Mayor’s Show.

For more free events in London, check out the full list of London’s best Christmas lights and when they will be switched on this year.

Plus, is this England’s most beautiful Christmas market? The 100-stall festive event in the middle of a palace courtyard.

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.”

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 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.

When much of Altadena burned in January, it affected not just the city’s homes but also its businesses. Popular local shops went up in flames just like everything else, and work-from-home artisans — displaced from not just their residences but also their work spaces and all the materials contained within — were suddenly without a place to live or a place to work.

On the Westside, the Palisades fire, also in January, tore through Pacific Palisades and Malibu, forever changing the fabric of these tight-knit neighborhoods and small businesses. Although rebuilding efforts are underway, progress and construction are expected to take several years as residents and business owners deal with permit approval, insurance hindrances and inflation.

Even now, local businesses that remain have struggled to regain a foothold.

With the giving spirit in mind this holiday season, we’ve put together this list of gifts from Altadena, Pacific Palisades and Malibu businesses, all of whom were affected in some way by the Eaton and Palisades fires. Purchase one of these items and you’ll spread good cheer (and good money) around areas that still need all the help they can get.

If you make a purchase using some of our links, the L.A. Times may be compensated. Prices and availability of items and experiences in the Gift Guide and on latimes.com are subject to change.

The newly opened coffee shop-cum-arboretum Creature’s was created to provide a place where one could “be a creature amongst other creatures.” To that effect, the establishment filled with native plants and succulents hosts events that promote compassion for all — there’s been a free clothing swap, local makers fairs, a nature sketching gathering and a presentation in tandem with Citizens for Los Angeles Wildlife (CLAW) about peacefully coexisting with L.A.’s native animals.

Owned by Hope Creature, the business sells plants, gifts and garden supplies in one building and organic drinks and pastries in another. A 50-foot greenhouse shelters indoor tropicals, organic edibles, drought-tolerant native plants and small potted succulents, which go for less than $2. The outdoor seating area is outfitted with plants available for purchase.

“A lot went into making this space architecturally stunning as well, with every design detail considered,” Creature says. “The space also serves as a platform for our ongoing community programming, which showcases what the space is all about — bringing people together to explore, learn and connect.”

The queer-owned-and-run cafe offers standard coffee fare including matcha, espresso, cortado, cold brew and drip options from local roaster Unity, as well as a selection of teas and pastries.

Open daily from 7:30 a.m. until 5 p.m., the shop’s enclosed outdoor patio (buttressed on either side by the cafe/general store and greenhouse) offers a peaceful reprieve from the relative hustle and bustle of Eagle Rock Boulevard.