By Chris Snellgrove
| Published 18 seconds ago

Disney just dropped an unexpected summer treat on fans: a trailer for the second season of X-Men ‘97. Frankly, it looks absolutely awesome, with plenty of killer action sequences and hints of fan-favorite comic storylines. The first season of the show was the best Marvel project in years, and this trailer establishes that this was no fluke. X-Men ‘97 Season 2 looks like it will deliver even more of what audiences have been craving, and Disney revealed that Seasons 3 and 4 are already in production and that we’ll be getting a new season of this breakout animated series each year for the next couple of years. 

For fans of Marvel’s merry band of mutants, this is everything we’ve been waiting to hear and then some. But this is one case where we might be getting a little too much of a good thing. Why is that? As I have written about before, X-Men ‘97 is so awesome that it’s setting completely unrealistic expectations for future Marvel projects. Between the show’s awesome writing and its seamless inclusion of awesome comic storylines, one thing is clear: the upcoming live-action X-Men movie is going to be a major disappointment, and that might be enough to fully halt the momentum the MCU has been desperately trying to regain.

The X-Men Movie: What We Know

Right now, we only know a few details about the upcoming X-Men movie set in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. It’s going to be directed by Jake Schreier, the same man who brought us The Thunderbolts. Theoretically, that’s good news. The Thunderbolts was a critically acclaimed movie, one that had particularly solid interactions between its eclectic characters, and that should serve Schreier well when directing the X-Men film. Additionally, MCU guru Kevin Feige told CBR that he thought the director “has his pulse on … a younger demographic.” This is crucial “because X-Men, as it was in the comics, will be a very youth-oriented, focused, and cast movie.”

Beyond that, very little is known. The MCU X-Men movie doesn’t have a release date, though we know it will be released after Avengers: Doomsday and Avengers: Secret Wars come out. This is presumably because the latter film will be doing a reboot of this cinematic universe, which will presumably explain why mutants are now one of the dominant forces in the MCU. It’s no secret that Feige wants these mutants to be the new focal point of this rebooted universe. Unfortunately, that plan may already be unraveling thanks to the continued success of X-Men ‘97!

Send In The Toons

There’s a famous proverb (often attributed to Teddy Roosevelt) that says, “Comparison is the thief of joy.” The meaning is quite simple: it’s hard to be happy with something you’d otherwise like once you have something else to compare it to. In a vacuum, the X-Men MCU movie would likely be an unqualified hit, especially if (and this isn’t exactly a huge hurdle) it’s notably better than other disappointing team-based films like Eternals and The Fantastic Four: First Steps. But when this team makes its official live-action debut, fans will inevitably start comparing it to X-Men ‘97, and that’s not going to go well for Kevin Feige.

Obviously, X-Men ‘97 is an excellent show on its own. It has world-class writing, killer lore, and some of the best character chemistry to ever grace superhero television. But part of why it was so successful was that this mutant franchise has been decidedly hit or miss over the years. The first two 20th Century Fox films were great, but the third one was an unmitigated disaster. The same thing happened when the studio rebooted the universe (sort of): X-Men: First Class and Days of Future Past were blockbuster successes, but X-Men: Apocalypse was a huge letdown, and Dark Phoenix was so bad that most who watched it have spent years trying to get its taste out of their mouths.

The MCU’s Apocalypse Is Here

After that last cinematic failure, X-Men fans’ expectations had hit rock bottom. Therefore, it was that much easier for X-Men ’97 to completely blow us away. But by the time the MCU X-Men movie comes out, fans will have enjoyed at least four seasons of this franchise’s hit animated series, plus Deadpool & Wolverine. By that point, their expectations will be through the roof, and if the X-Men movie is anything less than brilliant, it will be rejected by fans and become a box office bomb. Should that happen, then Kevin Feige’s final, most ambitious plans to reignite interest in the MCU will fail right alongside the movie.

As a lifelong X-Men fan, this is one of those times when I’m desperately hoping to be wrong. With any luck, the X-Men movie will be even better than X-Men ‘97, and we’ll enter a new golden age of mutant mania. However, this beloved show has set the bar almost impossibly high for the upcoming film, and with the MCU’s recent spotty record, it may be impossible to meet those expectations. That could spell doom for the biggest cinematic universe in history, and fans will again be stuck right where they are: spending years hoping someone can make mainstream audiences actually care about the X-Men again.

screenwashed (adjective) — When something seen on a screen completely changes how someone thinks or feels, as if their old beliefs were erased and replaced by what they just saw.

By Joshua Tyler
| Published 2 minutes ago

In 2020, violent protests rocked the United States, devastating major cities. Since then, dozens more have appeared, so many that it almost seems normal.

But it isn’t normal. 

Make a list of the most violent protests of the past 20 years, and you’ll find that the majority of them didn’t happen until after 2019. Before that, most protests, even the big ones like Occupy Wall Street or the Tea Party protests of the early 2000s, were just a lot of dudes walking around with signs until it got dark. There were exceptions, like the disastrous riots in Ferguson, Missouri, but those were noteworthy because they were unusual.

Now, violence, particularly from supposedly peaceful protesters themselves, is the norm. A daily occurrence in some cities, a regular seasonal event in others. What changed? In 2019, one movie took theaters by storm and manipulated its most ardent viewers to stop playing nice. 

This is the story of how Joker screenwashed Americans into accepting violence as personal expression. 

The Story Of Joker

Joker was billed as being about Batman’s arch-nemesis, but it has no true connection to the world of comic books. Instead, it’s a grim character study about Arthur Fleck, a mentally ill, socially invisible man slowly crushed by a city that doesn’t care whether he lives or dies. There are no superheroes, no grand conspiracies, and no redemption arc, just a sad, broken man discovering that the only time the world notices him is when he stops playing by its rules and embraces nihilism.

When Joker arrived in theaters, it was both controversial and a huge box office hit. No movie captured a bigger share of the cultural conversation in 2019 than it did, and theaters were packed with people looking for something edgy, different, and maybe even dangerous.

The Lone Observer

The debate over Joker often centered on whether it might inspire mass shootings or homicides. All of that discussion missed the true danger in the film.

Only one person saw the truth. It wasn’t mass murderers or an increase in individual homicides that we needed to worry about. A few months after Joker’s release, at the start of the George Floyd riots in 2020, master persuader Scott Adams made this observation:

“I’m willing to bet 90% of the protesters have seen Joker. It’s so powerful and well-made that it bounces around in your brain and burrows in, forming a dominant go-to pattern for your thinking.” – Scott Adams

Scott then asked, “Can one movie nudge a young person into violence and anarchy? A bad movie can’t. Even a good movie can’t do that. But Joker can. That movie is next-level, persuasion.”

Joker doesn’t merely depict unrest; it romanticizes it. It does it, using some very specific persuasion tricks.  

Catharsis Through Violence

The film presents social collapse as catharsis. Arthur Fleck’s personal breakdown is fused to a citywide explosion of masked demonstrators who burn, riot, and kill. All while the camera treats it like liberation. 

That’s what Catharsis is. The release of pent-up emotion through experience or expression leaves the mind clearer by safely discharging feelings that were previously contained or unresolved.

The need for catharsis exists in all of us. It’s an irresistible pull. That can be healthy, prompting reflection, relief, and clarity. But it can also distort judgment, causing people to chase emotional release for its own sake, overreact, or embrace narratives that justify anger, sadness, or guilt just to feel unburdened.

That’s what Joker taps into.

The violence isn’t framed as tragic or cautionary. It’s operatic. The mob becomes the chorus validating Arthur’s transformation. Gotham’s chaos isn’t shown as a failure of civilization, but as a necessary purge. This matters because culture isn’t created through instruction; it’s learned by association.

Arthur Fleck is introduced as powerless, humiliated, and ignored. By anchoring the audience inside his suffering before any violence occurs, the film ensures viewers emotionally identify with him.

Joker’s Six Screenwashing Tricks

Joker screenwashes its audience by employing six distinct persuasion techniques.

In Joker, responsibility for violence is consistently shifted away from the character and onto abstract forces: “the system,” “the rich,” “society.” This trains viewers to see violence as an inevitable consequence, not a moral failure.

• Two, Aestheticization of Chaos

Riots are filmed beautifully in Joker. When violence is visually pleasing, the brain associates it with power and release rather than danger or shame.

• Three, Catharsis Substitution

The film substitutes violence for resolution. Destruction itself is the payoff, reinforcing the idea that “burning it down” is a valid emotional endpoint.

Arthur’s transformation is validated not by reasoned argument, but by mass approval. Viewers subconsciously absorb the same validation loop.

• Five, Thinking Past The Sale

Joker’s story strongly implies that violent societal collapse is unavoidable. When outcomes feel predetermined, audiences stop asking whether violence is right and start asking only when.

• Six, Meaning Injection Into Rage

Most importantly, the film gives rage a story. Raw anger becomes “truth.” Once anger is framed as insight rather than impulse, acting on it feels justified.

Before Joker, America had a culture in which only truly peaceful protest was acceptable. After Joker, the cultural zeitgeist became one in which violent protest wasn’t just acceptable; it was the only way to be heard. 

In the movie, Joker had nothing to say; he just wanted to be heard. And now, being heard is all that matters, not whether or not you have anything worth saying.

The Case Against Joker’s Power Of Persuasion

Those without an understanding of persuasion say audiences are smart enough to separate fiction from reality and can’t be affected by what they see in screen.  If culture can be changed by a single movie, then why didn’t the movie V for Vendetta have a similar effect? 

A movie like V for Vendetta could never achieve the same effect because it frames violence as symbolic, ideological, and abstract, not emotionally personal. V is not an everyman the audience inhabits; he’s a mythic construct with clarity, planning, and moral certainty. His actions are presented as an allegory, not catharsis. The film creates distance through stylization, speeches, and overt political philosophy. This keeps viewers analyzing rather than identifying. 

Joker is a totally unique piece of screenwashing because of the way it collapses that distance, rooting chaos in intimate humiliation and emotional grievance, making mass violent release feel personal, spontaneous, and psychologically relatable rather than theatrical or ideological.

Was Joker’s Impact Intentional?

I think it’s important to say here that it’s not clear if plunging America into endless violent riots was the intent of director Todd Phillips when he made Joker. Little is known about Phillips’ personal political views; he refuses to be categorized. 

It’s possible Phillips’s goal was something besides the one he achieved. Indeed, the movie’s sequel suggests he wasn’t entirely happy with the effect his first movie had on its viewers. Joker 2 attempts to undo much of what the first movie did, revealing Joker as a fraud and his followers equally so.

Of course, Joker wasn’t solely to blame for a cultural shift towards violence. COVID lockdowns created a powder keg, and irresponsible media coverage lit it. But would things have gone as badly as they did, and continue in that direction for years after, if Joker hadn’t been there, at that exact moment, to condition rioters in advance?

Watch one of the riot scenes from Joker. Then watch any Portland, Oregon protest and ask yourself if what you’re seeing is organic or just Joker cosplay. 

Joker didn’t invent violent protest. But it did something arguably more influential: it made violent protest feel understandable, beautiful, and emotionally correct. Once culture grants moral permission, reality tends to follow, no manifesto required.

Congratulations, fiery but mostly peaceful protestors, you’ve been Screenwashed.

By Robert Scucci
| Published 8 seconds ago

As of May 25, 2026, The Brave Little Toaster (1987) is finally available to stream on Disney+. Years ago, I wrote about how Disney+ was bizarrely missing the title from its streaming catalog despite hosting its much crappier sequels, The Brave Little Toaster to the Rescue (1997) and The Brave Little Toaster Goes to Mars (1998). To anybody who grew up with the original film, this always felt strange because Disney had long treated The Brave Little Toaster like part of its extended family while simultaneously keeping the actual movie locked away.

The reason came down to rights issues and the complicated history behind the film itself. While Disney distributed the movie on home video and eventually absorbed much of the talent that helped create it, the original film was produced independently by Hyperion Pictures. Disney had stronger ownership and distribution control over the direct-to-video sequels, which is why those movies hit Disney+ years before the original ever did. For years, the streaming rights surrounding the 1987 film appeared to be tied up in older licensing agreements that left it in limbo.

A Cult Classic Disney Couldn’t Fully Claim

The Brave Little Toaster has always occupied a weird space in Disney history because the film’s DNA is deeply tied to the company even though it wasn’t fully born under the Disney banner. The project was spearheaded by former Disney employees, including future Pixar co-founder John Lasseter, and many people have referred to Hyperion Pictures as a proto-Pixar operation because of the talent involved. Disney originally passed on fully backing the film after executives reportedly questioned whether audiences would connect with a story centered around talking appliances.

Despite its rocky production history and extremely limited theatrical release, The Brave Little Toaster refused to disappear. The film found its audience through VHS rentals and syndication on the Disney Channel throughout the late ’80s and early ’90s, becoming one of those formative childhood movies that traumatized an entire generation with air conditioners having mental breakdowns and horrifying junkyard death songs. Disney eventually released the movie on DVD in 2003, but for years, streaming remained the one place fans still couldn’t easily find it.

While I’m no lawyer, I’m pretty good at basic math. I can’t find anything publicly stating that Disney officially secured the rights, but Disney+ has been going heavy on throwback additions and has more money than God. So, I’m operating under the reasonable assumption that Disney either renegotiated the streaming rights with Hyperion Pictures or simply bought them outright, knowing longtime fans of the movie would finally be able to stream it at home alongside the other two movies that only belong to the Brave Little Toaster franchise by name (they’re terrible).

We Can Finally Pay It Forward, And Scar Our Kids For Life

On its face, The Brave Little Toaster is basically an early version of Toy Story. Here, we have talking appliances who come to the horrifying realization that their “Master” has abandoned them, prompting them to set out in search of him after their Jack Nicholson-sounding air conditioner friend has a life-ending mental breakdown.

They trudge through treacherous terrain. Toaster (Deanna Oliver) experiences a disturbing nightmare sequence in which a clown rises out of a fire with smoke billowing through his gritted teeth, prompting him to “run” before he falls into a bathtub and gets electrocuted to death. The gang eventually ends up in a repair shop where the owner guts other appliances alive for parts before the film culminates in the third-act junkyard sequence, where every single character we’ve grown attached to faces certain death while hoping to be rescued before they’re crushed into submission.

As terrifying as The Brave Little Toaster may be, and trust me, this movie made me ugly cry when I was a child, it also tells an incredibly wholesome story about found family, resilience, and the power of friendship in a way that no Disney or Pixar film has really achieved since. It proves that hope can exist in a world full of pain if you refuse to let the elements beat you down. The film resonated with an entire generation of kids who all have kids of their own now.

Modern life has only gotten more complex and difficult since 1987, and even as adults, we could all learn something from The Brave Little Toaster. And that message is simple: don’t give up. Ironically enough, the film’s home-viewing legacy is almost as poignant as its original messaging. If you’re dealt a bad hand, you need to persevere. Only then can you reemerge from the ashes like a phoenix, or, like the horrifying clown demon in the film, look around, and say to yourself, “everything’s going to be okay.”

As of this writing, and hopefully forever, The Brave Little Toaster is streaming on Disney+.

Bebe Rexha is once again speaking out after cruel online comments about her body exploded following her appearance at the 2026 American Music Awards. 

While the singer stunned on the red carpet in a sleek dress, social media quickly filled with harsh remarks targeting her weight. 

Instead of staying silent, Rexha responded with humor and confidence, reminding critics she has spent years openly discussing her struggles with body image, fluctuating weight, and living with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome, also known as PCOS.

Bebe Rexha wasted no time shutting down body-shaming comments after appearing at the AMAs on Monday night.

The 36-year-old singer walked the red carpet in a fitted black gown, but her appearance quickly became the subject of online criticism from trolls posting rude comments about her body.

“You know she’s not on Ozempic,” one person wrote online per the Daily Mail, while another added, “She needs to lay off the Twinkies.” A separate user cruelly posted, “Everyone discovers Ozempic. She discovers food.”

The criticism intensified after the account @HustleBitch_ shared an older photo of Rexha beside a recent image from the awards show alongside the caption, “Singer Bebe Rexha is going viral after fans noticed how different she looked at the American Music Awards. Be honest… what’s your first thought?”

Rather than directly arguing with critics, Rexha delivered a sarcastic response promoting her upcoming music. “My thought is… My new album dirty blonde is out June 12th. Available for pre order now,” she wrote on X.

Rexha Previously Revealed Her PCOS Diagnosis

As the online comments spread, many supporters pointed out that Bebe Rexha has previously spoken publicly about living with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome.

Advertisement

The singer revealed her PCOS diagnosis in 2023 while discussing her struggles with fluctuating weight and public scrutiny. 

According to the World Health Organization, PCOS is a chronic metabolic condition that can increase the risk of weight gain.

Rexha has repeatedly addressed how difficult it can be to navigate body changes while constantly being judged online. 

In one candid Instagram post from 2023, she lifted her sweatshirt to reveal her stomach while embracing her appearance.

Advertisement

“Yes, I’m in my fat era and what?” she wrote on X at the time.

The singer’s openness about her health challenges has earned praise from fans over the years, particularly because she has never pretended that the criticism does not affect her emotionally.

Bebe Rexha Admitted Public Scrutiny ‘Does Mess With You’

Rexha also previously opened up about body-shaming during an appearance on “The Jennifer Hudson Show.”

While speaking with Jennifer Hudson, the singer acknowledged that public commentary about celebrities’ appearances can become overwhelming.

Advertisement

“Listen, we’re in the public eye, so that’s bound to happen,” Rexha explained. She admitted that her body had changed over time, noting, “I was a lot thinner and I did gain some weight – that comes with the territory.”

Even though she understood why people discussed it, Rexha admitted the criticism still affected her emotionally. “I’m not mad about it because it is true, but when you see things like that, it does mess with you,” she said.

The singer also emphasized that strangers online rarely understand what someone may be privately experiencing. 

Rexha then expressed frustration that conversations around women’s weight remain so common. “But I feel like we’re in 2023 … we should not be talking about people’s weight,” she noted.

Advertisement

Rexha Joked About Loving Food Amid Online Criticism

Seeing that search bar is so upsetting. I’m not mad cause it’s true. I did gain weight. But it just sucks. Thank you to all the people who love me no matter what. pic.twitter.com/EGkGybhcRY

— Bebe Rexha (@BebeRexha) April 16, 2023

Despite the harsh comments, Bebe Rexha has often tried to approach criticism with honesty and self-awareness. 

During her conversation with Hudson, the “I’m Good” singer lightened the mood while discussing her relationship with food.

“Listen … I like to eat, okay? I like to eat,” Rexha joked. Hudson immediately supported her response, telling her, “Ain’t nothing wrong with that!”

Advertisement

Rexha has repeatedly acknowledged that she struggles to read online commentary, even when she knows it can be harmful.

At one point, she admitted she searched through TikTok comments after noticing “Bebe Rexha weight gain” trending online.

“Seeing that search bar is so upsetting,” she later tweeted. The star also thanked supporters who continued standing by her regardless of how her appearance changed. “Thank you to all the people who love me no matter what,” she wrote.

Bebe Rexha Says She’s ‘Working On Myself Everyday’

Although Rexha continues to face criticism online, she has made it clear that she is focused on herself rather than trying to satisfy internet trolls.

In another candid social media message, the songwriter admitted she has battled body image issues for years. “I’ve always struggled with my weight,” Rexha confessed, adding, “A bi*ch likes to eat.”

Advertisement

She also reassured followers that she continues working on her health and mental well-being despite the negativity surrounding her.

“I’m working on myself everyday,” she shared. Still, Rexha admitted the online commentary can occasionally wear her down emotionally. In her words, “Just discouraged a bit right now.”

I have a confession to make: I’m a latecomer to For All Mankind. While I’ve long believed that Apple TV is one of the best streamers out there in terms of its full-throated embrace of the sci-fi genre, the truth is that I’ve been forced to take my time working through its streaming library. I’ve watched every episode of shows like Murderbot and Severance, and I’ll bang the drum all day in praise of Pluribus, but I somehow overlooked Ronald D. Moore, Matt Wolpert, and Ben Nedivi‘s alt-history sci-fi drama until the weeks leading up to its Season 5 premiere. (For what it’s worth, though, For All Mankind makes for an excellent binge, albeit a stressful one, in which you often find yourself shouting at the screen over certain Baldwins and their occasionally questionable decision-making.) Not only is the show a fascinating examination of how a specific turning point in global history can have ripple effects that span generations, but it’s also an emotional character drama consisting of absolutely laudable performances.

Now that I’m fully caught up (and yes, that includes this week’s Season 5 finale), I had more than one reason to be drawn in by the premise of Star City. Apple TV’s first official For All Mankind spin-off jumps back in time to the historical divergence depicted in the original series’ first episode, in which the Soviets successfully beat the United States to the achievement of a crewed Moon landing. It’s an intriguing foundation for a series on its own, as For All Mankind previously proved, but where Star City differentiates itself isn’t just in answering some of the biggest questions surrounding the Soviet space program, but in embracing a completely different genre to do so.

What Is ‘Star City’ About?

As the show’s title indicates, Star City is set in the designated headquarters for the Soviet space program, but its story begins at the same place as For All Mankind, with cosmonaut Alexei Leonov’s Moon landing, which sees Russia’s decisive victory over the U.S. in a major lunar achievement. At the head of it all is a man only known as the Chief Designer (Rhys Ifans), both for his personal safety and as an effort to safeguard the space program, the exposure of which could have deadly ramifications. Despite constant oversight and interference, the Chief Designer has secret aspirations to carry out a wholly different space mission, but it won’t be possible without a little help from a few unlikely allies, including young engineer Sergei Nikulov (Josef Davies) and recruited scientist Lakshmi (Priya Kansara).

It’s quickly established that Star City has a very different approach to protecting its secrets, with the upper echelons of the KGB willing to resort to covert and invasive methods to monitor anyone and everyone, regardless of where their loyalties actually lie. KGB head Lyudmilla Raskova (Anna Maxwell Martin) rules over the surveillance pool with an iron fist, while new hire Irina Morozova (Agnes O’Casey) wrestles with the undeniably invasive nature of her job alongside her greater professional ambitions.

No one is immune to Star City’s intelligence-gathering, not even the young cosmonauts who are dutifully completing their training in the hopes of making it into space. Valya Markelov (Adam Nagaitis) is the program’s most respected cosmonaut, but his wife, Tanya (Ruby Ashbourne Serkis), chafes against Star City’s restrictions. Meanwhile, Sasha Polivanov (Solly McLeod) could stand to take his role as cosmonaut more seriously, but things change once he’s paired up with a familiar name to For All Mankind fans in Anastasia Belikova (Alice Englert), whose larger aspirations are often weighed against her relative inexperience.

‘Star City’ Pulls Back the Curtain on ‘For All Mankind’s Biggest Untold Story

Image via Apple TV

Although For All Mankind has occasionally delved into the Soviet side of its narrative, chiefly through NASA engineer Margo Madison’s (Wrenn Schmidt) tragically complex storyline, Star City finds itself in the unique position to expand on some of the original series’ most pivotal moments surrounding the initial space race. Some characters will instantly be familiar to longtime fans, but there’s a thrill that comes from watching this depiction of their most defining years, especially when they’re written this well. O’Casey and Davies may have the biggest hurdles to overcome in terms of portraying Star City‘s most recognizable names, but they both deftly rise to meet the challenge; Davies, in particular, bears such a striking resemblance to original actor Piotr Adamczyk that I recognized Sergei even before he was introduced explicitly by name. Englert has the responsibility of building out one of For All Mankind‘s least-defined characters, and it’s a treat to watch her excavate Belikova’s layers as she faces the difficulties of being one of the only female cosmonauts in a male-dominated field.

Other cast members responsible for depicting the show’s completely original characters lend Star City even more of its intrigue. Ifans, who once again joins an existing franchise spin-off, approaches the role of the enigmatic Chief Designer with potent cunning and charm, while Martin is equal parts chilling and riveting as a KGB department head who seemingly answers to no one. Nagaitis’ Valya could easily earn comparisons to his most infamous role on AMC’s The Terror, but the actor unearths new levels of desperation to make the cosmonaut more sympathetic than Hickey ever was. It’s likely no coincidence that some of Nagaitis’ best scenes occur opposite his onscreen spouse, especially once both husband and wife start to feel the pressure of Star City’s constant supervision; the glimpses we earn of Tanya’s more free-spirited and rebellious nature are confirmation that Serkis was the perfect choice for the role. One of the biggest questions I was left with while watching, however, had more to do with the spin-off’s lack of any distinct Russian accents; Star City‘s cast mostly embraces a generic English cadence, which does serve as a notable departure from For All Mankind‘s approach.

‘Star City’ Is a Completely Different Change of Pace for the ‘For All Mankind’ Franchise

The new opening credits of Star City make one thing clear: this is a very different show — not merely in the story’s focus and tone, but also in the series’ aesthetic. There’s a distinctly grainier, grittier look to the spin-off’s scenes that immediately sets it apart; some of that is certainly in large part due to the setting itself, with its austere and minimalist architecture calling a very specific time and place to mind. It honestly might feel jarring to be plunged into Star City‘s ’60s Cold War era, with very little warmth to speak of in its palette, especially if you’re caught up with For All Mankind as a sci-fi epic that has evolved far beyond its current 2010s timeline. While its darker cinematography can occasionally tip too far into streaming television’s biggest struggle, rendering some scenes difficult to decipher, it’s also instantly immersive as a backdrop.

Given that the Soviet space program was also historically shrouded in secrecy, it makes perfect sense for the majority of Star City‘s storylines to deal in that very theme, and the result is a successful pivot into full spy thriller territory. Watching the first five episodes provided for review calls the very best parts of FX’s The Americans to mind, especially with Star City‘s emphasis on the cost of deception and how increasingly stacking lies can culminate disastrously, not just for those directly involved but for their closest loved ones as well.

An equally transfixing element can be found in the series’ depiction of surveillance work and how surprisingly intimate it can be for someone like Irina, for instance, to listen in on every single second of another person’s day-to-day life, combing through audio recordings for even the slightest whiff of political treachery. By the time Irina comes face-to-face with the individual she’s been monitoring, it’s a delicious instance of internal drama that revolves around her juggling her knowledge of their secrets against the facade they choose to present to the world. Once Irina’s personal truths are also exposed, it doubles as a reminder that even the characters we thought we knew best from For All Mankind all had to start somewhere.

The best decision Star City makes isn’t to copy or mimic what came before on the original series, but to carve out a completely separate path within the overall franchise. There are still sequences that unmistakably call the spin-off’s predecessor to mind, particularly when the story embraces those familiarly fraught space missions where everything can and will go wrong in a matter of seconds. However, Star City‘s distinct visuals, sharp performances, and compelling narrative that pulls back the curtain on the mysteries surrounding the Soviet position in the space race all combine for a spin-off that doesn’t necessarily need to match For All Mankind‘s longevity to be gripping in the moment.

Star City premieres May 29 with its first two episodes on Apple TV.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Release Date

May 29, 2026

Network

Apple TV

Advertisement

Showrunner

Ben Nedivi, Matt Wolpert

Advertisement

Writers

Megan McDonnell

Advertisement

Cast

Advertisement

• 
• 

  Anna Maxwell Martin

  Lyudmilla

Advertisement

Advertisement

Pros & Cons

• The cast is full of standouts, from Rhys Ifans’ enigmatic Chief Designer to Anna Maxwell Martin’s chilling KGB head Lyudmilla.
• Agnes O’Casey and Josef Davies deliver terrific performances as the younger versions of For All Mankind’s Irina and Sergei.
• The show’s decision to embrace the spy thriller genre feels perfectly aligned to the story it’s telling.

• The stark difference in cinematography means that some scenes land just this side of too murky to be decipherable.

Advertisement

Jennifer Lopez doesn’t need a man to make her happy.

The Office Romance star, 56, said she’s happily single and in no rush to get into a new relationship following her divorce from Ben Affleck in 2025.

“You’re single right now,” comedian Jimmy Kimmel noted to the actress, who was a guest on the Wednesday, May 27, episode of Jimmy Kimmel Live!

Lopez quipped in response, “I am. I should have done it sooner! I’ve been doing it all wrong. Trust me.”

Related: What Jennifer Lopez Has Said About Love and Romance

Presley Ann/Getty Images Jennifer Lopez has had love on the brain through the years — regardless of her relationship or marital status. During a 2024 appearance on Carrie & Tommy’s Australian radio show, Lopez called herself “more of a love addict or a workaholic than everything else.” Before she was a household name, Lopez’s first […]

Kimmel, 58, then floated the idea that Lopez find love on reality television, asking, “Would you consider becoming the next Bachelorette here on ABC?”

“No. Are you crazy?” Lopez emphatically responded. “I’m not doing anything to ruin how I feel right now. It’s fantastic. I love it.”

“It seems hard for you to meet people otherwise,” Kimmel reasoned. However, Lopez replied, “I’ll meet somebody somewhere one day, if they’re good enough.”

Kimmel went on, “I think it would be great if we put you in a house with 25 weirdos. Wouldn’t it be funny even just as a prank that they haven’t met the Bachelorette yet, and then you walk out and they all s*** their pants simultaneously?”

“I can’t. I could never. I can’t do it,” Lopez responded, adding, “I’m good right now. I’m happy.”

Lopez finalized her divorce from longtime love Affleck, 53, in January 2025. She initially filed for divorce in August 2024, two years after they tied the knot.

Lopez and Affleck were initially engaged in the early 2000s after meeting on the set of the movie Gigli. They were due to get married in September 2003 but called off the wedding days before it was set to take place. They later split in January 2004.

The former couple reconnected in 2021 and got engaged for a second time in April 2022. They tied the knot in Las Vegas in July that year and held a second wedding ceremony in Georiga the following month.

In March, Lopez reflected on pushing the reset button following her fourth divorce. (She was previously married to Ojani Noa from 1997 to 1998, Criss Judd from 2001 to 2003 and Marc Anthony from 2004 to 2014.)

Thank You!

You have successfully subscribed.

“I took a year off,” Lopez said during an appearance on Good Morning America, explaining that she had to “stop everything” after splitting from Affleck. “I canceled tours. I decided to just be home and sit in what had happened without running away from it through work, through another person, through anything. Just sit.”

“I was just at a point where I was like, ‘What is going on with you?’” she continued. “I couldn’t blame anybody else because I don’t think that’s where the lesson is. And so, I really needed to figure myself out.”

Lopez added, “I feel like for the first time in my life, I’m free. I’m on my own. It feels really good. I didn’t really know what that felt like since I was in my early 20s, and even before that I always had a boyfriend. There was always someone in my life and so many other things that I felt were out of my control. I’ve gotten to the point where I really trust myself and appreciate myself a little bit more.”

Rocking a tee and jeans combo is always tempting, but not when it’s 80 degrees and sunny outside. Thankfully, breezy summer dresses are even comfier than this tried-and-true pairing, not to mention much more stylish. The right dress makes you appear put together with any pair of shoes, be it sneakers, sandals or even flip-flops.

These 13 easy, comfortable dresses handle casual plans without a second thought, allowing you to be dressed and out the door in minutes. Consider this your shortcut to looking like a rich mom on days you’d rather not think about it. Our favorites start at just $8!

13 Comfy One-and-Done Dresses — From $8

1. Our Favorite: With a lapel collar and puff sleeves, this striped midi dress has a preppy and polished feel. The A-line skirt skims without clinging, making it a flattering silhouette for most body types.

2. Barely There: When waistbands feel too constricting, this flowy tiered sundress saves the day. It floats away from your body in a flattering way, keeping you cool on your busiest days.

3. Wrinkle-Free: Toss this wrinkle-proof T-shirt dress in your carry-on for a beach trip. It works from morning coffee runs through evening dinner dates, allowing you to pack a little less.

4. Sassy Stripes: This striped midi option has an empire waist that hits at your slimmest point, then lets the skirt drape loosely over your tummy. Roomy pockets are a welcome bonus, letting you go bag-free.

5. Darling Dots: Picture an iced coffee, a bookstore and zero wardrobe stress. This flowy dotted dress handles errands and lunch without anyone guessing it cost under $15.

6. Tummy-Hiding Pick: Effortlessly conceal your tummy in a pretty, printed, tie-waist dress. Shoppers love reaching for it daily, whether they’re teaching, traveling or momming.

7. Pretty Paisley: Sleeveless and flowy, this paisley maxi keeps your hot weather outfit from feeling too bulky (and therefore, too sweaty). The midi-to-maxi length means you won’t have to keep adjusting it during your commute or while you’re running after little ones.

8. Three for One: Pack one maxi dress, look pulled together for three days. This travel-friendly wonder shakes out smooth, so you can skip the hotel iron entirely.

9. East Coast Class: If your closet is split between work clothes and weekend clothes, this classy striped dress bridges the gap. Wear it to the office and straight to cocktails.

10. Easy ‘Yes’: Front buttons, ruffle sleeves and actual pockets turn this light green shirt dress into a triple threat. It’s elevated without being stuffy.

11. Mediterranean Maven: Picture strolling through a coastal town with gelato in hand. This short-sleeved printed dress is your European (or Midwest) vacation uniform.

12. Total Steal: People will assume you spent quadruple digits on this playful polka dot sundress, but no — it’s under $10. You’ll love how it skims the hips with zero squeeze.

13. Picnic Party: Thanks to the smocked bodice, this trendy gingham dress stretches to fit without the need for annoying zippers or buttons. Spaghetti straps and a flounce hem add a vintage picnic vibe.

Related: Amazon Shoppers Say These Chic Summer Sandals Feel Like ‘Walking on Clouds‘

Shopping for quality sandals can sometimes feel challenging, but doing it online takes the task to a whole new level. Luckily, Amazon shoppers have made the experience even more fail-proof than in-store shopping, leaving plenty of detailed reviews about specific designs. After scouring hundreds of comments, we uncovered these 11 chic, comfy sandals that shoppers […]

Advertisement

At one point or another, we’ve all been forced to work a job that we hated. It’s simply a rite of passage that typically strikes at our first gig in the workforce. Or maybe it was the entry-level position that we picked up to launch a fresh start in a new career. After all, no matter how big our dreams are and how achievable they may feel, the bills still need to be paid, and the fridge still needs to be stocked. This summer, Dave Franco (Together) and O’Shea Jackson Jr. (Straight Outta Compton) will find themselves locked in the worst job of their lives when Macon Blair’s (The Toxic Avenger) Idiots arrives in cinemas. Today, as part of Collider’s Exclusive Preview event, we’ve got a brand-new look at the comedy that will make you feel much, much better about your nine-to-five.

Mark (Franco) and Davis (Jackson) aren’t just down on their luck; they’ve completely run out of it at the top of Idiots. The pair of screwups might mean well, but nothing they’ve touched has ever turned to gold, with most things simply falling to pieces instead. But, for once, it seems like things might be on the up-and-up for the duo when they land a new job that sees them in charge of ushering a spoiled teenager (Mason Thames) to a rehab facility. While it may seem like a point A to point B journey, the mission is anything but, and it will throw Mark and Davis into the wildest and most dangerous few days of their lives.

Our sneak peek of Idiots showcases a handful of the absolutely stacked cast that Blair has assembled for his latest dark comedy. With an orange electrical cord wrapped around his hands and wrists, Thames’ Sheridan Kimberley is escorted out of a building by Mark (Franco) and Irinia, played by Kiernan Shipka, who is giving full Natasha Lyonne vibes in our new image. The troubled teen scowls at the camera as he makes his way towards captivity, while a white powdery substance completely covers his body from head to toe.

Who Else Is Behind ‘Idiots’?

Filling out the rest of the talented ensemble behind Idiots is three-time Emmy Award nominee Nicholas Braun (Succession) and four-time Emmy recipient Peter Dinklage (Game of Thrones), with helmer Blair (The Florida Project) and four-time Grammy Award-winner Killer Mike (The Lowdown) joining the supporting lineup. In addition to starring, Franco also joins the team as a producer alongside Blair, Brandon James, Jeremy Saulnier, Nathan Klingher, Alex Orr, and Ford Corbett.

Check out our new look at Idiots above and see it in cinemas on August 28. Stay tuned for more to come from Collider’s Exclusive Preview event.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Release Date

August 28, 2026

Runtime

Advertisement

100 minutes

Director

Macon Blair

Advertisement

Writers

Macon Blair

Advertisement

Producers

Alex Orr, Dave Franco, Jeremy Saulnier, Mark Fasano, Brandon James, Nathan Klingher, Ford Corbett, Macon Blair

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement