Celeste Rivas Hernandez’s case continues to unfold as investigators track a disturbing trail of evidence across different parts of the state. Investigators later discovered one of her personal items in a remote, wooded area far from where she was last seen. And, it’s raising new questions about how it ended up there. As authorities work to connect the locations and timeline, the case is becoming more complex with each new detail uncovered.

RELATED: Celeste Rivas Hernandez’s Father Addresses Claims Of Contact With D4vd & Receiving Alleged Payments (VIDEO)

Celeste Rvias’ Passport Card Reportedly Found 100 Miles From Los Angeles

According to TMZ, authorities have confirmed new details in the ongoing investigation into the death of Celeste Rivas Hernandez. And, it includes how one of her personal identification items was recovered months after her disappearance. According to officials cited by Caltrans, a maintenance worker was performing traffic control on State Route 154 near Painted Cave Road on January 7, 2026. They allegedly discovered Celeste’s passport card in brush along a remote, wooded area about 100 miles northwest of Los Angeles.

Furthermore, the worker reported the finding to supervisors, who then contacted the California Highway Patrol, which collected the item at the scene. Detectives later returned to the area on January 17 to follow up as part of the ongoing investigation.

Evidence Spreads Across Counties In Celeste Rivas Case

Investigators allege that personal belongings linked to Celeste were disposed of in the Santa Barbara County region following her death. The court filing alleges that on the night of April 23, 2025, D4vd arranged a ride-share to pick up Celeste Hernandez from her home in Lake Elsinore, transporting her to his Hollywood Hills residence. Prosecutors claim the two exchanged only two messages before Hernandez’s phone abruptly went silent, raising concerns about her whereabouts.

Later that same night, around 11:30 p.m., investigators say D4vd drove his Tesla north along Highway 101. He reportedly drove toward San Marcos Pass Road (SR-154) near Lake Cachuma in Santa Barbara County. Nonetheless, according to the filing, he allegedly returned to the same remote area on May 8 and again on May 31.

Celeste Rivas’ Father Sets Record Straight Amid Online Speculation

As previously reported, Celeste Rivas’ father, Jesus Rivas, has spoken out through attorney Patrick Steinfeld, who reportedly represents the family. Jesus addressed circulating claims tied to the case. As online speculation continued to spread about possible financial arrangements or contact with D4vd, Jesus set the record straight and rejected those narratives outright. In his statement, he made it clear, saying, “I never had any contact with this guy and we haven’t received any money from him or anyone in his family.”

RELATED: Celeste Rivas Hernandez’s Family Shares Statement As Gruesome Details About Her Final Moments Emerge (VIDEO)

Some of the best movies of 2025 were family-friendly, as the genre proved once again to be a big hit at the box office. Live-action remakes of animated favorites (like How to Train Your Dragon and Lilo & Stitch) were much better than many expected; the Chinese film Ne Zha 2 became the first animated effort to hit $2 billion worldwide; A Minecraft Movie proved video game adaptations are on the rise; and the streaming world changed forever with the Academy Award-winning KPop Demon Hunters.

Another family-friendly movie that quietly rose to record-breaking box office heights is Zootopia 2, a direct sequel to the first Zootopia film, which saw much of its acclaimed voice cast return. Jared Bush and Byron Howard‘s blockbuster sequel was once again led by Ginnifer Goodwin and Jason Bateman as Judy and Nick, with Ke Huy Quan joining the main cast as Gary. The rest of the voice cast included Quinta Brunson, Fortune Feimster, Patrick Warburton, Andy Samberg, David Strathairn, and many more.

Without much fanfare, Zootopia 2‘s box office run was hugely impressive. Grossing more than big blockbuster hits The Avengers, Avatar: Fire and Ash, and Top Gun: Maverick, the Zootopia sequel earned an enormous $1.87 billion worldwide, split between a domestic haul of $428 million and a further $1.442 billion from overseas markets. This total helped the movie pass Inside Out 2 and become Hollywood’s highest-grossing animated movie of all time. After its theatrical run, Zootopia 2 finally made its streaming debut in March and has proven yet again to be quietly successful. At the time of writing, the movie is one of the ten most-streamed on Disney+ in the U.S., and ranks sixth in the global top ten.

Was ‘Zootopia 2’ a Hit With Critics?

Not just a smash hit at the box office, Zootopia 2 also earned the praise of critics, who were impressed by its ability to balance a wild adventure with some subtle and important theming. On review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes, the sequel earned a 91% score from critics. One critic wrote, “The result of this animated tale is fun and cute while being ever so slightly educational,” whilst another added, “Every frame of Zootopia 2 is packed with detail and movement, and all of it looks just right.”

Zootopia 2 is a streaming hit on Disney+. Make sure to stay tuned to Collider for more streaming stories.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Release Date

November 26, 2025

Director

Byron Howard, Jared Bush

Advertisement

Writers

Jared Bush

Advertisement

Producers

Jennifer Lee

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

The Hills alum Audrina Patridge’s relationship with singer Michael Ray keeps getting sweeter — and could even result in a walk down the wedding aisle.

“I’m open to it,” Patridge, 40, exclusively told Us Weekly on Friday, May 1, while attending Calamigos Ranch Resort & Spa’s Leading Hotels of the World accreditation celebration.

“I think when you find someone that actually clicks and makes you happy, and we’ve both been through divorces and all of that, I think we know what not to do and what we want,” she added of the possibility of getting engaged again.

Patridge was previously married to Corey Bohan, with whom she shares 9-year-old daughter Kirra, from 2016 to 2018. As for Ray, 38, he tied the knot with Carly Pearce in October 2019. The singers divorced one year later.

Related: Audrina Patridge Shares Rare Look Inside Her Romance With Michael Ray

Audrina Patridge can’t hide her happiness when it comes to her romance with country singer Michael Ray. “I think for a long time, I wasn’t really looking for anything,” Partridge, 39, exclusively told Us Weekly while attending ChainFEST Los Angeles with Skrewball Peanut Butter Whiskey on Saturday, October 5. “So when I met him, it […]

Patridge and Ray confirmed their relationship in July 2024, though the former reality TV star made it clear she’s in no hurry to say “I do.”

“We’re not rushing into anything. We just love each other and are taking it easy,” she told Us on Friday, offering a glimpse into her romance. “I feel like Michael is very private. When we are together, we’re just so present and we usually just stay in at the house or cook dinner.”

According to Patridge, she even recently surprised her “amazing” boyfriend on his 38th birthday late last month.

“I actually surprised him for his birthday on Wednesday, and flew out to Georgia and took him to this Dunya Camp, which is incredible,” she said. “It’s long distance. I’ll fly out there, He’ll fly here. We make it work.”

Ray is currently based in North Carolina, while Patridge lives across the country in California with her daughter.

Thank You!

You have successfully subscribed.

Advertisement

“When I met Michael, it was very unexpected,” Patridge explained. “I was kind of in that mindset of, ‘I don’t need a guy. I’m happy being alone. It’s me and my daughter, girl power. We’re gonna travel the world.’ And then I met Michael, and we just clicked with our chemistry. He’s my best friend and we’re inseparable.”

Long before finding love with Ray, Patridge rose to fame on MTV’s The Hills in 2006 alongside the likes of Lauren Conrad, Kristin Cavallari, Heidi Montag and Spencer Pratt. Most of the OG cast returned for the network’s The Hills: New Beginnings in 2019.

“That was a whole different kind of show, [but] it was still fun,” Partridge told Us of the revival, adding that she is “open” to another reunion down the line. “I’m not opposed. Now that I think we’re all older, we have families [and] we have kids, our lives are very different than it was. It’s not as crazy and exciting at first.”

Y’all, Reginae Carter is getting real about her upbringing. And let’s just say, her story isn’t what some might expect. While many assume growing up in the spotlight comes with nonstop privilege, Reginae is sharing moments that were anything but easy. And, that includes navigating life as the daughter of Lil Wayne to facing situations no child should ever experience.

RELATED: Ballin’ Out! Reginae Carter Spills On How Much Cash Lil Wayne Gave Her As A Kid & Why Her Mom Stepped In (VIDEO)

Reginae Carter Recalls Being Robbed At Gunpoint

During a recent episode of her ‘Heir Time’ podcast, Reginae Carter  revealed that at just 12 years old, she was robbed at gunpoint. And, it was an experience she says led to her having security by her side for years. According to her, a guard was assigned to her shortly after the incident. Additionally, they remained with her until she turned 18, standing outside her school and accompanying her to events. Reginae reflected on the situation by saying, “it’s okay… it made me who I am today,” noting that while it was traumatic, it ultimately shaped her resilience. She also shared that the suspects were reportedly caught years later.

Reginae Reveals She Was Denied From Public Schools Due To Her Dad’s Lyrics

In the same conversation, Reginae revealed she was denied entry to what she called the “biggest” private schools in Atlanta. Furthermore, she claimed that certain institutions turned her away because of the controversy surrounding her father’s music at the time. While she said she understood their desire to protect a certain image, she felt those decisions unfairly judged her as a child rather than her own character. She even hinted at how serious it felt at the time, suggesting there were moments she considered speaking out about the way she was treated.

Fans Didn’t Let Anything Slide

Fans quickly flooded The Shade Room’s comment section, with many calling it “nasty work” to rob a 12-year-old. Others shifted the conversation, trying to guess which elite Atlanta private schools she was referring to after being denied admission. And of course, plenty of supporters made it clear that regardless of it all, Reginae still turned out to be that girl anyway.

One Instagram user @trinidadrell said, “Why y’all walking up in there sayin ‘lil Wayne is my dad’ just send the unknown aunty or sumn in there“

This Instagram user @kushpapi_ commented, “In reality the school can reject whoever they want 🤦‍♂️🤣”

And, Instagram user @latigerr added, “Being robbed at 12 years old is the craziest of works.“

Meanwhile, Instagram user @paige.the.babe joked, “She be interviewing herself every interview lol“

While Instagram user @therealeazyeconomicz shared, “She turned out to be perfectly fine to me 😍”

Finally, Instagram user @richgirlroses203 wrote, “Being denied to those school was a blessing in disguise 🙏💕💕”

RELATED: Social Media Weighs In After Reginae Carter & Jeezy’s Son Seemingly Flirt While Reflecting On Their Past History (VIDEOS)

When James McAvoy landed his earliest major starring roles in Atonement and Wanted, it seemed like his career was headed in a particular direction. But then, like Leonardo DiCaprio before him, he showed the world that he had more in his arsenal than just one kind of character. Over the next decade, McAvoy went on to play one of the most noble superheroes of all time, Charles Xavier, in the X-Men reboot series, but he also headlined a trio of movies in which he played off-kilter characters that truly shook his fans to the core. The most prominent of these movies has to be Split, directed by M. Night Shyamalan. The horror-thriller served as a sizzle-reel of sorts for McAvoy’s range. A few years before Split, he played a chaotic Scottish detective in an adaptation of Trainspotting writer Irvine Welsh‘s Filth. Any doubt regarding McAvoy’s abilities was put to rest a couple of years ago, when he played another unhinged type in a sleeper hit that will soon leave its streaming home.

The movie in question was released theatrically in 2024. It featured McAvoy as a man’s man who, along with his wife, invites an unsuspecting couple to his countryside cottage for a vacation. When the couple shows up, hidden secrets come to light. The film was directed by James Watkins, who is set to direct the upcoming DC Universe body horror film Clayface. Watkins broke out with the acclaimed horror film Eden Lake, and went on to direct Daniel Radcliffe in The Woman in Black.

Here’s How Long You Have Left To Watch James McAvoy’s Unhinged Performance

His movie with McAvoy, of course, is Speak No Evil. A remake of the critically acclaimed 2022 Danish film of the same name, Speak No Evil was rather well received itself. Both movies incidentally hold “Certified Fresh” 83% scores on the aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes, where the consensus for the remake reads, “Harnessing sick suspense from the glimmer in James McAvoy’s eye, Speak No Evil is the rare remake that hushes up concerns of ‘been there, done that’.” Also featuring Scoot McNairy, Mackenzie Davis, and Aisling Franciosi, the remake was commercially successful, grossing $77 million worldwide against a reported budget of $15 million. Speak No Evil is currently streaming on Peacock in the United States, but it will be removed from the platform on June 6. Stay tuned to Collider for more updates.

Advertisement

Release Date

September 13, 2024

Advertisement

Runtime

110 Minutes

Director

Advertisement

James Watkins

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

By TeeJay Small
| Published 49 seconds ago

If you’re into weird, trippy movies with complex characters, twisted conspiracies, and some overarching sci-fi elements, you’re probably already a fan of Greek filmmaker Yorgos Lanthimos. Lanthimos’ oeuvre includes The Lobster, The Killing of a Sacred Deer, and Kinds of Kindness, just to name a few. While each of these films offers a mind-bending adventure, none has turned my head inside out quite like his latest, Bugonia, now streaming on Netflix.

Bugonia stars Emma Stone as a ruthless CEO of a massive pharmaceutical conglomerate. Fresh off a slew of bad press for suppressing workers’ rights, Stone’s Michelle Fuller goes above and beyond to present the image of a caring, easygoing boss. She encourages her employees to take time for their mental health and leave early, while subtly implying that doing so would mean risking their jobs. She’s your run-of-the-mill billionaire monster.

As Fuller goes about her daily routine, we are introduced to conspiracy theorist Teddy Gatz, played expertly by Breaking Bad‘s Jesse Plemons, and his cousin Don, portrayed by newcomer Aidan Delbis. Teddy, like many real-life viewers at home, is a disenfranchised wage worker who has fallen down a deep rabbit hole of online alien conspiracies. He has come to believe that a race of alien creatures has assimilated into Earth’s population, disguised themselves as corporate elites, and subjugated the world through a series of telepathic commands.

Bugonia really picks up when Teddy and Don kidnap and imprison Michelle in their basement, believing her to be a member of the alien race. Based on information they’ve collected in insulated internet chatrooms, the duo shave her head, chain her up, and slather her entire body with antihistamine lotion. They believe these measures will prevent the CEO from utilizing her mind-control powers or contacting her alien mothership for backup.

From there, most of Bugonia centers on Michelle as she attempts to escape from her captors by any means necessary. She tries to enlighten the kidnappers with logic and deprogram their conspiracy-addled minds. She even tries leaning into the conspiracy and promising that she’ll bring them into contact with her alien superiors if they let her go. The whole time, Teddy and Don are taking measures to prevent themselves from being manipulated by Michelle, by chemically sterilizing themselves and taking prescription drugs against label instructions.

Bugonia is an absolute wild ride from start to finish, and one that I simply couldn’t pry my eyes away from. Everything from Emma Stone’s spectacular leading performance to the quirky, bizarre writing to the occasional mind-bending twist kept me on the edge of my seat, constantly questioning the film’s reality. By my estimation, it’s the perfect conspiracy movie for a post-Epstein list world, where even the most twisted conspiracies don’t seem as ridiculous as they did five or ten years ago.

If you get the chance to catch Bugonia on Netflix, don’t miss it. Just be sure to throw away everything you think you know before going in, or you just might find yourself manipulated by a race of malevolent alien overlords.

L.A. Law has the kind of confidence that legal procedurals just don’t have these days. The show didn’t reach for spectacle or scale, remaining closer to the ground with realistic conversations, compromises that don’t feel overboard, and decisions that weigh heavily. Now that it’s on Hulu, it feels like a working template, one that a lot of modern legal dramas are still circling back to, whether they want to admit it or not.

Viewing it today is different because we’re in an era where prestige TV tends to spell itself out, circling its themes in thick marker and polishing every edge until nothing feels accidental. L.A. Law was comfortable letting things stay a little uneven. Scenes stretch just past where you expect them to cut, characters double back on themselves, and outcomes rarely leave someone unchanged. Watching it now, it’s not just about spotting the blueprint for shows like The Good Wife and Suits, you’re also noticing what got streamlined in the 40 years since.

‘L.A. Law’ Doesn’t Lean on Cut and Dry Endings

L.A. Law is a groundbreaking legal drama focusing on the personal and professional lives of attorneys at the high-powered Los Angeles firm McKenzie, Brackman, Chaney & Kuzak, featuring idealistic lawyer Michael Kuzak (Harry Hamlin), slick divorce expert Arnie Becker (Corbin Bernsen), and powerful litigator Ann Kelsey (Jill Eikenberry). On a rewatch, L.A. Law rarely rushes to resolution, letting cases land with compromises and lasting consequences, instead of clean victories.

The show lets the gaps do the work, like in “Raiders of the Lost Bark,” when Kuzak watches Stacey Gill (Barbara Bosson) reject a massive settlement just to force the truth into the open. The scene moves on, but the look on his face doesn’t, and you’re left with it, aware it wasn’t settled nicely. That’s a gamble a lot of modern shows sidestep. They chase clarity, but L.A. Law was fine letting audiences sit in uncertainty. Those choices give the series a kind of durability. You’re not watching for the outcome as much as you’re watching for the aftermath — like Kuzak carrying that loss into what comes next — and what it does to the people making those decisions.

The ‘L.A. Law’ Firm Felt Like It Could Fracture at Any Moment

Image via Fox

On top of all of this, the firm in L.A. Law didn’t feel like a stable workplace. In the office, every conversation carries tension, like it can all blow up if someone is pushed just a bit too far. The employees of the firm leaned completely into ego, ambition, and survival, layering it into every interaction. You weren’t just tracking cases, you were watching alliances shift in real time.

In the episode “The Venus Butterfly,” relationships and loyalties blur under pressure, and no one stays firmly on one side for long. One partner backs another, then pulls away when the cost gets too high. Someone makes a move that looks strategic, until it starts unraveling into something else entirely. It made the firm feel alive in a way that goes beyond the weekly procedural plot.

Why ‘L.A. Law’ Still Holds Up Today

Where L.A. Law really separates itself is in how it handles power. Not the big, obvious moments, but the smaller ones. Like the conversations in hallways, or the decisions made behind closed doors. The places where ethics don’t disappear, but they start to bend. You see it in arcs like Rosalind Shays’ (Diana Muldaur) rise, where ambition isn’t framed as a flaw so much as a force that reshapes everything around it. You see it in the firm’s handling of corporate clients, where “doing the right thing” becomes less about principle and more about calculation. The show isn’t cynical about it. It doesn’t sneer at its characters for playing the game. It just shows you the rules as they actually function. And once you see them that way, it’s hard to go back to anything more simplified.

There might be a temptation to treat L.A. Law as nostalgia, to name it as the origin point and leave it there. But watching it now, that’s not necessarily the full truth. The pacing is different, the tone isn’t as polished, and it doesn’t move with the same urgency modern shows rely on. But that difference is part of why it works. It gives the story room to settle without unnecessary exposition. And in a landscape that often leans toward over-explanation, that restraint stands out. Streaming on Hulu doesn’t just make it accessible again; it becomes a show that still has something to say. The gold standard for legal dramas didn’t appear fully formed; it started here, and it’s still holding up better than most of what tried to follow it.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Release Date

1986 – 1994-00-00

Advertisement

• 

  Corbin Bernsen

  Arnie Becker

  Advertisement
• 

  Jill Eikenberry

  Ann Kelsey

  Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

By Chris Snellgrove
| Published 38 seconds ago

One of the most weirdly persistent debates of the modern world is over whether AI can create art. Sure, you can type a prompt into ChatGPT or any number of AI platforms and have a unique image within seconds. But while the image is technically unique, it’s not exactly original. The AI was trained on every image it could get its grubby little gears on, so you never get a truly one-of-a-kind image. Instead, you get a mishmash of one or more artists’ styles that the AI bot helpfully masses off as completely original art.

The debate over the matter is so fierce because the two sides are so diametrically opposed. AI bros claim that this technology effectively democratizes art, making it possible for anyone to share their vision with the world. Traditional artists, meanwhile, claim that art has always been democratic and that AI is just a soulless alternative to learning how to draw. While ChatGPT and other generative AI platforms are relatively new, this debate stretches back decades, and in two forgotten episodes of Star Trek: The Next Generation, the android officer Data reminds us of the limits of AI art.  

To Prompt Or Not To Prompt

One such example came from the episode “The Defector,” which begins with Data and Captain Picard acting out Shakespeare’s Henry V on the holodeck. After Data gives a surprisingly solid performance, Picard compliments the android’s acting. However, Data demurs and basically admits that his acting was an amalgamation of other performers who have played this role. He tells Picard, “I plan to study the performances of Olivier, Branagh, Shapiro, [and] Kullnark.” The captain replies that while Shakespeare is perfect “to learn about the human condition…you must discover it through your own performance, not by imitating others.”

This episode first aired in 1990, but Picard’s dialogue fits right in with our modern AI debate. Data, fittingly enough, is doing what artificial intelligence always does: mashing together the work of several different artists. It looks like an original performance at first, which is why Picard applauds. But after finding out what Data did, he chides the android for just mashing a few other performances together and calling it a day. After all, he will never develop as an artist if he doesn’t take the time to develop his own style instead of copying everyone’s homework.

Picard Has Entered The Chat

This obviously reflects our modern discourse about generative AI. As an avid Shakespeare fan, Picard understands that what made those earlier actors so great was that they found ways to put their own spin on Henry V. If those performers hadn’t, in turn, just tried to copy others, then acting becomes functionally meaningless. 

The conversation about Data creating art actually echoes another conversation in the earlier episode “The Ensigns of Command.” When Picard tells the android that his recent violin performance “shows feeling,” Data corrects him. “Strictly speaking, sir, it is not my playing. It is a precise imitation of the techniques of Jascha Heifetz and Trenka Bronken.” Picard insists that Data created something original because he successfully combined two very different performances. Reluctantly, Data takes the compliment, telling his commanding officer that “I have learned to be creative…when necessary.”

At this point, AI bros might think that Captain Picard is on their side. After all, he argues that by choosing to combine two wildly different musicians, Data is actually synthesizing something new, which is akin to “prompt engineers” feeding a bunch of contrary ideas into ChatGPT and hoping for the best. The key difference, though, is that Data still had to bust out the violin and successfully perform this composition himself. Picard considers Data an artist because the android actually makes art. So-called prompt engineers aren’t even doing that; they are simply asking the computer to make something cool and then taking the credit.

Computer: End Program

To keep our Star Trek framing, think of it this way: simply telling a computer to draw a picture is a bit like an Enterprise crewman telling the holodeck to create an exotic vista. Obviously, it takes some level of thought to generate an idea and tell it to the ship’s computer. But the crew doesn’t have to program anything or render anything because the Enterprise does all of the hard work for them. That’s why, in the far-flung future of the 24th century, nobody calls themselves an artist for barking a sentence or two at the computer when they get bored.

Unfortunately, the world is far less enlightened here in the 21st century. The laziest people in the world are typing one sentence into a glorified search engine and treating the resulting aesthetic abomination as a startlingly brilliant and original piece of art. Even wilder, they get grumpy when you don’t treat them like serious artists who spent a lifetime perfecting their craft. As it turns out, both now and in the future, there’s one thing that AI can’t generate: the approval from others that these tech bros so desperately need!