Taylor Swift’s wedding to Travis Kelce occurred on July 3, 2026, and among the over 1,000 attendees, including such stars as Bradley Cooper, Karli Kloss, Hugh Grant and more, was Donna Kelce.

The mother of Travis and Jason Kelce, Donna is Taylor’s mother-in-law, and the two women have already established a close relationship over the years. “Everybody knows how close Travis is with his family,” a source told Us Weekly in January 2024. “So it really means everything to him how seamlessly Taylor blends in with all of them. His family is all about just hanging out, joking and having a great time. It’s almost like she’s known his family forever, and he loves that about her.”

To celebrate 2026’s most talked-about nuptials, Us looks back on Taylor and Donna’s relationship throughout the years.

Advertisement

Related: Taylor Swift’s Best Moments With Travis Kelce’s Family

If Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce are indeed endgame, she’s seemingly already won over her in-laws. The Grammy winner and the Kansas City Chiefs tight end began dating during summer 2023. That September, Swift started attending Chiefs games, sitting with the athlete’s mother, Donna Kelce, for the first time on October 1, 2024. That same […]

September 2023

Swift went to her first Chiefs game on September 24, sitting next to Donna in a private suite. While Donna wore Travis’ No. 87 jersey and matching team-branded earrings, Swift sported a white corset-style tank with a red Chiefs hoodie.

October 2023

Donna once again sat with Swift during the Chiefs’ October 1 away game in New Jersey. Days later, she was asked about the pop star dating her son during an interview on the Today show.

“It’s fairly new, so I don’t like to talk about it,” Donna said on the morning show. “I honestly can’t tell you. It’s just too new.”

Donna also said it “was OK” interacting with Swift, but she later regretted being so blasé. According to Travis’ WSJ. Magazine profile in November 2023, he called Donna “immediately” after the broadcast and reassured his mom that “she did a super job.”

January 2024

Throughout the NFL season, Donna alternates between attending Travis and Jason’s team games. (Jason retired from the Philadelphia Eagles in early 2024.) When she hits up Travis’ games, she is often seated with Swift in a private suite.

The two women notably sat next to each other at the AFC Wild Card playoffs on January 13 and the AFC championship on January 28. During the latter, Swift wore a ring with a replica of Travis’ jersey that had been a gift from Donna.

Related: Donna Kelce Isn’t the Only NFL Mom Fans Love: A Complete Guide

Donna Kelce, Wilma McNabb and more moms of pro football players were their sons’ No. 1 fans long before their NFL days. Travis and Jason Kelce’s mother found herself in the spotlight leading up to Super Bowl LVII in February 2023, which marked the first time brothers played against one another in the championship game. […]

Advertisement

After the game, Donna updated her Facebook banner photo with a snap with Taylor and the rest of their suitemates in the box.

“That was a picture where all of us were so excited that we’re in the suite,” Donna told Today in early February.  “And we were so excited that they made it to the Super Bowl that we took a shot of everybody that was there, so it wasn’t anything calculating or anything like that.”

She added, “It was just everybody that was supporting my son and I was so happy to put that picture on Facebook, yes.”

February 2024

The Chiefs won the Super Bowl, marking the team’s second Lombardi Trophy in a row, on February 11 in Las Vegas. After the game ended, Donna and Swift walked on the field holding hands.

April 2024

Swift dropped her 11th studio album, The Tortured Poets Department, on April 19, and Donna listened to all 31 songs that same day.

“It’s her best [album],” Donna told Us less than one week later at the QVC Women’s Summit in Las Vegas.

TTPD features several songs that seemingly have Travis-coded references, though Donna played coy about whether her son was indeed Swift’s muse.

“I know there’s a few that some people think are about Travis, but we’ll just see,” Donna quipped to Us. “You know, I’ll have to ask her when I see her.”

November 2024

The duo cheered Travis on from a suite at Arrowhead Stadium during his game against the Tampa Bay Buccaneers on November 4.

January 2025

Swift and Donna hit the Arrowhead Stadium field after Travis and the Chiefs won the AFC conference championship. The two women walked onto the field holding hands before greeting Travis with a pair of sweet hugs. Swift, of course, added a kiss to her interaction. Swift and Donna were also seen warning Travis about staying away from Bourbon Street at the 2025 Super Bowl held in New Orleans.

Just months later in August, Travis proposed to Swift. The couple planned to wed in July 2026 after Donna flew into NYC for the occasion.

Thank You!

You have successfully subscribed.

Advertisement

March 2026

Seven months after Swift and Travis announced their engagement on August 26, 2025, Donna was spotted exiting the LAX airport. When approached by TMZ, she refused to spill any secrets about the upcoming event. Donna was also asked what Travis would wear to the wedding, or if she’s involved in planning, to which she replied, “Is the mother of the groom ever involved?”

She then added, “I’m just happy. Just so happy for them.” Donna can keep a secret, but she can’t hide her joy for the soon-to-be-married couple.

July 2026

It’s safe to assume Donna will be at her son’s wedding, but everyone got closer to a confirmation when she arrived in New York City on July 2, one day before the nuptials were reportedly taking place. According to TMZ, Donna was picked up by one of Swift’s drivers and was taken straight to Madison Square Garden. The tight-lipped Kelce mother was even more secretive than usual, not answering any questions or divulging any new info about the ceremony.

The hottest book series in the world is already making its way to television, as Peacock and Seth MacFarlane have teamed up for the live-action adaptation of Matt Dinniman’s Dungeon Crawler Carl. The series of novels has become a legitimate phenomenon over the past few years, selling millions of copies across its eight books and quickly branching into the worlds of comic books and tabletop gaming. Nothing has more hype or anticipation than the TV series, though, and fans are already breathing sighs of relief that Dungeon Crawler Carl has a big advantage that other popular book-to-TV adaptations didn’t.

Despite the original Dungeon Crawler Carl being published just a few years ago, the entire saga is already almost complete. The eighth novel, A Parade of Horribles, was released back in April, setting up the story for what will surely be an epic conclusion. Dinniman has confirmed that he has already been writing the chapter in the series, which will be split into two books and bring the story to a close. In other words, nearly all of Dungeon Crawler Carl is out there right now, and the ending is just around the corner. Most adaptations of long-running book series don’t get the same benefit.

‘Dungeon Crawler Carl’ Won’t Suffer the ‘Game of Thrones’ Fate

Image via Renegade Game Studios / Luciano Fleitas

Game of Thrones will, unfortunately, go down as perhaps one of the biggest fumbles to conclude an iconic TV series. The series spent six seasons as perhaps the greatest spectacle in the history of television, but the adaptation ran into big problems when it caught up to author George R.R. Martin‘s written work. After the show had worked through the already published Song of Ice and Fire books, it quickly started spiraling downhill, and the majority of fans remain disappointed in how it came to a close.

To this day, Martin still has yet to publish the next book in the series, The Winds of Winter, and many fans wonder if it will ever see the light of day. Game of Thrones is just one example of a TV adaptation arriving before the conclusion of its source material, but it is easily the most notorious of the bunch. Dungeon Crawler Carl, on the other hand, won’t suffer the same set of circumstances.

While the wait for The Winds of Winter continues, the Dungeon Crawler Carl finale is fast-approaching. There isn’t a release date for the two-part conclusion just yet, but Dinniman has been very open about his progress. He’s been working on it for some time and, given the rapid release schedule of the previous entries, it wouldn’t be surprising for the first part to arrive sometime in 2027. Regardless of the exact release date, MacFarlane and the rest of the creative team behind the TV show will have the entire story at their disposal very early on in the production process. Even if the new book isn’t here in time for them to begin production on Season 1, it will arrive long before they even get close to the show’s eventual endgame.

Plotting the Finish From the Start

In addition to simply being able to craft the ending as its original creator intended, MacFarlane & Company also have the advantage of being able to set up for some of the series’ biggest moments very early on.

Even if the final book isn’t out when the show begins shooting, Dungeon Crawler Carl is already eight books deep. We know who all the characters are and who many of them will eventually become. There are some big reveals and moments later in the series that cause some bits from the first and second book to become incredibly important — much more important than they initially seemed. Armed with the knowledge of eight entire books (and likely more), the creative team around the show can more carefully plot each season.

There are still plenty of hurdles involved with bringing Dungeon Crawler Carl into the live-action TV space, but perhaps the biggest potential challenge won’t be an issue for this series. The creative team knows exactly where this story is going to go, and there won’t be a decades-long wait to see if it ever gets an ending.

Advertisement

Network

Advertisement

Peacock

Writers

Chris Yost

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

By Brian Myers
| Published 1 hour ago

The 2009 thriller The Box had all the makings of a Hollywood hit. A-list stars (Cameron Diaz, Frank Langella, James Marsden), a $30 million budget, and a hot new director to take the lead. However, the lukewarm reception at the box office and the mediocre critical response to The Box led director Richard Kelly’s career to take an almost immediate nosedive. Fifteen years later, streaming maks it possible for viewers to get a second look at a film that deserves a lot more credit than it originally received.

Kelly had scored a major success several years leading up to the production of The Box, serving as director and screenwriter for the sleeper hit 2001 film Donnie Darko. However, in the years since The Box was released, Kelly has only had a handful of projects in the industry.

Some of this has been attributed to his own admission of wanting to prove to studios that he’s worthy of another modestly budgeted film, and some due to sheer bad luck. Kelly was set to work on a crime film titled Amicus with Sopranos star James Gandolfini, only to have the actor die from a heart attack in 2013 before the project could be started.

The Box’s Moral Conundrum

If you’ve never seen The Box, you’ll likely be intrigued by the storyline alone. Married couple Norma and Arthur Lewis (played by Diaz and Marsden, respectively) are approached by a disfigured stranger (Frank Langella) who gives them a mysterious box. Press the button inside the box, the stranger promises, and you’ll receive $1 million in cash.

However, the stranger reveals a caveat to receiving the prize money. Press the button, and someone that they do not know will die. The plot of The Box takes a good number of unpredictable twists and turns after Norma presses the button, and the young family sees a horrific fate unfold before their very eyes.

The Twilight Zone Episode

The Box was conceived from a short story written by acclaimed horror and science fiction writer Richard Matheson in 1970. Matheson’s original story, Button, Button, was turned into a radio show in the late 1970s. In 1986, a screenplay was written based on the story for an episode of the revived version of The Twilight Zone.

The theatrical version of Matheson’s story debuted in 2009 and wasn’t a favorite of critics. Though Roger Ebert gave it three out of four stars, other critics cited poor editing and the sense of the film being more of a pet project for Kelly as reasons for their dislike of The Box. Audiences at the time largely agreed as box office receipts led to barely making back the film’s budget.

The Box is certainly worth a look 15 years later, despite the lack of enthusiasm it received in 2009. The soundtrack alone should tempt a good number of curiosity seekers. Win Butler and Regine Chassagne of the pop band Arcade Fire teamed with composer Owen Pallett for a film score that more than redeems any of the film’s minor shortcomings that critics pointed out.

As of this writing, The Box can be rented or purchased on-demand through Amazon Prime Video, YouTube, Apple TV+, and Fandango at Home.

By Jason Collins
| Published 1 hour ago

The removal of content from streaming, or the absence of definitive versions, underscores the importance of media preservation. That now applies to Dark City, the 1998 neo-noir sci-fi thriller about an amnesiac man trying to recover his identity while hunted for a series of murders. The theatrical cut is available to stream for free, but if you want to watch the superior Director’s Cut, you’ll have to rent or purchase the title on-demand.

A Dystopian City Ruled By The Strangers

Dark City’s narrative is set in a dystopian city that is perpetually shrouded in darkness and controlled by a mysterious group known as the Strangers, beings that possess the ability to alter reality and reshape the city and its inhabitants’ memories at will.

The protagonist, John Murdoch (Rufus Sewell), wakes up with no memories and finds himself accused of murder, which sets him on a quest to uncover his past and the city’s darkest secrets and horrifying truths about his reality and Strangers’ manipulations.

Dark City Was Doomed At The Box Office

Dark City’s theatrical release was marred by studio interference from New Line Cinema, which diluted its thematic complexity and sense of mystery. Most notably, the studio insisted on an opening narration that prematurely explained many of the film’s biggest reveals, undercutting its suspense and intrigue.

Coupled with a marketing campaign that failed to convey the film’s unique blend of noir and sci-fi accurately, these interventions contributed to its initial lack of success among critics and audiences.

How The Director’s Cut Saved The Film

Something similar happened with Highlander II: The Quickening, which was also nearly completely ruined by its production studio, investors, and completion bond company. However, similar to Highlander II, Dark City was also saved by its Director’s Cut edition by removing the opening narration and restoring the film’s intended sense of mystery. The added scenes also deepened character development and clarified the narrative further, which significantly improved the audiences’ perception of the movie.

The added changes to the film transformed Dark City from a misunderstood gem into a cult classic that’s now appreciated for its bold narrative and visuals. Not to mention that some of its themes, such as the loss of individuality and the manipulation of reality, have become more relevant with time, particularly now, with the rising concerns about technology and privacy.

Without The Director’s Cut, It Might As Well Be Radio

The improvement introduced with the Director’s Cut propelled Dark City into a Certified Fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes. As of this writing, the film has a 78 percent critical score against an 85 percent approval rating on the Popcornmeter.

Yet, despite its acclaim, the definitive version remains relatively inaccessible. While the theatrical cut is available to stream for free on Tubi, the superior Director’s Cut is still locked behind on-demand purchases, making the film’s best version harder for casual viewers to discover.

Despite its immense quality, Dark City continues to elude many viewers because the version most deserving of its cult reputation isn’t the one most people are likely to stumble across.

By Charlene Badasie
| Published 20 seconds ago

Titan A.E. is an animated sci-fi action adventure directed by Don Bluth and Gary Goldman. Released in 2000, it was a major project for Fox Animation Studios. But despite its ambitious scope and visual appeal, the film was a commercial failure, earning $36.8 million at the box office against a budget of almost $90 million. So, the studio closed its doors, and the movie became infamous as a result.

Leaving In The Titan

Titan A.E. tells the story of a young man named Cale Tucker (Matt Damon) who is tasked with saving humanity after a hostile alien species destroys Earth. The movie begins in 3028 when The Titan Project becomes the target of a hostile alien race called the Drej. Made of pure energy, the aliens fear that the ambitious Earthly undertaking will allow humans to challenge their power.

The Drej eventually launch a massive attack on Earth, forcing humans to evacuate the planet. Amid the chaos, Professor Sam Tucker (Ron Perlman) leaves his son Cale with his alien friend Tek (Tone Loc).

Before leaving in the Titan spaceship, Sam gives Cale a gold ring and tells him that as long as he wears it, there will be hope for humanity. Over a decade later, Titan A.E. finds the surviving humans living as refugees without a home planet.

Meanwhile, Cale has become jaded and works in a space station salvage yard. Former military officer and trusted companion of Cale’s father, Joseph Korso (Bill Pullman), finds Cale and reveals that the whereabouts of the Titan are hidden in his ring. 

Becoming Fast Friends

Upon activating it, a holographic map opens. Korso asks Cale to accompany his crew to Valkyrie so they can search for the Titan together. Cale agrees and becomes fast friends with pilot Akima Kunimoto (Drew Barrymore) and three alien crew members, including first mate Preed (Nathan Lane), weapons officer Stith (Janeane Garofalo), and scientist Gune (John Leguizamo).

Using Cale’s map, they reach the planet Sesharrim, where the Gaoul reveals the Titan’s location. But everything is not as it seems in Titan A.E., as the map often changes. The crew of the Valkyrie is also faced with various challenges, including a kidnapping and a shocking betrayal that takes the story to a new level.

The Deathblow To Fox Animation Studios

Originally planned as a live-action movie named “Planet Ice,” Titan A.E. was brought to life as an animated feature due to the high costs of the visuals.

Ben Edlund penned the initial script, with John August handling re-writes. With a budget of $55 million and 19 months to complete after $30 million had already been spent on pre-production, much of the animation was computer-generated, with traditional animation used for the main characters. Despite various setbacks, like studio cutbacks and executive changes, the film was released in 2000.

However, the closure of Fox Animation Studios shortly after hindered its promotion and distribution. In fact, cutbacks at the studio during the making of Titan A.E. were largely responsible for the movie underperforming. It kind of all went wrong at once here.

Still, Titan A.E. made almost $9.4 million in its opening weekend, ranking fifth behind other popular films. However, its audience dropped by 60 percent the following weekend.

Streaming Titan A.E.

Titan A.E. received mixed reviews from critics and currently holds a 51 percent approval rating on review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes alongside a 61 percent audience score.

The movie’s DVD release featured extras like commentary by the directors, deleted scenes, and a music video. Titan A.E. is available via various video-on-demand platforms such as YouTube, Apple TV+, Amazon Prime Video, and Fandango at Home.

By Jonathan Klotz
| Published 20 seconds ago

It’s 12 years old, it’s been off and on different streaming services over the years, and yet, David Fincher’s 2014 hit Gone Girl is again in the Netflix Top Ten. There’s something about the story of a missing wife that tickle the true crime center of the brain. That’s before the first twist, and then the second one, and then a few more on top of that. By the time the credits roll, you’ll be horrified and impressed in equal measure. 

Every Man’s Worst Nightmare

Gone Girl starts with the disappearance of Amy (Rosamund Pike). Her husband, Nick (Ben Affleck) is immediately considered the prime suspect. It doesn’t help that there’s signs of a struggle in their kitchen, the small fact that he really was having an affair with one of his students played by Emily Ratajkowski, and the complete breakdown of their relationship has left him feeling, at best, completely numb inside. At worst, he thinks Amy has set him up. 

No one’s listening to anything Nick says or does in his own defense. What he says is less important than how he says it. His inability to get with the program and be the grieving, distraught husband every major news network wants to interview is more damning than all of the circumstantial evidence the police dig up. It’s everyone’s nightmare to be accused of a crime that isn’t being taken seriously. 

It’s also why Gone Girl works as well as it does. Everyone involved in the disappearance of Amy is a horrible person, with the lone exception of Nick’s sister, Margo (Carrie Coon), including Nick and Amy herself. No one’s listening to Nick’s defense, and no one listened to Amy. 

Every Woman’s Worst Nightmare

David Fincher was working off very strong source material when putting together one of the darkest, bleakest thrillers about a marriage falling apart. Author Gillian Flynn wrote the screenplay to her own blockbuster 2012 novel herself. It’s a testament to the skill and craft of everyone involved that in an era when adult thrillers were fading, the film pulled in $370 million at the box office. 

It’s Rosamund Pike’s best movie, arguably Ben Affleck’s best performance, and in the last 12 years, nothing’s come close. A wave of similar hit thriller novels came to the big screen including The Girl on the Train, but nothing hit the sweet spot of edge of your seat “what is going on here” with wild twists and characters you’ll love to hate. Or love to love. Gone Girl is a rorschach test of a film and you’ll end up seeing what you want to see. 

The success that the film has had on streaming isn’t up for debate. On every streaming service it’s been a part of Gone Girl has been a hit. True crime podcasts rising in popularity over the last decade has helped the film remain on the top of the most-watched lists. Those haven’t dipped in popularity as sadly, every year brings fresh material for the legions of podcasters out there to pour over. Gone Girl will always be relevant. 

Gone Girl is currently streaming on Netflix.

Pokémon is one of the longest-running franchises in the realm of video games, and it’s not difficult to see why. The series allows players to roam a fascinating world populated by the titular creatures. You can capture Pokémon, train and bond with them, and face numerous challenges throughout your journey across a particular region. Most mainline Pokémon games follow a similar structure, with the protagonist challenging the Gym Leaders and, eventually, the Elite Four and the Champion. Along the way, they must also overcome other obstacles, mainly an evil team aiming to control the region.

The regional evil team has been a staple of the series since Generation I introduced the iconic Team Rocket. However, in recent titles, the series has been quietly moving away from the idea, with Pokémon Scarlet and Violet featuring Team Star more as a group of misunderstood outcasts than an outright evil organization seeking regional domination. The decision has proven successful, and the games’ narratives have greatly improved. Indeed, it’s time for Pokémon to abandon the idea of evil teams entirely, making way for new and exciting plots that might also introduce more complexity to the series’ tried-and-true formula.

Evil Teams Have Grown Stale in Pokémon Games

Since Generation I of Pokémon, regional evil teams have been a crucial aspect of the franchise’s formula, making up about half of the narrative in any given mainline title. In Kanto and Johto, it’s the mob-like Team Rocket, which aims to control the regions by exploiting Pokémon for profit. In Hoenn, it’s Team Aqua and Team Magma, both seeking to expand the oceans and land, respectively. In Sinnoh, it’s Team Galactic, arguably the most deranged of them all, which seeks to literally destroy the universe and create a new one. In Unova, Team Plasma, the most sinister, wants to conquer the region by separating Trainers from Pokémon, while Kalos has Team Flare, which wants to create a “beautiful” world by using the Ultimate Weapon.

Alola and Galar have regional teams, Team Skull and Team Yell, but they’re both subservient to groups that function as the regions’ actual evil organizations: the Aether Foundation, which seeks to research and potentially control the Ultra Beasts, and Macro Cosmos, which wants to prevent an energy crisis that’s not actually set to occur for another thousand years. Similarly, the most recent region, Paldea, has Team Star, which, as previously mentioned, is just a group of misunderstood pariahs rebelling against their bullies.

For the first five generations, the evil teams in Pokémon were quite good. The trope peaked in Gens IV and V, with both Team Galactic and Team Plasma representing Pokémon villainy at its purest. The leaders of both teams, the stoic and somber Cyrus and the insane and brutal Ghetsis, are also two of the best villains in the saga, largely because of how shamelessly evil they are. Since Gen VI, the evil team trope has been on the decline; yes, Alola’s Aether Foundation is great, and Lusamine is a top-tier figure, but Team Flare and especially Macro Cosmos were very underwhelming.

Galar’s Macro Cosmos is the main reason why most fans have grown tired of the evil team trope. Its leader, Chairman Rose, is, for lack of a better word, an incredibly useless guy who’s willing to put the entire region at risk for something that won’t happen for another millennium. Let me repeat that: Rose wants to wake Eternatus to harness its energy to solve a problem that won’t actually need solving for another thousand years. It’s the peak of stupidity, and it doesn’t help that Rose is just not a good character: his villainy is meant to be a twist, but you can see it coming from a mile away.

Pokémon Games Need To Embrace Ambiguity With Its Characters

Image via the Pokémon Company

It’s not a coincidence that the downfall of evil teams in Pokémon coincided with the rise of a new type of character, one that was more morally grey and elusive than anyone we had seen before. Gen V introduced N, one of the franchise’s all-time best characters and the closest thing Pokémon has to an anti-hero. N represented an evolution of the classic Pokémon formula, representing a misguided character who opposed the protagonist while remaining compelling and even easy to root for; in other words, N was an antagonist, not a villain, and that’s exactly what Pokémon needs.

Future games followed a similar route, introducing characters who did misleading, treacherous, or even reprehensible things without necessarily being evil: AZ in Pokémon X and Y, Lusamine and Guzma in Pokémon Sun and Moon, and most recently Penny in Scarlet and Violet. The latter two games also feature the AI Professors, Turo and Sada, who act as the final bosses in the base story. They’re allies for most of the playthrough, only to reveal their ulterior motives during the story’s prologue. Turo and Sada aren’t evil, but they are a dangerous enemy and the final obstacle to overcome in Paldea. The DLC also introduces Kieran, another fascinating character who descends into desperation and becomes the main antagonist in this portion of the narrative.

All these figures greatly enhance the narratives, introducing some much-needed complexity to a franchise that has long been accused of rejecting change and refusing experimentation. Yes, the plots of most Pokémon games are still rather straightforward, but characters like N, Guzma, and Kieran offer different takes on what it means to be an antagonist. After all, a story doesn’t need a great evil to overcome, even a hero’s journey like the one most Pokémon protagonists experience.

Pokémon Must Let Go of Evil Team Once and for All

Image via The Pokémon Company

Now, I’m not saying Pokémon games need to abandon villainy for good. However, I am saying the idea of the evil team is now outdated and should probably be retired. The games can still have an overarching force for evil; just look at Volo in Pokémon Legends: Arceus, possibly the best villain in the franchise’s history. Volo is widely recognized as one of the best characters in the series, acting as the embodiment of pure evil yet acting all by himself; no need for a whole organization to back him up.

Abandoning the idea of the evil team can also free a lot of space in the average Pokémon narrative. The Starfall Street storyline is one-third of Scarlet and Violet‘s main narrative, time that could’ve been spent exploring the secrets behind the Paldea region, for example. Legends: Arceus also provides a blueprint on how to keep a narrative engaging and still have a main villain at the end of the road without any additional distractions. The evil teams in Pokémon have had a good run, but like many of the series’ other tired tropes — HMs, third versions, the Battle Frontier, etc. — it’s time to leave them in the past where they belong.

Jodie Foster isn’t holding back when it comes to Hollywood’s growing reliance on artificial intelligence. 

During a candid appearance at the Aspen Ideas Festival, the Oscar-winning actress sparked debate after pointing to Brad Pitt’s hit racing drama “F1” as an example of filmmaking that felt shaped by AI. 

While praising the movie’s commercial success, Foster questioned its storytelling approach, sparking a broader conversation about technology’s rapidly expanding role in the entertainment industry.

While speaking with former Sony executive Michael Lynton, Jodie Foster discussed how artificial intelligence is reshaping modern filmmaking.

As the conversation turned to AI’s growing influence, Foster singled out one of last year’s biggest box office successes: Pitt’s “F1.”

“I don’t say this disparagingly, how could I? This movie went on to make millions of dollars but look at a movie like F1 and I’m like, F1 was made by AI,” she said, according to Variety.

Foster also added, “Wasn’t it? I mean, the structure was exactly the structure that you would learn in school.”

The actress continued, explaining that it wasn’t the technology behind the visuals that caught her attention, but rather the film’s storytelling and dialogue.

She argued the cast delivered “lines exactly the way it would be written if a computer was writing exactly what would be the right thing for that time.”

Foster added that the filmmakers “were able to dominate the technology to make something big and beautiful and potentially where a lot of the information comes from other places.”

Foster’s Critique Comes After ‘F1’ Earned Box Office And Oscar Success

Jodie Foster’s comments come despite “F1” becoming one of last year’s biggest theatrical successes. 

Directed by Joseph Kosinski and written by Ehren Kruger, the sports drama starred Brad Pitt alongside Damson Idris, Kerry Condon, Javier Bardem, and Tobias Menzies.

Released in theaters last June, the movie earned an impressive $634.1 million worldwide against a reported budget between $200 million and $300 million. 

Beyond its commercial performance, “F1” also received four Academy Award nominations and ultimately won the Oscar for Best Sound.

Long before Foster weighed in, Kosinski had spoken extensively about making the film feel as authentic as possible, emphasizing practical filmmaking over digital shortcuts.

Speaking to Esquire last year, director Kosinski explained that authenticity was one of the driving forces behind the project.

“The audience can tell when something has been captured for real and when it’s been manufactured,” he said, revealing that the production developed “a much smaller, lighter camera system” to capture the racing action.

Rather than relying solely on visual effects, the filmmakers shot scenes during actual Formula One Grands Prix.

“Overall, I wanted it to feel like you’re really at the race. So we actually shot scenes at Grands Prix, and that meant the windows for shooting were very, very narrow,” Kosinski explained.

He revealed there were occasions when the cast and crew had only a few minutes to shoot a scene. 

“The time constraint was a huge challenge, but at the same time it kind of infuses the scenes with energy and a realism that we couldn’t have gotten any other way,” he explained.

Foster Believes AI Must Never Replace Human Creativity

While “F1” became Jodie Foster’s example during the discussion, the broader conversation centered on artificial intelligence’s growing role across Hollywood.

“AI is one more giant step forward into changing the industry,” the “Panic Room” star said before Lynton asked the question many creatives continue debating. “The big question is, is it going to replace actors and writers?” he asked.

Foster answered candidly, noting, “We do replace people.” She pointed to the growing use of AI to replicate background performers rather than hiring additional actors, arguing that technological advances should not come at the expense of workers.

“We’re getting rid of a lot of jobs and hopefully, things like unions will be able to come in and say, you can use my actor 20 times, but you’re going to pay him 20 times. And I think that’s fair,” she shared.

Jodie Foster Believes Filmmakers Should Control AI, Not The Other Way Around

While expressing concern over AI’s impact, Foster also acknowledged that the technology can serve a creative purpose when used thoughtfully.

“What we all would love is that filmmakers would be able to dominate AI, and never lose sight of that,” she said. The 63-year-old pointed to her recent film “A Private Life,” which incorporated AI during one of its dream sequences.

Although she felt the technology suited the mystery thriller, she admitted the AI-generated imagery “made no sense.”

The debate surrounding artificial intelligence has become one of Hollywood’s most polarizing issues in recent years, with actors, writers, directors, and studios weighing its benefits and risks.

However, not everyone shares Foster’s cautious outlook, as “I, Robot” director Alex Proyas argued last month that AI could actually help repair what he described as the industry’s “broken” production process.

By Chris Snellgrove
| Published 18 seconds ago

Ronald D. Moore’s Battlestar Galactica reboot is one of the most grim and gritty sci-fi shows ever created. Every bulkhead is absolutely brimming with drama, including simmering tensions between the civilian fleet and the soldiers protecting them. There’s also plenty of erotic tension, like the kind fueling every single interaction between Starbuck and Apollo. Making everything that much worse is the general premise of the show: that most of humanity has been wiped out by evil robots, and everyone who is left must constantly run, fight, and run some more to keep the genocidal clankers hoping to finish the job. 

Long story short, the series is very dramatic, and it’s filled with one weird bummer of a moment after another. However, these are counterbalanced by moments of triumph and joy made all the sweeter by our characters’ constant struggles. A great example of this is “The Hand of God,” a Season 1 episode where the Battlestar Galactica crew finally took the fight to the Cylons and won a hard-fought victory. Understandably, it was an episode that made the fans quite happy. However, what most fans don’t know is that this episode had a nickname inspired by the pioneers of the Happy Meal: McDonald’s!

Big Mac, Big Bang

The premise of “The Hand of God” is that the Battlestar Galactica crew discovers an asteroid filled with tylium, which is necessary for faster-than-light travel. There’s just one problem: it’s being guarded by the Cylons, who are busy mining it for their own needs. Sick of running and hungry for the opportunity, Commander Adama orders the asteroid to be taken by force. This is a dangerous proposition, as the ship has only narrowly escaped earlier encounters with the Cylons. But thanks to a crazy plan from Starbuck and some hotshot flying from Apollo, the Galactica crew is able to score their first real victory against the toasters, boosting morale throughout the fleet.

Incidentally, the plot of this episode was written to boost morale among the viewers as well. As written in Battlestar Galactica: The Official Companion, “The Hand of God” started when co-showrunner David Eick was taking inventory of the kinds of episodes they had already made. “I had done an interior courtroom drama, we had done an inside-Baltar’s-head episode, we had done a torture room episode and a somewhat absurd episode, and I thought we needed to remind viewers why the show’s called Battlestar Galactica, he said. “So I asked David [Weddle] and Bradley [Thompson] to give us a ‘Big Mac’—a big combat show.”

Smoke’em If You Got’em

What made “The Hand of God” a “big combat show,” exactly? Basically, Battlestar Galactica didn’t have enough of a budget to show extravagant space fights in every episode. Frankly, that’s one of the reasons so much time is spent on Caprica and aboard the Galactica. Nonetheless, Eick and the other producers knew how much fans loved the show’s killer space battles. “Big Mac” was a fitting nickname, then, as it referred to giving viewers much more of the action (i.e., the meat) than they normally got.

In this case, David Eick’s instincts were perfectly correct: “The Hand of God” ended up being a crowd-pleasing fan-favorite, largely because of the ambitious outer space battles. After watching our heroes get their butts kicked for so much of Season 1, this victory over the dastardly Cylons felt downright cathartic. This was an episode that set the bar for such scenes quite high; fortunately, the Battlestar Galactica writers and producers rose to the challenge, and the action on this show only gets better over time. If you’re as religious as Six, you might say this was because the series’ success was guided by the titular hand of god. 

Or, quite possibly, the white-gloved hand of a darker, much more Eldritch figure: Ronald McDonald!

By Chris Snellgrove
| Published 53 seconds ago

Part of why James Gunn’s Superman was such a good movie is that it was a relatively self-contained adventure that still planted interesting seeds for future projects. One of those seeds was the surprise appearance of a party-loving Supergirl, which set her up for her own solo spinoff film. Lex Luthor’s arrest, meanwhile, set up his fun cameo in Peacemaker and his future appearance in Superman: The Man of Tomorrow. We also saw Superman’s evil clone disappear into a black hole, which some fans saw as the end of his story. However, many others are convinced that this is setting him up to be the Big Bad of a future DCU film. 

For example, it’s possible that the clone ended up in a different universe. That universe may be the DCU’s version of Earth 2, a world ruled by an evil Justice League. If so, the clone may reappear as Ultraman, who is the leader of that evil league in the comics. However, there is a different theory: based on his outfit in Superman, the clone may eventually resurface as Doomsday, the villain capable of outright killing Superman. It’s a cool theory, but if James Gunn chooses to go this route, audiences will be unimpressed. Why is that? Simple: this exact plot already appeared in the TV show Superman & Lois!

Attack Of The Clone

Early on in Superman, we discover that our titular hero has, shockingly, gotten his butt kicked by a guy named the “Hammer of Boravia.” Who could actually go toe to toe with the Man of Steel? Eventually, we learn the surprising truth: the Hammer of Boravia is actually Lex Luthor’s pet clone of Superman, one who can be given remote commands during battle. It looks like the clone might actually beat Superman near the end, but he gets tossed into a black hole. But fans have long suspected he might have ended up somewhere in the multiverse, especially after Peacemaker confirmed the existence of other realities.

One theory is that he ended up on Earth 2, from which he will eventually lead an evil Justice League. However, other fans have theorized that he could come back as Doomsday. While the clone doesn’t have Doomsday’s rocky face, he did wear a suit and mask very similar to what Doomsday wore in the comics, right down to the goggles. While this would be cool onscreen, it would also be more than a bit derivative. In Superman & Lois, Bizarro was an evil Superman clone that Lex Luthor transformed into Doomsday. Should this happen in the DCU, it may cause some fans to worry that James Gunn is officially out of ideas.

A Classic Comic Villain Returns

Obviously, all new comic book media borrows from what came before, so the DCU was always destined to have some similarities to previous DC media. Nonetheless, a major part of this cinematic universe’s success has been surprising us with beloved characters who are very different from previous onscreen appearances. Superman & Lois was a great show, one that all DC fans owe it to themselves to watch. But if Gunn ends up stealing the show’s idea of turning an evil Superman clone into Doomsday, future DCU movies may bomb like Supergirl did. After all, why head to the theater for a “new” story when you can just watch the reruns they stole from?

Obviously, we don’t know what the future holds (if anything) for the evil Superman clone. Should he return as Doomsday, Ultraman, or even just as himself, it won’t be until the third Superman film at the absolute earliest. Of course, we’ll be lucky to have a DCU by then; with Supergirl being a critical and commercial flop, Warner Bros. may completely reevaluate its approach to future superhero movies. That may mean getting a new leader to bring this cinematic universe to life. Who will it be? One thing’s for sure: it’s not going to be a clone (evil or otherwise) of James Gunn!