problems

SACRAMENTO —  Look, Xavier Becerra could cruise to a South Pacific island and bask on the beach until election day and Californians would still choose him as their next governor.

So, last week’s televised CNN debate between Becerra and Republican Steve Hilton really had no election significance, although it was important for the Democratic frontrunner in other ways.

Who won the debate? Becerra, because he came across as calm, collected and capable of governing this troubled state — certainly very few voters’ ideal candidate, but the only real choice for most Californians.

There’s simply no way Becerra can lose on Nov. 3 because his only opponent is a Republican. Californians will not elect a Republican governor in this polarized era, particularly one endorsed by the reviled President Trump.

Moreover, Hilton’s only previous political experience was as an advisor to a British prime minister and his sole claim to U.S. notoriety was as a Fox News TV host–not exactly resume boosters in California.

Becerra — with public office experience spanning more than three decades — held a growing 25-point lead in a recent poll by the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies.

He’s a shoo-in simply because he has a “D” beside his name in this state where Democrats outnumber Republicans nearly 2-to-1 and despise the GOP president.

Californians haven’t elected a Republican to statewide office in 20 years — and that’s Hilton’s main pitch to voters.

“The definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different result,” the GOP candidate asserted during the debate, as he does several times a day.

Turning to Becerra, Hilton said:

“You’re the candidate who is supported by the machine in Sacramento — the unions, big business, all these people that for 16 years have given us the highest cost of living in the country, made it impossible to build anything, given us the highest unemployment rate, the highest poverty rate….

“And that’s why we’ve got to try something different this time instead of voting for more of the same.”

OK, fair point. But try what exactly? That’s where Hilton stalls or veers erratically.

He’d build “10 new cities.” Build them where exactly? He doesn’t say.

He definitely doesn’t want to construct new apartment buildings in the suburbs “when we have got so much space that we could be building on in California.”

Like out in Southern California deserts or Central Valley farm fields — requiring two-hour commutes to urban jobs?

And where does the water come from for these 10 new cities as the West scrambles for what’s left of diminishing supplies? But unfortunately there was no discussion of that during the debate.

One debate exchange that caught my attention was about vaccines. Hilton seemed to be carrying the torch for whacko anti-vaxxer Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Becerra’s successor as U.S. health secretary in the Trump administration.

Debate co-moderator Dana Bash recalled what Hilton said previously about children’s vaccinations: “The government should have nothing to do with these fundamental and vital decisions.” And she asked whether he’d push to eliminate California’s vaccine requirements.

“No,” Hilton replied. “I’m pro vaccine.” But then he seemed to wander all over the stage looking to have it both ways.

It’s a “very, very emotional issue for a lot of parents,” he said, adding there’s “data around the world” showing that where vaccine “mandates are lower… you actually have higher [vaccination] compliance, where parents don’t feel that they’re being bullied into doing something that they don’t want to do. And that’s what I want to see here.”

But he ultimately said,“I’d follow the law.”

In California, the law requires all children without medical exemptions to be vaccinated for several diseases — including polio, measles, mumps, chickenpox, hepatitis B and whooping cough — before they’re admitted to school.

That’s a blessing. When I grew up, practically every kid at some point was bedridden with one or more of those dangerous ailments. Then some saviors invented vaccines.

“We had nearly eradicated measles,” Becerra said, responding to Hilton. “When I left HHS, you rarely heard of a case of measles…. Today, children are dying of measles. Today, the spread of measles has reached a proportion we haven’t seen since the 1960s.

“That’s what happens when vaccine deniers take over.”

Becerra achieved all he needed to in the debate. He didn’t screw up. He kept cool and actually was fairly quick on his feet in replying to Hilton’s attacks, while planting a MAGA hat firmly on the Republican’s head.

He missed an opportunity to accomplish more, however — like making Californians feel really good about voting for him, rather than merely because he’s the only Democrat left standing in the contest to replace the termed out Gov. Gavin Newsom.

Voters might like to hear what Becerra’s vision is — if he has one — for the California he wants to build.

What does he have in mind besides just defending California against Trump? That’s a given. How’s he going to lower our living costs? Upgrade public education? Prevent wildfires? Details, not platitudes.

Rather than relaxing on his lead, Becerra should be constantly moving around the state, introducing himself to Californians and — more importantly — listening to their problems and ideas. To his credit, he’s doing that this week.

“The debate was boring and uneventful, but Becerra won it,” says Republican consultant Rob Stutzman. “He is perfectly vanilla and that makes it really hard to pin him down in an attack.”

“We got the genuine Xavier Becerra. That’s exactly who he is,” says veteran Democratic strategist Garry Sragow, a longtime political ally. “Thoughtful, committed and very decent, but does not go very high on the charisma meter.”

In California right now, a candidate’s charisma rates much lower than a simple “D.”

What else you should be reading

The must-read: Voter ID proponents accuse California Democrats of lying about Trump’s support for Prop. 39
Eyes of the World: Will or won’t they? Newsom and Harris weigh 2028 contest — and possible collision
The L.A. Times Special: Voter guide to the 2026 California general election

Until next week,
George Skelton

—
Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.

Tom Cruise is one of the bankable stars in Hollywood. But his pull may not be enough to lift his upcoming film “Digger” from a likely hard fall at the box office this weekend.

That would be unwelcome news for Warner Bros., whose movies have largely struggled to connect with audiences this year, in contrast to 2025, when the studio ran up a string of hits such as “Sinners” and “Weapons.”

All of this comes as the studio braces for an uncertain future with Paramount Skydance’s $111-billion acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery set to close on Tuesday.

“No single film is going to capsize the boat,” said Stephen Galloway, dean of the Dodge College of Film and Media Arts at Chapman University. “However, it’s coming at a precarious time because it follows a series of less-than-successful releases at the very moment when the Warner Bros.- Paramount deal has been greenlit, and everybody — no matter how high up — is terrified for his or her job.”

Matching the success of the 2025 film slate was always going to be a tall order, particularly when so many of Warner Bros.’ movies that year overperformed.

So far this year, the studio’s domestic box office haul is $437.7 million, representing about 5.6% of the total theatrical revenue in the U.S. and Canada, according to Rentrak data.

Last year, Warner Bros.’ total at this time was $1.8 billion, aided by back-to-back successes starting with “A Minecraft Movie,” which went on to become the highest-grossing movie at the domestic box office during that calendar year.

The studio currently does not have any film in the top 20 of domestic box office earners this year, which includes some holdovers from 2025, with Emerald Fennell’s adaptation of “Wuthering Heights” ranking at 21 with $84 million. Bets on films like Maggie Gyllenhaal’s “The Bride!” cratered, while DC Studios’ “Supergirl” misfired.

“Digger” is unlikely to turn things around.

The satire from director Alejandro González Iñárritu about an impending climate change apocalypse has divided critics, yielding very mixed reviews. Tracking predictions for the film’s debut have steadily trended downward and settled between $15 million and $19 million.

That would be a major miss, given the film’s production budget was about $125 million (not counting marketing costs).

“Digger” faces several hurdles. For one, the film has a major twist, which complicates its marketing and makes it difficult to tell audiences what it’s about.

Then there’s Cruise’s nearly unrecognizable performance as Digger Rockwell, an eccentric oil tycoon whose drilling operations have led to the unfolding climate disaster. Clad in prosthetics with a head full of graying hair, Cruise is far from his usual stunts-heavy, bravado-filled roles, which could make his typical audience less likely to come out to theaters, analysts said.

“It has a lot of question marks,” said David A. Gross, who writes the movie industry newsletter FranchiseRe. “It doesn’t look like it’s heading for financial success.”

The film will have value to Warner Bros. beyond its theatrical reception. “Digger” probably will also make money through ancillary revenue streams such as premium video on demand and streaming, industry experts said. And if Cruise wins his much-coveted Oscar for his role as Digger, that is also a plus, Galloway said.

Beyond the fate of “Digger,” Warner Bros.’ theatrical business will be of prime importance to the combined Paramount-Warner company.

Last year, Warner’s studio business, which includes both film and television production, brought in $12.6 billion in revenue. This year, it’s projected to generate $11.1 billion, according to market expectations. On a positive note, Warner Bros. still has its animated “The Cat in the Hat” film releasing in November and the popular “Dune: Part Three” at the end of the year.

The prospects for Warner Bros. should improve next year, when the film and TV studios are expected to amass $11.7 billion in revenue, driven by strong titles including the sequel to “Minecraft” and a new “Lord of the Rings” movie, according to Bernstein research.

Aside from theatrical revenue, Warner Bros.’ film and TV properties have been key drivers of business to HBO Max and will also provide valuable content to Paramount+, particularly as the linear cable networks continue to decline.

“I would argue the studios are the very reason Paramount Skydance is buying Warner Bros.,” said Laurent Yoon, senior analyst at Bernstein. “Everything starts with the studios.”

The combined company is also legally required to release at least 30 films a year as part of a settlement agreement over antitrust claims with 12 state attorneys general, including California’s Rob Bonta. Paramount Chief Executive David Ellison has previously said the two studios would each release 15 films a year.

But the type of content the studios release could change after the merger is completed. Under film chiefs Pam Abdy and Mike De Luca, Warner Bros. developed a reputation for auteur-driven, original stories, particularly after the success of the 2025 slate. Ellison’s slate has trended toward blockbuster fare.

The combined company will also face a massive debt load of more than $80 billion after the merger closes, meaning there may be greater pressure for future films to be hits.

“Ellison is primarily in the business of delivering blockbusters,” Galloway said. “That’s going to be even more important as he tries to right the ship of his debt.”

Chelsea signed a striker from Brighton for the second successive summer, bringing in Welbeck to reunite him with Joao Pedro and provide support in attack.

Welbeck, 35, was tidy in possession but, with little service, managed only 17 touches before being substituted in the 71st minute.

Unlike Joao Pedro, who is capable of creating chances for himself, Welbeck found it difficult to influence the game in the same way.

Joao Pedro came into the weekend with the most goal involvements in the Premier League, having scored three and provided three assists in four appearances this season.

His impact extends beyond goals and assists, with the Brazilian linking well with Palmer and Rogers. Against Brentford, however, Rogers arguably produced his quietest performance since arriving from Aston Villa in the summer.

Rogers eventually moved up front with fellow striker Emmanuel Emegha sidelined through injury and still waiting to make his Chelsea debut.

Before Brentford‘s opener, it was a closely contested match that appeared likely to be decided by the first goal. Chelsea, however, made victory a certainty for the hosts with a dramatic collapse.

Alonso has not managed to cure Chelsea‘s set-piece weaknesses. They have conceded 23 goals from set-pieces since the start of last season – no Premier League side has let in more. And Anthony’s simple header from a corner took this season’s total to five.

Set-piece defending was an area Chelsea sought to address when they appointed Bernardo Cueva from Brentford two years ago. This summer, he was replaced by another highly regarded specialist in Austin MacPhee.

Asked about Chelsea‘s defending from set-pieces, stand-in captain Levi Colwill told Sky Sports: “Not good enough. At times we have been bullied in the box and we definitely need to improve.

“We have full trust in our set-piece coach and are still adjusting to new ideas, but we need to improve as a team.”

Like many of his predecessors, Alonso has been attempting to instil a stronger competitive edge within his squad and improve the mentality of his players.

That issue has often been linked to the relatively young age profile of the squad, but Chelsea fielded their oldest starting XI since May 2023. Henderson, in making his debut on Friday, lined up alongside fellow over-30s Welbeck and goalkeeper Emiliano Martinez.

“I would say that we have dropped our consistency and our competitive mentality in the second half. We know that small details can be decisive,” Alonso said after Brentford added two late goals.

It is also fair to say Alonso is still experimenting with systems and personnel, and has yet to settle on a style of play that gives his side control throughout a match.

“It’s not about looking for excuses,” the Spaniard told Sky Sports. “We need to look at each other and know that we have to work and improve because there is still a long way to go.”

After the initial excitement – and victories – provided by Alonso’s attacking football, Chelsea head into the international break with serious questions to answer.