Horror was in a bad place in the early 90s. The 80s slasher boom, led by Jason Voorhees and the Friday the 13th franchise, was over, and the genre struggled through the first half of the decade. It was saved by an icon when Wes Craven, the mastermind behind A Nightmare on Elm Street, released perhaps his greatest movie, 1996’s Scream. I was 16 when it came out and was in awe of what I saw on the screen. Millions of others must have been too, because the success of Scream led to a franchise.

Thirty years later, there have been seven Scream movies in total. Some have been great, a few okay, and one really bad. Craven was there for the first four before he sadly passed away in 2015. The franchise has since been handed off to the likes of Radio Silence and Kevin Williamson. Scream 8 has already been announced, and like with the Halloween franchise, I’ll keep turning up for Ghostface no matter how many sequels they pump out.

7

‘Scream 7’ (2026)

Image via Paramount Pictures

I like every Scream movie except for one. Scream 7 is garbage. I already had issues with it being made after Melissa Barrera was fired. I felt icky watching it but was ready to give it a fair shot despite the controversy. Scream 7 does admittedly have a fun opening scene, with Ghotsface getting in a few scary moments and burning Stu Maher’s house down. Sadly, it’s all speeding downhill after that, even though Neve Campbell is back as Sidney Prescott and Matthew Lillard, my favorite Ghostface, is sort of back as Stu.

Scream 7 is stacked with unforgettable characters. Sidney’s daughter, Tatum (Isabel May), and her friends are nothing more than lazy tropes. The A.I. plot, while intriguing on the surface in today’s society, has nothing to say. In fact, the whole film has nothing to say. All of the other movies spoke to the current state of the horror movie world. Not Scream 7. It’s your basic slasher, which is unfortunate since it was directed by Kevin Williamson, the man who wrote the original film. There are a few cool kills and eerie shots, but Scream 7 is a rushed mess, all leading to the absolute worst Ghostface reveal ever. Who thought this was a good idea?

6

‘Scream 3’ (2000)

Image via Dimension Films

Scream 3 isn’t a bad movie. It’s just off, and a sharp dip in quality after the first two films. I try to forgive it because Wes Craven was in a tough situation. The original idea for the final story in the trilogy, written by Kevin Williamson, was going to go big. The plot was supposed to be about a cult of Ghostfaces made of high schoolers who worshipped at the feet of Stu, who is shown to be still alive and in prison! Imagine that movie. Tragically, the 1999 Columbine school shooting forced a change in plot, which is why Scream 3 doesn’t feel fleshed out.

Written instead by Ehren Kruger, Scream 3 is still a fun watch because everyone we love is there. Craven is directing, Sidney Prescott is front and center, and Courteney Cox‘s Gale Weathers and David Arquette‘s Dewey Riley are by her side. There are plenty of fun chase scenes and the idea of a new Ghostface taking on the predators of Hollywood with a story about how Sidney’s mother was exploited and abused by the industry is intriguing, especially when rewatching it today. The script is clunky though and doesn’t quite get it right. Kudos to Scream 3 for having only one Ghostface this time, but the reveal was a letdown. And Courteney, what’s up with those bangs?!

5

‘Scream 6’ (2023)

Image Via Paramount Pictures

After how well Scream 5 did, Scream 6 was quickly greenlit and came out the next year. This could have led to another sequel that felt rushed. Instead, for the most part, it’s a pretty good movie, and it did it all without Sidney Precott! When Neve Campbell decided to sit this one out over a pay dispute, writers James Vanderbilt and Gary Busick, and directors Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett had the ultimate question to answer: how do you move on from your iconic final girl?

Thankfully, the team had done a tremendous job of building up a new cast of characters in Scream 5. Melissa Barrera, Jenna Ortega, Mason Gooding, and Jasmin Savoy Brown easily carry this on their own. Campbell isn’t even missed. Scream 6 is shot well, with plenty of great kills, and an unforgettable opening scene with Samara Weaving, my favorite since the first film. However, Cox’s inclusion in the movie is pointless, and I was shaking my head at how many stab wounds Chad Meeks-Martin could take and survive. The Ghostface reveal didn’t work for me either. The same old routine of multiple people taking off their masks and giving an explanation is getting old.

4

‘Scream 4’ (2011)

Image via Dimension Films

Eleven years after Scream 3, Wes Craven and Kevin Williamson reunited for Scream 4 in what was supposed to be the first film in a new trilogy. When the fourth film underwhelmed at the box office, those plans were nixed. That’s okay. Scream 4 works on its own and doesn’t feel like the setup for something more. The film is smart in its approach to its characters. Campbell, Cox, and Arquette are all back, but Williamson’s script also develops some new, fascinating characters. Everyone loved Hayden Panettiere‘s Kirby Reed so much that Scream 6 brought her seemingly back from the dead.

Scream 4 returned to the smart and chaotic fun missing from a lot of Scream 3, and I was actually surprised by who one of the Ghostface killers was and bought their motivation. The only issues I really have are all of the annoying fake-outs in the opening scene and the weird, foggy look to everything. Still, this is a great if unnecessary sequel. It was Wes Craven’s last film, a fitting end for such a monumental horror legacy.

3

‘Scream 5’ (2022)

Image via Paramount

Scream 4 came out at the wrong time. Fans have moved on from slashers. 2022, already having seen the successful return of Michael Myers in a new Halloween trilogy, was the perfect moment to bring Ghostface back. I, like many others, felt uncomfortable with the idea of a Scream 5 at first. How can you make a sequel without Wes Craven? What won me over was how Radio Silence and company approached it. Scream 5 is a bridge from the past to the future. This time, Melissa Barrera and Jenna Ortega, as sisters Sam and Tara Carpenter, are the leads. This is their movie, and that’s not a disappointment.

Scream 5 was brutal. The kills are more vicious and gory, and although it was heartbreaking to see Dewey die, it had to happen. This was Scream 5‘s way of saying that we were entering a new era where anything was possible. Neve Campbell and Courtney Cox are there, too, in roles that make sense and don’t feel forced. They need to be here to fight for Dewey’s memory. The only thing holding Scream 5 back is ghost Billy (Skeet Ulrich). I roll my eyes every time. How convenient that Sam is his secret daughter. And now she’s seeing a badly de-aged version of her dad, still wearing the same white T-shirt? What?

2

‘Scream 2’ (1997)

Image via Miramax

Scream 2 came out only one year after the first. Wes Craven and Kevin Williamson had to figure out how you top one of the greatest horror movies ever made. You can’t, and they didn’t try to. Scream 2 is a thrilling sequel which raises the stakes and ups the kills like all sequels do, but without attempting too much. It wisely moved the plot away from Woodsboro, California and put Sidney in an Ohio college, where she meets a whole host of new characters and potential killers.

Scream 2 had a fun opening scene with a Ghostface that dared attack a victim in front of an entire movie theater of people. The death of Randy Meeks (Jamie Kennedy) came out of nowhere, and although I wish he had lived, the decision shook everything up and showed that this killer would still be as much of a threat as the last. Scream 2 has plenty of great chase scenes, especially the one involving the death of Cici (Sarah Michelle Gellar). It’s a scary movie, and it doesn’t forget its meta roots either, with the hilarious debut of the Stab franchise. The Ghostface reveals aren’t my favorite, but I was genuinely surprised by one of them. When slashers are so often predictable, that was refreshing.

1

‘Scream’ (1996)

Image via Dimension Films

There could only be one answer for the top of this list. Scream is one of my all-time favorite movies. Slashers were dead and buried until that first movie came out in 1996. Kevin Williamson’s meta script took the familiar and made it feel new all over again by taking a loving jab at tropes of the subgenre without jumping into full Scary Movie parody territory. There are laughs, for sure, but Scream‘s uniquely designed Ghostface killer is genuinely creepy because, in a world of hulking, silent madmen, this guy uses the phone, not only taunting his victims but forcing them to answer horror movie trivia questions with their life on the line.

Roger L. Jackson’s voice is like a character unto himself. No wonder he’s still playing the part thirty years later. He owns that first scene, the best opening in movie history, in my humble opinion, thank you. Those first 15 minutes are perfection. And it was all a setup for more perfection with amazing characters and a thrilling whodunit. The final half of the movie, all set at Stu’s house, is non-stop mayhem, leading to a Ghostface reveal and ending which does everything right. You hit me with the phone, dick!

By Jennifer Asencio
| Published 1 hour ago

When Angel Studios released the trailer for the upcoming Andy Serkis adaptation of Animal Farm, I was already skeptical. The trailer suggested that the movie, led by Seth Rogan, not only missed the point of the novel, but turned it on its ear to support the very communism the book decried. However, back then, we only had the trailer to go by.

Now, independent political commentator Tim Pool has seen the full movie and confirms the impression the trailer conveyed was correct. In fact, the movie skews so far away from the book that Pool has refused to allow the movie to advertise on his podcast. According to Pool, the movie is anti-capitalist rather than anti-communist, which is the entire point of George Orwell’s notoriously anti-communist book.

Angel Studios is a well-known Christian outlet run by three brothers, Shawn, Jeffrey, and Jordan Harmon, the directors behind the campy Squatty Potty commercial. They turned their success into a crowd-sourced studio that is focused on conservative, Christian entertainment, including the Neal McDonough-led movie and series Homeland and the anime-styled Gabriel and the Guardians, a children’s cartoon led by the voice talent of Jonny Young Bosch, former Power Ranger and voice of Vash the Stampede in the English dub of Trigun.

Angel Studios Running Away From Its Conservative Roots?

With Animal Farm, Angel Studios seems to be running away from its conservative roots. Aside from a cast which includes well-known left-wing activist Seth Rogan, key character Snowball is played by trans thespian LaVerne Cox. This is not objectionable by itself, but it is a surprising move for a Mormon film company whose target audience is Christian conservatives.

Additionally, the movie is clearly targeted to and being marketed for children, with adorable, animated animals voiced by other celebrities, like Woody Harrelson and Glenn Close. However, Animal Farm is definitely not a kid’s book and not suitable as a “family film” the way this version is being sold.

However, the most glaring controversy is that the villains are obvious caricatures of famous billionaires, most notably Elon Musk, and that the movie decries capitalism by using the same storyline George Orwell used to criticize Soviet socialism and Stalinism in his 1945 book. The irony is that the book is largely about the use of propaganda to tell people what to think, and the adaptation being released on May 1, 2026 actually is propaganda more in line with a left-leaning Hollywood than a conservative Christian distributor. Even the distribution date is somewhat of an attack on the author of the work, as May 1 was the date of a revolution in Spain that was a significant event in Orwell’s life, about which he wrote a memoir.

Angel Studios May Have Circumvented Its Conservative Donors To Get Animal Farm Made

Angel Studios execs Jordan and Jeffrey Harmon leaped to defend the movie, claiming it was “anti-communist and anti-cronyist;” Jeffrey even went on Tim Pool’s show to respond to his allegations directly. However, the casting, the hints from the trailer, and the testimony of Tim Pool have all raised the eyebrows of many viewers and called attention to the lack of screening by the Angel Guild.

The Angel Guild is a group of donors who help crowd-source the movies Angel Studios produces. Each project is supposed to be voted on by the many members of the Guild, but several responded to various threads about the Animal Farm controversy by admitting they had not known about the vote or been offered a screening of the movie.

The Lord of the Rings is borderline untouchable, as a movie trilogy. That should be stressed right out of the gate. The three movies adapted J.R.R. Tolkien’s massive novel of the same name, with that novel sometimes being called a trilogy, owing to how it was released in three parts. And it was the same deal with the movie adaptation, or adaptations. You sort of have to take them all as one whole, and they were filmed as one huge production, but then there are also, technically, three movies, one released every year between 2001 and 2003 (The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers, and The Return of the King). But since they’re all available now, you’re more than welcome to treat all three as one huge movie, and watch them as such, should you have about nine hours to spare for the theatrical versions, or more like 11 hours to spare for the extended versions. The trilogy (yeah, sorry, it’s going to be called that, for present purposes) is largely centered on an increasingly desperate battle to prevent a dark lord from re-emerging and re-conquering Middle-earth, with a Hobbit entrusted with the task of destroying an all-powerful ring, which is what said dark lord wants no matter what.

To cut a long story short (even though The Lord of the Rings is a long story, but oh well), The Lord of the Rings is pretty much the gold standard when it comes to adapting books to the big screen. There are parts of Tolkien’s work that didn’t get fully translated, and some things that had to be streamlined for the sake of the new medium, but the trilogy really does the vast majority of things right. As such, it’s hard (albeit probably not impossible) to argue that there are genuinely superior trilogies overall, but ever so slightly less difficult to argue that there might be some trilogies from cinema history that are even more entertaining. Some of this comes down to the time commitment, with the following trilogies being debatably easier to watch and enjoy because they don’t require nine to 11 hours, and also, you get variety with these trilogies, to a greater extent than with The Lord of the Rings, so that helps with entertainment value, to some extent. And again, it’s not even that these trilogies are better when you take into account everything… since everything, you know, includes more than just a trilogy’s entertainment value.

3

The ‘Star Wars’ Original Trilogy (1977–1983)

Easy pick here, with the first three Star Wars movies, but it does have to be emphasized that it’s the original trilogy being singled out here (so, the three released between 1977 and 1983). There are two more trilogies within the Star Wars series: the prequel trilogy (1999–2005) and the ever-divisive sequel trilogy (2015–2019). The original three, though, are phenomenal, and chronologically come between the prequel trilogy and sequel trilogy. Star Wars, later called Star Wars: Episode IV – A New Hope, gets things off to a phenomenal start, while middle chapter The Empire Strikes Back is pretty much perfect in just about every way, and then Return of the Jedi is admittedly a little more flawed, yet still a satisfying conclusion to the trilogy as a whole. A New Hope might’ve felt like the freshest at the time, and it can still be recognized and appreciated for what it kicked off nowadays, but The Empire Strikes Back is the film that really showcases Star Wars at its best, and its success is a huge reason why Star Wars, as a whole, is now such a monumental franchise.

The Empire Strikes Back has the best pacing of the three original films, and it succeeds in making the conflict first explored in A New Hope feel a little deeper and more personal to some of the central people involved. It also ups the stakes in a big (and nowadays very well-known) way, and Return of the Jedi is at its best when exploring the fallout from the single biggest revelation that comes near the end of The Empire Strikes Back. Assessing the trilogy as a whole, it’s quite easy to watch all three movies in a very short span of time, given they’re all a little over two hours each, and there is a definite progression and upping of the stakes from film to film. Well, okay, if Return of the Jedi feels a little less intense than The Empire Strikes Back, it at least makes up for it, to some extent, with the spectacle it offers, since the whole final act of that movie offers a great deal of action in three distinct settings, cutting between them all in a rather thrilling way. These three movies are all quintessential blockbusters in their own ways, and watching them all back-to-back-to-back proves tremendously entertaining.

2

The ‘Cornetto’ Trilogy (2004–2013)

Image via Rogue Pictures

Advertisement

Call it a loose or thematic trilogy if you want, but the Cornetto trilogy is still a trilogy. Sometimes, it’s referred to as Three Flavours Cornetto, which is a parody of the title of the Three Colours trilogy, and those films are also great, albeit not as entertaining in the traditional sense. But to stick to the Cornetto movies, they’re united by a few things, including the director (Edgar Wright), the two leads in each movie (played by Simon Pegg and Nick Frost, albeit they’re different characters in each film), and a series of recurring jokes and beats that are hit from film to film. Also, each movie serves as a parody of a different genre, though it’s also worth noting that all these movies go beyond your average parody, and all of them function as genuinely pretty good films if you’re to judge them within those genres they’re parodying.

That’s not the neatest way to put it, but let’s break it down with a little more clarity. You’ve got 2004’s Shaun of the Dead, which more or less puts a comedic spin on zombie movies, and parodies certain conventions of this particular horror sub-genre. At the same time, there is an increasing sense of tension throughout Shaun of the Dead, and its final act, in particular, ends up being a good deal more intense than a fair few actual (more serious) zombie movies out there. Hot Fuzz (2007) does a similar thing, but with buddy cop/action movies, and it also functions as a surprisingly engaging murder-mystery sort of thing, at the same time. Then there’s 2013’s The World’s End, which some people might like to tell you isn’t as good as either Shaun of the Dead or Hot Fuzz, but those people are wrong, and time will be kind to The World’s End. It’s the most mature and downbeat of the bunch, exploring a tragic sort of middle-aged angst while parodying – and then also belonging within – the sci-fi genre, more specifically something like Invasion of the Body Snatchers. The variety here is what really makes the Cornetto trilogy soar, thanks to all the movies belonging to different genres (and it also helps, of course, that all three films are very funny in their own ways).

1

The Original ‘Evil Dead’ Trilogy (1981–1992)

Image via New Line Cinema

Those first three Evil Dead movies are so, so good. Admittedly, the two most recent ones (at the time of writing, from 2013 and 2023) are also pretty good, in their own ways, but here, things are specifically centered on the first three, all of them directed by Sam Raimi and starring Bruce Campbell. It’s the Evil Dead original trilogy, so to speak, and they make up what’s probably the easiest trilogy to watch in one sitting. That does come down to all three movies only being about 80 minutes each, so you can get through all three in just over four hours (and hell, there are some movies that are about four hours long, including the extended edition of The Return of the King). Within those four hours, you will be subject to a lot. Maybe even too much. But it’s a trip to go from the straightforward horror of The Evil Dead to the all-out farce that is Army of Darkness.

To be a little more specific, The Evil Dead (1981) is one of those quintessential “evil cabin in the woods” sorts of movies, and it’s genuinely still quite frightening and intense, with very little in the way of intentional comedy. Evil Dead II (1987), on the other hand, sees the series getting a little more comedic, with it having a similar premise to the first movie, but with a combination of horror and comedy elements. And then Army of Darkness (1992) has the protagonist of the trilogy, Ash, getting transported back to medieval times (well, it technically happens at the end of Evil Dead II, but Army of Darkness fully commits to the cliffhanger/bit). In those medieval times, he becomes something of an unlikely action hero and quip machine, and almost nothing is taken seriously. It’s all played for comedy, and it’s all very over-the-top. But if you watch all these movies from start to finish, it makes sense, somehow. You go from grisly horror to glorious camp, and it works. There might be movie trilogies better than the first three Evil Dead films, but there probably aren’t any trilogies that stand as genuinely more entertaining.

By Robert Scucci
| Published 8 seconds ago

Just last week I watched Gerald’s Game for the first time and was blown away by its psychological depth. The Stephen King adaptation uses a simple story in which a woman is handcuffed to a bed after her husband dies during a sexual role playing game, leaving her to face a ravenously hungry stray dog and a potential intruder waiting for the right moment to strike. 2021’s Till Death has a similar setup, but it’s a completely different movie with its own identity. I’m not framing this as a ripoff or a carbon copy because it’s anything but, but if you’re looking for a double feature on Netflix, I’d strongly recommend watching both films back to back and seeing how differently they play out.

Gerald’s Game is a near-perfect psychological thriller about trauma, trust, and identity. Till Death is a straight-up home invasion thriller that starts out completely bonkers and only continues to escalate. The handcuff setup I’m about to get into is really the only parallel the film has with Gerald’s Game, but thanks to recency bias it’s all I can think about. Gerald’s Game is heavy. Till Death, while I don’t necessarily think it’s intended to be, is way more fun than it has any right to be.

That’s One Way To Split Up …

Megan Fox is Emma Davenport, and we’re introduced to her as she breaks up with her lover, Tom (Aml Ameen). Tom is a partner at her husband Mark’s (Eoin Macken) criminal defense firm, so no matter who she’s sleeping with, it’s happening at a five-star hotel or in a vacation home. It’s a great setup because we meet our protagonist in the middle of an affair, suggesting she’s not exactly sympathetic. It just so happens that Emma and Mark are about to celebrate their 11th wedding anniversary, and Mark, who knows their marriage is on the rocks due to his own misdoings, thinks it would be a great idea to bring her to the lake house they used to enjoy during happier times.

The place is decked out with roses, romantic music, and the dark room Emma used to use for her photography business is filled with pictures of their happy marriage. It’s all very sweet until Emma wakes up the next day handcuffed to Mark, who then shoots himself in the face.

Rightfully traumatized, Emma needs to figure out how to get home, but there’s a series of problems she has to address. The first and most obvious obstacle is the fact that she’s half naked and handcuffed to her dead husband. She has to lug his corpse from room to room, floor to floor, in search of an escape. To make matters worse, Mark destroyed her phone, removed every single tool from the basement, siphoned the gas from all of the vehicles, and his entire plan in death was to make her spend her last moments in life suffering immeasurably.

Not only did Mark know about Emma’s affair with Tom, he also sent two men named Jimmy and Bobby to the house, who need access to a safe that only she knows the combination to. It’s also worth noting that Bobby just finished serving a 10-year sentence for assaulting Emma, and Mark summoned him specifically to antagonize her under these exact circumstances.

This Isn’t A Comedy, But You’ll Laugh

From this point forward in Till Death, the chase is on. Megan Fox is an absolute beast in this movie because she’s in total fight or flight mode for most of its runtime. She has the homefield advantage in the sense that she knows the lake house well. She can move around and evade capture, but that’s made all the more difficult by the fact that she’s handcuffed to Mark’s dead body and has to factor in how much of a drag, pun intended, that is. Still, she perseveres, outsmarts the bad guys, and stays one step ahead of certain death because she doesn’t want to go out like this.

I say that this movie is funny, but it’s far from a comedy. It’s dead serious and by all measures a balls to the wall thriller. But how else am I supposed to react when Emma uses Mark’s body as a sled to get from the top floor of her lake house to the bottom? It’s not funny in the slapstick sense, but it elicits laughter because that’s exactly how I’d approach the situation, and it’s also badass to watch in a “Oh no, she didn’t!” kind of way. 

It’s also worth noting that for most of this movie, Emma is absolutely drenched in blood from the inciting incident that kicks Till Death into high gear, but she’s so determined to survive that she just rolls with it.

Till Death is a brutal watch, but Megan Fox commands every single scene she’s in, making it impossible to resist her charm and charisma. Not only does she take control of a miserable situation, she looks like a total boss while doing it. Everything about this movie is wild, and if you’re looking for a thriller that’s equal parts sexy and violent, you can stream it on Netflix right now.

Influencer Dan Bilzerian is entering the world of politics.

Bilzerian, 45, filed paperwork to challenge Representative Randy Fine’s seat in Florida’s 6th congressional district on Tuesday, April 7, per Federal Election Commission records. Bilzerian is running as a Republican.

The social media star, whose Instagram boasts nearly 30 million followers, announced his intentions to seek office earlier this month.

“Yes, I’m running,” he told The Daytona Beach News-Journal in an April 1 statement. “Getting everything in order now.”

Related: Influencer Bran Flakezz Details How He Grossed Nearly $800k in 1 Year

Social media influencer Bran Flakezz, real name Brandon Edelman, detailed how he made almost $800,000 in one year. Speaking on the Wednesday, March 5, episode of the “Networth and Chill” podcast, hosted by Vivian Tu, Flakezz said, “I grossed $768,000 in 2024,” before detailing how much was left in his pocket as a result of […]

Bilzerian further told the outlet that he would be “happy” to talk about the election “as soon as [he is] officially registered, which should be within a week at the latest.”

Bilzerian is known for his shirtless Instagram snaps, often depicting a partying lifestyle. He started sharing political commentary in 2024.

“I realized the whole hedonism thing wasn’t really my bag and wasn’t making me happy,” Bilzerian said on the “Modern Wisdom” podcast in August 2024. “I came to the realization, much like I came to the realization that money didn’t make me happy and then still chased money for a long time. I wanted to get off the hedonistic treadmill.”

The influencer added that he “went to the edge of the Earth” trying to chase wealth and lust.

“There was a point — I mean, there’s definitely a point, I was on a 300-foot yacht [with] 30 girls and I was like, ‘I should be stoked,’ and I wasn’t,” he said. “My energy was being sucked in a bunch of different directions. I just remember being way happier surfing with my buddies, doing a couple vacations [and] all the stuff that I had, kind of, done before.”

Thank You!

You have successfully subscribed.

Related: Reality Star of the Year Ariana Madix on Bouncing Back From Heartbreak

Advertisement

In early March, Ariana Madix’s world turned upside down when it was revealed that her boyfriend of nine years, Tom Sandoval, was cheating on her with her close friend and fellow Vanderpump Rules costar Rachel “Raquel” Leviss. What followed was a surreal chain of events for Madix as “Scandoval” gripped the nation, setting social media […]

While Bilzerian acknowledged that he had “fun” going on million-dollar global trips and attending blowout parties, he eventually found less joy in going out.

“I was already kind of over it from the realization that I was happier having a girlfriend than doing the harem thing,” he added. “Then, I felt kind of trapped because now I had a brand and now I kind of had to do it. It was almost like COVID saved me a little bit. … It’s a lot more fun when it’s your choice.”

Bilzerian continued, “I was a slave to my own creation for a while … because then I took the two years and wrote [my book The Setup] and zoomed out, looked at my life and things that made me happy and things that didn’t make me happy. That was pretty eye-opening.”

Nikki Glaser is getting candid about money, beauty and aging, as well as her views on modern relationships. During a recent podcast appearance, the comedian described plastic surgery as more of a rich-person flex in Hollywood than a tool for enhancing natural beauty.

Glaser previously revealed that she plans to get a facelift in August this year, saying that she views the cosmetic procedure as “a wise investment.”

The outspoken star also teased that she may be in an open relationship with long-term boyfriend Chris Convy, as she revealed she doesn’t really care if he hooks up with other women.

Nikki Glaser Thinks Plastic Surgery Is More ‘A Wealth Flex’ Than Beauty

In a recent episode of “Call Her Daddy,” Glaser peeled back the curtain on her thoughts about plastic surgery, claiming that most cosmetic procedures had little to do with beauty.

“Having a face that’s manicured in that way is just a status symbol of ‘I’m wealthy,’” she said. “It’s not a way to show people you’re beautiful or f-ckable, it’s to show people ‘I have money.’”

Despite her blunt take, the comedian acknowledged the physical toll of such procedures, adding that anyone who undergoes one is “brave” due to the pain involved.

Glaser also got personal, noting that she “never felt pretty” when she was young before opening up about her own plans to get a facelift in the next couple of years.

Glaser Said Plastic Surgery Is A ‘Wise Investment’

Glaser has never shied away from admitting that she intends to get work done on her face sometime soon. During a previous appearance on “The Tonight Show,” she told host Jimmy Fallon that a facelift is definitely in the cards for her.

“Wait till the facelift,” she joked when Fallon complimented her on her looks, per PEOPLE. “That’s coming. August 2026. I’m gonna do it. I have no problem with that.”

The “Dancing with the Stars” alum went on to explain that she sees the procedure as more than just cosmetic, calling it “a wise investment” despite the stigma often attached to plastic surgery.

“People treat you better when you’re hotter. It’s just a fact,” she added. “It’s a sad fact of life.”

Nikki Glaser ‘Doesn’t Care’ If Her Boyfriend Sleeps With Other Women

Glaser also raised eyebrows when she opened up about her unconventional views on relationships.

Speaking on “Call Her Daddy,” the “FBoy Island” star claimed that she doesn’t really care if boyfriend Convy sleeps with other women.

“In a relationship, I don’t really care if my boyfriend were to hook up [with others],” Glaser told Cooper, per PEOPLE.

However, she made it clear the dynamic isn’t mutual.

“But that is not a two-way street. I’m not someone who likes to hook up when I’m in a relationship. I don’t really care about that,” she added. “But I don’t care if someone else were to. In fact, I kind of like it.”

The Actress Also ‘Doesn’t Believe In Soulmates’

Glaser continued to unpack her views on relationship dynamics, revealing she doesn’t subscribe to the idea of soulmates. She explained that although Convy is her first serious boyfriend, she has, at times, encouraged him to explore other options.

“Innately, it is settling,” she said of long-term partnerships. “You do not know that the person you are with is the best person for you. There’s too many people on this planet; you haven’t met any of them. You never will. So you have to settle.”

The award show host noted that the odds of anyone finding someone who’s best for them are “kind of low,” adding that she ultimately doesn’t believe in soulmates.

Nikki Glaser Says She Can Be ‘Too Busy To Be Sexy’

On “Call Her Daddy,” Glaser was asked how Convy feels about her unconventional views.

The Ohio-born star said he fully understands there could be someone better suited for both of them, disclosing that she does not consider herself the love of his life. She even revealed that she encourages him to seek attention elsewhere.

“I want a guy who other girls want,” Glaser explained, noting that she has urged him to “go out there and just have a flirty moment with someone.”

The Emmy-nominated actress pointed to her demanding schedule as part of the reason for her approach.

“Sometimes I’m too busy to be really sexy, so I’m like, ‘Go out and get some attention,’” Glaser said.

Internet users are sharing support for Safaree after he said he feels like he doesn’t want to be here anymore following the passing of his mom.

RELATED: Prayers Up! Safaree Samuels Confirms The Passing Of His Mother In Heartbreaking Tribute (PHOTOS)

Safaree Says He Feels Like He Doesn’t Want To Be Here Anymore Following The Passing Of His Mom

On Wednesday, April 8, Safaree took to X, formerly known as Twitter, to share a few messages with his followers. Furthermore, in the first message, he wrote, “Life don’t hit the same anymore.. it don’t mean the same.. life without momma doesn’t feel like life… I’m numb and don’t feel anything. I miss you mommy so much..”

Then, he shared another tweet, which read, “I feel like I don’t wanna be here anymore”

Furthermore, over on Instagram, Safaree shared a clip of him and his mom with a caption reflecting on their morning walks.

Internet Users Share Support

Internet users entered TSR’s comment section, sharing heavy support for Safaree.

More On The Passing Of Safaree’s Mom

As The Shade Room previously reported, last month, Safaree revealed that his life was “shattered” due to the passing of his mom.

As fans sent condolences his way, his ex-wife, Erica Mena, turned heads and sparked strong reactions by sharing a clip of her and Safaree’s daughter alongside her new romantic partner.

RELATED: Internet Reacts After Erica Mena Reportedly Shares Clip Of Antonio Bibbs Interacting With Her Daughter Safire Following Passing Of Safaree’s Mom

A seemingly casual romance has quickly spiraled into a headline-grabbing controversy after Shia LaBeouf was recently spotted with a mystery woman.

However, what began as curiosity has turned into scrutiny.

As more details surface about his new partner’s past, the story has taken a darker, more complicated turn that few saw coming.

Shia LaBeouf’s Public Outburst Raises Eyebrows

The first signs that something was off came during a tense public moment in Rome.

Shia LaBeouf was seen sitting at an outdoor table when he suddenly lashed out at the woman beside him, reportedly telling her to “f-ck off” in a heated exchange.

The confrontation shocked onlookers and quickly made waves online.

Just weeks earlier, the pair had been seen together during Mardi Gras celebrations in New Orleans, where LaBeouf was also arrested twice for battery.

Advertisement

Despite the chaos surrounding those moments, the relationship appeared to stabilize shortly afterward.

Days later, the two were photographed in Los Angeles, looking relaxed and affectionate, walking arm in arm as if nothing had happened.

Identity Of Shia LaBeouf’s Girlfriend Revealed

The woman at the center of the story has now been identified as Nicole Mumphrey, a 33-year-old from Louisiana.

Described as a “free-spirited” individual, she studied Urban, Community and Regional Planning at the University of New Orleans.

However, as her identity became public, so did details about her past.

Advertisement

Like LaBeouf, Mumphrey has reportedly had previous encounters with law enforcement and has been linked to what insiders describe as a “toxic” relationship history.

An insider did not mince words about the current romance when speaking to the Daily Mail, warning that it “is not going to end well.”

That claim has only intensified speculation surrounding the pair’s future.

Troubling Allegations From Past Relationship

Court records and police reports paint a troubling picture of an incident involving Mumphrey and her former partner.

She was charged with serious offenses, including domestic abuse, aggravated assault, and false imprisonment with a weapon.

Advertisement

According to a police report, tensions escalated during an argument.

“Her boyfriend attempted to put on a shirt and leave, and Ms Mumphrey grabbed a kitchen knife and stabbed the shirt that was in her boyfriend’s hand to prevent him from leaving,” the report stated.

It continued, “Her boyfriend then grabbed Ms. Mumphrey’s bag, and a physical altercation ensued. Her boyfriend then left the location.”

The situation reportedly intensified further. Authorities claimed Mumphrey “started to punch him in the face,” leaving visible marks though no serious physical penetration was recorded. During questioning, her ex described a pattern of fear, recalling, “A month ago, she was on pills and attacked [me] with a knife.”

Advertisement

He also expressed concern about the escalation of events, saying he feared “she [would] seriously injure” him and that it was “getting worse” over time.

Despite the severity of the allegations, the case ultimately did not proceed to trial. Charges were dropped after the district attorney declined to file formal charges, though a protective order had been put in place during the process.

Insider Claims Paint A Chaotic Picture

Beyond official reports, insiders have made even more explosive claims about Mumphrey’s past relationship. According to one source, the issues went far beyond a single incident.

The insider alleged that “wasn’t a one-time thing,” suggesting a pattern of behavior. They recounted one particularly alarming episode, claiming, “One time she cracked him over the head with the candle with the glass. He was bleeding out, eventually passed out and should have been in the hospital.”

They also described an environment filled with volatility and unpredictability. “It was a lot of her screaming, yelling, blaming him for the situation she’s gotten herself in and blaming him for her ‘life sucking,’” the source said.

Advertisement

Additional allegations included destructive outbursts and invasive behavior, with claims that “she would go through his phone every night and anything incriminating like a photo of another woman or any females’ name, she would punch him in the face.”

The relationship, which reportedly lasted seven years on and off, was described as a “dangerously toxic relationship.” According to the insider, communication between the former couple continued even after their breakup.

“They last were in touch at the end of February,” the source claimed. “She said stuff like, ‘I love you’ and ‘I miss you,’ and asked when he was coming back to town.”

The situation took another turn when Mumphrey’s new relationship became public. The insider revealed, “But then she disappeared and a few weeks later, the photos of her with Shia came out, and he was completely shocked to see she had quickly moved on to another guy. He’s still processing everything and it’s hard for him to see photos of them together.”

Advertisement

Shia LaBeouf’s Own Controversial History

While the focus has shifted to Mumphrey’s past, LaBeouf’s own history has also resurfaced in discussions.

The actor has faced multiple controversies over the years, including legal issues and high-profile relationship disputes.

In 2020, his former partner, FKA Twigs, filed a lawsuit accusing him of abuse and emotional distress. The case was eventually settled in 2025 under undisclosed terms, though legal tensions appear to have continued.

Her legal team previously claimed, “Shia LaBeouf has tried to control Tahliah Barnett for the better part of a decade,” adding another layer to the narrative surrounding the actor’s personal life.

Insiders now suggest that the pairing of LaBeouf and Mumphrey could be volatile.

Advertisement

One source described the situation bluntly, warning, “This is a rebound situation… You put them together and that’s a perfect storm for destruction. This is not going to end well.”

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are heading to Australia for an unofficial tour, but early signs suggest a lack of interest in the royal couple’s appearances.

The Duke of Sussex is set to speak at a mental health summit in Melbourne, while his wife will host a retreat in Sydney.

Now, reports claim that discounted tickets and lingering availability have raised questions about demand, while public criticism and scrutiny over their visit continue to build ahead of their arrival.

Sussexes’ Australia Trip Faces Challenges As Harry’s Melbourne Event And Meghan’s $3K Retreat Struggle To Sell

Harry and Meghan Markle are set to arrive in Australia this week, but according to Sky News Australia, the couple’s trip is already in “peril” as early signs suggest their planned appearances may not be drawing the expected level of interest.

The couple will begin their visit in Melbourne on Thursday, kicking off an unofficial tour that includes separate speaking engagements. Harry, 41, is scheduled to headline a workplace mental health summit, while Meghan, 44, will host a live discussion event at a high-end retreat in Sydney.

In the lead-up to the Melbourne event, organizers of the InterEdge Summit have reduced ticket prices significantly, with passes now selling for roughly half of their original cost.

The two-day conference, held at Melbourne Park, will feature Harry alongside former tennis star Jelena Dokic and other speakers who will focus on mental health conversations.

Reports suggest Harry is expected to earn around $50,000 for the appearance, notably less than the reported seven-figure fee he received to attend a JP Morgan event in February 2020.

Meghan Markle’s Sydney Retreat Is Also Reportedly Facing Low Sales

Meanwhile, Meghan is due to appear at the “Her Best Life” retreat in Sydney, an exclusive weekend experience hosted by Jackie’ O’ Henderson and her manager Gemma O’Neill.

Guests are being charged about $3,000 each for the event, which is taking place at a luxury hotel in Coogee. Although it was initially described as fully booked, recent updates hint that additional spots may still be available.

Beyond ticket sales, the Sussexes may also face public scrutiny during their visit. An online petition has received tens of thousands of signatures from Australians opposing any use of public funds to support the couple’s trip, arguing that, as private individuals, they should cover their own expenses.

Despite the mixed reception, royal commentator Richard Palmer believes the visit could be a strategic moment for Meghan in particular, offering an opportunity to reshape public perception and respond to ongoing criticism if the tour proves successful.

“They want to prove their critics wrong, so they will be hoping it is a huge success. If it is, it will be Meghan’s revenge,” Palmer said.

Prince Harry And Meghan Insider Slammed ‘Misinformation’ Surrounding Their Australia Trip

Following reports of a petition against Harry and Meghan’s trip, a source close to the royal couple hit back at “misinformation” surrounding their Australian tour.

“There is a lot of misinformation being spread about this trip – all designed to whip up hate,” the insider told The Mirror. “The truth is, you have a couple heading down under for work. While they’re in town, they’re going to check in on some charitable causes that they have long supported and – in the duke’s case, with the Invictus Games – he set up.”

The source added, “The couple [is] critically aware that by just visiting a charity, they can help shine a light on its work – bringing media attention that wouldn’t otherwise exist. They don’t have to do that.”

The Sussex Source Called The Public Backlash’ Irrational’

In their chat with The Mirror, the Sussex source fiercely defended Harry and Meghan, as they branded negative reactions to their Australian tour as “irrational.”

The insider called out royal Commentators who make “hate bait” comments about the royal couple, stressing that the duke and duchess just want to do “good” in the world.

“They could just as easily get paid and head straight back to California,” the source claimed. “It’s an irrational reaction to sh-t-can a couple who just want to support some [of] the charitable causes close to them.”

“God forbid they try to do any good in a world that could, frankly, use a little more Harry and Meghan, and a little less sniping from ‘Royal Commentators’ who make a living by proving hate bait for anyone willing to platform them. It’s sad. What a way to make a living,” the Sussex source concluded.

Claims Mount Over Sussex High Staff Turnover

At the same time, scrutiny around the Sussexes extends beyond their public appearances. The pair have long faced criticism over staff turnover, and some insiders claim the issue goes deeper than their professional team.

Royal commentator Kinsey Schofield has alleged that turnover among household staff has been even more frequent, at one point describing the rate of departures as unusually high.

“It actually became kind of comical because during a certain period, it felt like every week there was … someone new who left,” Schofield told NewsNation.

Although representatives for Harry and Meghan have pushed back against such claims, Schofield says she has heard troubling accounts from former employees.

She recalled one alleged former nanny describing the experience as “dehumanizing,” claiming that the working environment became challenging after an initial adjustment period.

According to these reports, the couple is said to have gone through three childcare providers early on, including before their move to the United States.

However, at least one nanny is believed to have remained with the family for five years, alongside additional caregivers and support staff who assist with daily responsibilities.