By Jennifer Asencio
| Published 17 seconds ago

As more material based in the world in which The Lord of the Rings takes place gets made, more entertainment pundits and fans are referring to Middle-earth and everything in it as a “franchise.” This is a travesty of entertainment that was even decried by Christopher Tolkien, son of the story’s creator, JRR. Middle-earth has been the inspiration for almost all modern fantasy, most notably the tabletop role-playing game Dungeons & Dragons, but calling The Lord of the Rings and its associated worldbuilding a franchise is a cynical attempt to pardon weak and uncreative attempts to add to it by modern filmmakers.

Tolkien’s son famously did not enjoy the original Peter Jackson trilogy’s telling of the quest to destroy the One Ring. In a 2012 interview with the French newspaper Le Monde, Christopher decried the films for a variety of reasons, including the commercialization of The Lord of the Rings for pop culture, which he felt betrayed the essence of his father’s work. “The chasm between the beauty and seriousness of the work, and what it has become, have overwhelmed me.”

How The Hobbit Stretched Tolkien

The younger Tolkien said this just in time for the release of The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, the first of the Lord of the Rings films to contain source material Tolkien didn’t write. Young Tolkien’s statements were about the original trilogy, which he felt overshadowed the books and thus subsumed them as the authoritative version of the story, but The Hobbit trilogy only made that worse. It expanded a single book into three movies that were as long as their predecessors, each covering one book apiece.

To stretch the single book The Hobbit into a trilogy, writers like Phillipa Boyens added plots that JRR Tolkien never intended. This included the infamous love triangle between Legolas, Kili, and Tauriel, the latter played by Evangeline Lilly, who only joined the cast on the condition she would not be inserted into a gratuitous love triangle. That she finished filming the trilogy despite this blatant betrayal is either a remarkable sign of Lilly’s patience or of the power of her movie contract.

Rings Of Power Took A Bad Idea And Ran With It

Rings of Power took the technique of adding extraneous and original characters and subplots into the established lore and ran with it faster than Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli ran to Rohan. The most blatant of these new additions is the constant attempts to give Galadriel a love interest despite lore linking her to Celeborn in a marriage lasting thousands of years and no established history of her being with anyone else. They even matched her in the second season of the show with a character who turned out to be Sauron.

Many of the new characters are also gratuitous, including an Orc protagonist, despite canon that is clear that Orcs are corrupted former elves (this is an oversimplified explanation about which Tolkien wrote entire books). Races that don’t have the variety of humans are given that variety anyway, especially if the character it is given to is in a position to lead or be a hero. These characters wouldn’t be an issue except that they were not the world Tolkien wrote; they are imposed upon Tolkien’s world by the lack of respect for his source material.

Tolkien Under Fire From Activists

Tolkien’s source material has been attacked by commentators before, including the 50^th anniversary edition of the game Dungeons & Dragons. In that book, the publishers at Wizards of the Coast denounced the creators of the game for misogyny, racism, and themes of colonialism and slavery.

Lord of the Rings had so much inspiration on Dungeons & Dragons that the game had to replace hobbits with Halflings to avoid a lawsuit for copyright infringement (and even then, the names of the different Halfling races are very similar to those of The Shire). This close adherence by D&D to Tolkien’s vision opened the author and his works to the same accusations, especially since the minions of Sauron include men who seem to be based on North African and Indian soldiers.

The Importance Of Skin Color In Middle-earth

These accusations are therefore “answered” by subverting all the racial elements of the show, both those that are real-world and those that are fantasy. Protagonist Orcs are not something Tolkien would have designed, especially in a prequel to the main series that takes place so long before it, when Orcs were new.

All Elves were fair, because those who were “dark” never saw the Light of the Two Trees of Valinor; this is in Tolkien’s Middle-earth history, The Silmarillion. With the wide variety of human skin tone variants present among Men, Dwarves, and Harfoots (the predecessors to hobbits), inserting real-world identity politics on the Orcs and Elves is more of a rebellion against Tolkien and his perceived transgressions than it is “inclusive.”

Upcoming Middle-earth Transgressions

Two new Lord of the Rings projects are expected in the next year or two: The Hunt for Gollum and Shadows of the Past. The Hunt for Gollum is about the period between The Hobbit and The Fellowship of the Ring, as Aragorn tracks the doomed hobbit-creature in the search for the One Ring before anyone knows Bilbo has it. The problem with this script, directed by original Gollum actor Andy Serkis, is that Philippa Boyens and her co-writers are essentially making it up. This particular period in Middle-earth’s history isn’t detailed in any of the books; it’s only alluded to through secondhand information from Gandalf when he visits The Shire for the One Ring.

Shadows of the Past, written by Boyens, Stephen Colbert, and his son, Peter McKee, at least relies on source material to tell its story. There were a few chapters of The Fellowship of the Ring that were left out of the movie, particularly the adventures in the Barrow Downs and the party’s encounter with Bugs Bunny cartoon Tom Bombadil. However, unable to resist adding yet more of their own garnishes to Tolkien’s work, the trio have reportedly framed this story around Sam’s daughter, well after the trilogy takes place, who will be solving a mystery from the past.

How Calling Lord Of The Rings A Franchise Allows Hollywood To Ruin It

Calling Lord of the Rings a franchise is the backhanded technique that these writers think allows them to alter and add to Tolkien’s work. If a collection of stories is a franchise, it gives other creators permission to have their say about it, especially in film.

Most people haven’t read much more than The Hobbit or the trilogy, if they even got through all of that. The Silmarillion is a famously tough read, and Tolkien’s many other histories of his fantasy world are more like notes than prose. So most people wouldn’t recognize that these works have been altered, since, as Christopher observed, most people take the films as the definitive canon. In this way, The Lord of the Rings has been appropriated from its creator.

The fact is, until Peter Jackson got hold of it, The Lord of the Rings was the sole work of Tolkien. To write it, he leaned on his research of Icelandic sagas and Anglo-Saxon poetry, like Beowulf and Arthurian legend.

Tolkien wrote his novels and his histories of Middle-earth in the style of these sagas, complete with their triumphs, tragedies, wars, and romances. Tolkien modernized the concept of the saga, but he did so without turning the storytelling style into a franchise by creating his own original work.

Hollywood Is Rationalizing Theft

Those insisting that Lord of the Rings is a franchise are thus rationalizing the theft of Tolkien’s world from its author. The worst part is that this theft isn’t because of anything the author did wrong except not be a writer in the 2020s.

The changes that Boyens and her compatriots have made to the series are all there to apply presentism to the saga by adapting the content to their own tastes rather than presenting Tolkien’s work as it stands. There are too many themes of the series they deem “offensive” for them to present the source material accurately, so what we have gotten since the original, Oscar-winning trilogy are several Tolkien fanfictions with Mary Sue self-insertions.

Controlling Lord Of The Rings Corrupts Everyone Who Uses It

Control of the Lord of the Rings saga is just like the One Ring, and as happens to everyone who touches the One Ring (except maybe Sam Gamgee), it has corrupted those in power with their own egos. They think they can do better than Tolkien, but they can’t, so they pardon this with the cynical label of “franchise.”

The slop eaters let them get away with it because slop eaters will eat anything the producers tell them to, even when it attacks and subverts a thoroughly established canon. It’s up to the rest of us to remind Hollywood that Middle-earth is not a franchise, lest it continue to grow into the commercial nightmare JRR’s son feared.

By Jonathan Klotz
| Published 7 seconds ago

Streaming has turned countless theatrical bombs into hits. Morbius and Madame Web had value as movies that were ”so bad they’re good,” but it’s likely even Angelina Jolie forgot she starred in Life or Something Like It. The 2002 romantic comedy drama was hated by critics, ignored by audiences, and managed to lose millions of dollars in theaters on its way to being forgotten, yet when it started streaming, it suddenly topped viewing charts on platforms like Netflix. 

Angelina Jolie Will Die In Seven Days

You’d be forgiven for thinking that Angelina Jolie made Life or Something Like It before she brought Lara Croft to the big screen in Tomb Raider, but the rom-com came in between the original and Cradle of Life, and only three years before Mr. and Mrs. Smith cemented her status as a major action star. The low-key rom-com has Jolie starring as Lanie Kerrigan, a local Seattle reporter filled with the type of ennui and emptiness about her life that marked so many early-2000s films, when she’s told by a street prophet (Tony Shalhoub) she’ll die in seven days.

The prophet is shown to be eerily correct throughout the film, predicting an earthquake at exactly 9:06 AM in San Francisco, and that an “Angel will fall from the sky,” which turns out to be a member of the Anaheim (now LA) Angels. The prediction is enough to get Lanie to try to turn her life around.

Though her hot baseball-playing boyfriend Cal (Angel’s Christian Kane) is useless, Pete (Edward Burns), the cameraman, is right there to share his philosophy of living each day to the fullest. Lanie finds herself falling in love with Pete’s weirdo charm and zest for life while pursuing her dream of becoming a national-level news anchor harder than ever. That’s the entire plot, and while Angelina Jolie tries to make Life or Something Like It into a hit through sheer willpower, the film, like Lanie, was doomed before opening day. 

The Worst Combination Since Pineapple And Pizza: Expensive And Boring

If you decide to watch the movie on streaming, keep in mind that this film had a budget of $40 million, and that was before the inescapable marketing campaign. With inflation, that would be close to $70 million today.

While Angelina Jolie was expensive to get for the film, Life or Something Like It cost $20 million more than the gorgeous Nosferatu remake and $30 million beyond Den of Thieves 2: Pantera, a film that managed to turn a profit, beloved by fans and critics, and was enough to secure a third film. There was no way Jolie’s film was going to turn a profit, even though it did beat The Ring and the “seven days until you die” plot to the punch by a few months. 

Angelina Jolie may be an A-list star with a string of blockbusters to her name, but like any performer, she has an equal number of flops in her filmography, and Life or Something Like It may be the most forgettable. That’s not to say the film is bad; Jolie does her absolute best to elevate it, but it’s completely forgettable, and today it would be a six-episode series on a streaming service. It’s a testament to her star power that has yet to dwindle after over 30 years in the spotlight that dropping one of her worst films on a streamer would turn it into a smash hit.

Life or Something Like It is currently streaming on Amazon Prime Video.

The number one movie on Prime Video this week is Peter Farrelly’s new action comedy Balls Up. Written by Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick and starring Mark Wahlberg, Paul Walter Hauser, Sacha Baron Cohen, and more, the movie follows a pair of marketing executives who inadvertently cause a global scandal at the World Cup in Brazil, which makes them a target of angry fans, drug lords, and government officials. Though widely panned by critics, the movie has clearly found fans among Prime Video subscribers. But Balls Up is hardly the only thing you could watch on the streaming service. Here’s a look at three great movies that we think you should watch on Prime Video this week, including one of last year’s most acclaimed films.

For more recommendations, check out our list of the best shows and movies on Prime Video.

1

‘Weapons’ (2025)

One of the most celebrated horror movies of 2025, Weapons is a mystery horror film directed, written, produced, and co-scored by Zach Cregger. The movie revolves around the mysterious disappearance of 17 children in the small town of Maybrook, Pennsylvania, which leaves the community in a state of anger, confusion, and paranoia, and leads their parents and teacher to investigate, discovering a sinister evil power in the process. The film boasts a star-studded ensemble cast that includes Julia Garner, Josh Brolin, Alden Ehrenreich, Austin Abrams, Cary Christopher, Toby Huss, Benedict Wong, and Amy Madigan.

Following up on the success of his previous horror film Barbarian, Cregger delivers a twisted and terrifying horror story in Weapons that has further elevated his reputation as a new horror master. With a non-linear, anthology-esque narrative that ties together the stories of multiple different characters, it’s an intelligently crafted film with a genuinely scary villain, brought to life by Amy Madigan’s Academy Award-winning performance. Weapons is easily one of the most thrilling horror films of recent years, and it’s earned near-universal acclaim for its writing, direction, performances, and production values.

2

‘The Voyeurs’ (2021)

Written and directed by Michael Mohan, The Voyeurs is an erotic thriller starring Sydney Sweeney and Justice Smith. Set in Montreal, Quebec, Canada, the movie follows a young couple, Pippa (Sweeney) and Thomas (Smith), who develop an obsession with the lives of their neighbors across the street and start spying on them, leading to unexpected and deadly consequences. Ben Hardy and Natasha Liu Bordizzo star as the neighbors, and the film also features Katharine King So, Cameo Adele, and Jean Yoon in supporting roles.

The Voyeurs had a pretty mixed critical reception when it was first released in 2021, but it was an undeniable success with Prime Video audiences, performing far beyond Amazon’s expectations. While its plot is quite uneven and borders on the unrealistic, the film is still an engaging, steamy, and wild thriller that takes a sexually-charged approach to its familiar premise. It’s no Rear Window, but The Voyeurs is still a lot of fun, largely thanks to the performances by Sweeney and Smith.

3

‘Transformers One’ (2024)

An animated sci-fi action movie inspired by the iconic toy line, Transformers One was directed by Josh Cooley and written by Eric Pearson, Andrew Barrer, and Gabriel Ferrari. Set on Cybertron in the years before it was torn apart by civil war, the film explores the origins of the Cybertronians who would go on to become the familiar Autobots and Decepticons of the franchise, primarily focusing on Orion Pax, the future Optimus Prime, and his best friend, D-16, the future Megatron. Chris Hemsworth voices Orion Pax and Brian Tyree Henry voices D-16, leading an ensemble voice cast that also includes Scarlett Johansson, Keegan-Michael Key, Steve Buscemi, Laurence Fishburne, and Jon Hamm.

A fresh reimagining of the Transformers franchise, Transformers One takes inspiration from the classic cartoons to create a fascinating new origin for the franchise’s heroes and villains, and it was widely acclaimed at the time of its release. Though it wasn’t a box office success, the movie is easily one of the best new Transformers films released in recent years, far better than some of the live-action films. Brought to life through striking animation by Industrial Light & Magic, Transformers One has earned praise from critics and fans alike for its visuals, story, performances, and action.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Release Date

September 20, 2024

Runtime

Advertisement

104 Minutes

Director

Josh Cooley

Advertisement

Writers

Andrew Barrer, Steve Desmond, Gabriel Ferrari

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

A simple comment about not being a Taylor Swift fan turned into something far uglier for Josh Hutcherson.

In a new interview, the actor is looking back on the intense online attacks he received after saying he was “definitely not a Swiftie.” This barrage included body-shaming remarks that hit at some of his long-standing insecurities.

Hutcherson has also reflected on how this extreme reaction reinforced his desire to stay away from internet fame.

Josh Hutcherson Described The Backlash From Swifties As Intense

In 2025, Hutcherson came under fire from Swift fans after telling his “I Love LA” castmate Jordan Firstman in an interview with i-D Magazine that he was “definitely not a Swiftie.”

Now, in a GQ cover story, the actor is revisiting the reaction with some surprise, recalling how quickly the backlash escalated into body-shaming once the comment started circulating online.

“All of a sudden, it garnered this, ‘F-ck him! He’s a monster! Destroy him! He’s short! He hates her because he’s short!’” Hutcherson told the outlet.

“The Hunger Games” star said the experience only reinforced his decision to keep his distance from internet culture, even as many celebrities lean into building highly visible online personas.

Hutcherson made clear, however, that he has no issue with Swift herself. He told the outlet he thinks “she’s great,” but said her music simply does not connect with him, despite attending one of her New Orleans concerts last year.

Hutcherson Doesn’t Want To Be Idolized By The Internet

Hutcherson has built a sizable following on Instagram, with more than two million followers on the platform. However, he also made it clear that being idolized online is not something he wants. As he said to GQ, he does not “need that energy.”

The actor confirmed his belief that too much public familiarity can actually get in the way of his work, especially when it comes to disappearing into the characters he plays onscreen.

“It’s counterintuitive to my job, because if people know you more, you can’t disappear into characters,” he said. “They see you as, ‘Oh, that’s Josh.’ So, if you’re a f-cking meme, people know you for the meme.”

Josh Hutcherson Recalls Constant Scrutiny As A Child Star

By age 9, Hutcherson was already building a name for himself in Hollywood with roles in family films like “Zathura” and “Bridge to Terabithia.” But growing up in the spotlight also meant getting used to a level of scrutiny that never really let up.

“You are always being watched, he said. “You’re potentially always being recorded and photographed, and those things directly impact your career and what roles you get.”

Advertisement

That constant attention, he explained, also heightened his awareness of what he saw as his “weak points,” including his rosacea and shorter height. According to Hutcherson, those insecurities were often weaponized against him and “thrown” back in his face.

The Actor Says Therapy Has Helped Him Face His Insecurities

Over time, Hutcherson has come to understand the importance of confronting his insecurities and has begun doing so by undergoing therapy.

“I’ve started to really open up about it in therapy and talk about it more directly,” the “Hunger Games” star said, “as opposed to having fake confidence, but really you’re dying on the inside.“

Still, Hutcherson maintained that the process has not been easy. He said therapy often requires admitting things about yourself that do not feel “cool” to say out loud, which can be both uncomfortable and “scary.”

Josh Hutcherson ‘No Longer Sees’ His Insecurities As Flaws

These days, Hutcherson says he has a healthier relationship with the insecurities that once weighed heavily on him. Rather than viewing them as “negatives” or “beauty faults,” he now sees them as part of who he is.

The former child star said that shift has come through both therapy and the perspective that comes with getting older.

Advertisement

“I feel like it has led to me being able to handle it in a much more healthy, sane way, and not spiral out and feel like a piece of sh-t,” Hutcherson said of his healing process.

Even with that progress, he insisted that the struggle has not disappeared entirely. Hutcherson acknowledged that those triggers still resurface at times, but said he works to keep them from taking over.

Will Trent killed off a main character — and now the actor is speaking out about their shocking exit.

During the Tuesday, April 14, episode of the show, Amanda Wagner (Sonja Sohn) died while secretly working with the FBI to find information to help Will’s (Ramón Rodríguez) case against Adelaide Trevens (Mallory Jansen).

Sohn’s exit received backlash, which she addressed in several social media posts. The actress, 61, took to Instagram on Saturday, April 18, to reflect on how “surprised by the response to Amanda’s death” she was.

“Once you get the pink slip, it’s just a job. I got a job like you got a job. It’s just a job,” she explained. “Actors are really low people on the totem pole when it comes down to the big structure. When you get a pink slip, you don’t ask about it. You just say goodbye.”

While reflecting on her departure, Sohn promised to share more insight on having to “say goodbye to” characters she played in the past.

“[In my upcoming memoir, I get to talk about] the ins and outs of that and what comes with the business and all that,” she shared. “It’s not always time to talk about the details because one of the things I was taught through this experience of being Amanda and of being in this situation is she’s a much more thoughtful, reserved character than I am. When I engage with characters, we give each other aspects of ourselves.”

Sohn noted she is going to be “a little more reserved in [her] expressions” for now. “The best years are yet to come,” she concluded. “Here’s to Will Trent. Here’s to Amanda. My god. What a character. What an honor and a privilege. So just hold tight. We’re gonna be alright. There’s plenty of Sonja Sohn coming up.”

Sohn captioned the post: “I cannot adequately express the overwhelming gratitude I feel for the @willtrentabc fans who have poured their hearts out on my page.”

She added: “I did my best to to [sic] respond to each one of you but the comments kept growing & I had some life on deck to live. Please know I am receiving & grateful for your precious attention and support. I promise to honor that by giving you something you can sink your teeth into & celebrate with me in the not so distant future.”

Co-showrunner Karine Rosenthal also addressed the decision to write off Amanda, who had been a main character on the show since season 1.

“Amanda has been the character who has protected Will for as long as she has known him,” Rosenthal told Variety in a statement. “So this gives us the opportunity for a completely new dynamic in the GBI, because her replacement will not have that same relationship with Will. Her death had the most impact on the most amount of characters. It really sets everybody reeling from this enormous loss. So it’s such a reset for our characters in a way that is painful but exciting for season 5.”

Thank You!

You have successfully subscribed.

Advertisement

Rosenthal told the outlet that Sohn was made aware that her arc was coming to an end early in season 4 and she handled the news with “grace.”

“Nobody gets to always exit their shows — even on the writing side — on their own terms all the time,” executive producer Daniel Thomsen added. “It’s hard to do that with grace. So it was just very impressive. She is a total pro.”

Will Trent airs on ABC Tuesdays at 8 p.m. ET before streaming the next day on Hulu.

Plastic surgery rumors are not enough to steal Anne Hathaway‘s beauty crown.

The award-winning actress previously ignited rumors about going under the knife to enhance her looks via cosmetic procedures after attending the 2025 Met Gala ceremony in New York City. While she has denied the rumors, she has been quite vocal about struggling with insecurities as a woman in the entertainment industry,

Anne Hathaway shares some secrets to keeping her body in shape and her looks on point even after childbearing. She stresses the importance of staying active as one ages, giving up bad habits, and having a good skincare regimen.

Anne Hathaway Says Beauty And Ugliness Can Coexist

Hathaway marked a major achievement as she has been named the Most Beautiful Woman for People magazine with her appearance as the May cover star. The stunning actress had an interview where she talked about her career, family life with kids, and shared her perspective on beauty. 

When asked how she defines what is beautiful, the movie star gave an unconventional answer, quoting a statement she previously heard from a fellow member of the industry. “A  filmmaker once told me this: Beauty can contain within it ugliness as long as it contains truth.” She began, and then added, “So for me beauty always falls along those lines.” Hathaway’s answer echoed a simple message: true beauty must house no lies!.

Further in the conversation, the “Devil Wears Prada” actress gave a shoutout to her personal trainer while discussing how she stays in shape. “I love working out with Monique Eastwood. She’s a genius. She’s a former ballerina, so she’s put together ballet, HIIT, Pilates, yoga,” she gushed. Hathaway revealed that she had been working with her personal trainer for over four years, having private lessons, hinting that the results of the workouts are off the charts.

The Primetime Emmy Awardee Was Not Comfortable With Conversation About Her Weight

The Daily Mail reported that the iconic actress admitted during the interview that she did not like the attention that was drawn to her body after her hit role as Catwoman in “The Dark Knight Rises.” She played the sexy comic book character starring opposite Christian Bale in the 2012 Christopher Nolan film.

The actress explained that it bothered her that there was a loud conversation about her weight and not her strength. Hathaway disclosed that before filming, Nolan had a deep conversation with her, stressing that he did not care about her losing weight, all her wanted was that she would be able to do all her stunts. The 43-year-old actress added that with a lot of practice, she did indeed learn her stunts, including flipping backward out of a window.

“I didn’t like that the way into the question was, ‘How much weight did you have to lose?’ And not, ‘How strong did you have to get to play that part?’” She remarked  Hathaway’s interview did not end without her praising her husband, Adam Shulman, for his constant support and holding down the fort with their two sons while she works.

Anne Hathaway Headlines With Plastic Surgery Rumors Last Year

The actress’s jaw-dropping look at last year’s Met Gala set tongues wagging once again The whispers began after she stepped out for the Ralph Lauren fall 2025 runway presentation held at the Jack Shainman Gallery in Manhattan’s Tribeca neighborhood last April For the Met Gala last May, she wore a crisp white dress shirt by Wes Gordon, which she paired with a beaded maxi skirt in a black and silver striped pattern. She sealed the look with sky-high black heels and statement jewelry.

“The Princess Diaries” star looked breathtaking as she walked the red carpet posing for pictures, which ignited speculations when they hit the media Many fans commented on her youthful glow, raising questions about whether or not she had undergone a cosmetic procedure The Blast reports that a plastic surgeon, Gary Motykie, analyzed the Hollywood icon’s looks, saying he had “no doubt [she] had surgery on her nose.”

Hathaway, on the other hand, claimed in 2008 that she had never gone under the knife but desired to have her nose worked on because she needed the face for her job. “When I was growing up, I wanted a nose job, because I didn’t think my nose was good,” she told news outlets at the time.

The ‘Devil Wears Prada’ Star Responded To The Plastic Surgery Speculations

The internet buzz around the actress’s looks got to her ears, and she decided to clear the air. As shared by The Blast in a previous release, the 43-year-old star clarified that she was not down for entertaining rumors. She stated that despite the ongoing rumors about her potential look-altering procedures, she was not going to publicly “discuss medical information.”  

Hathaway, however, previously claimed that her looks are due to her skincare routine, workout sessions, and changes in her lifestyle choices, like saying goodbye to alcohol. At this year’s Oscars, she disclosed one of her beauty tips. 

The award-winning actress noted that she achieves a more “awake” appearance, with a simple, subtle braided hairstyle designed to create a lifted, snatched effect. Hathaway has also shared over time that she had to tailor her mindset to tilt in a different direction concerning looks after she clocked forty.

Anne Hathaway’s Take On Self-Confidence

Beauty comes from within, and it takes confidence to keep a head held high as a female star in the entertainment industry because often, looks are prone to judgment. Hathaway admitted that she had phases where she struggled with her self-confidence right from her younger days.

She also noted that she struggled to find her voice as a child because she often felt out of place. “When I was a kid, I found talking really difficult, so I had a bit of stress and anxiety around just, like, communicating,” she previously revealed. The Blast also reports that the mom of two shared that there are days when she looks in the mirror and feels different about her looks in an interview.

She cited a moment when she did not feel like she looked her best but had to put on what she described as he “aspirational swimsuit.” Ultimately, Hathaway decided to embrace that growth and the changes her body goes through with age with a positive mindset. With this, she feels free, comfortable, and confident in a way she hasn’t felt before.

On first watch, Exit 8 is a terrifying experience. An adaptation of the 2023 viral video game, The Exit 8, it thrives in uncertainty. Unbeknownst to a viewer with no previous knowledge of the subject, there is no guarantee of survival. The only assurance is the apprehension and fear that come from the unexpected at every turn. Failure could mean a fate worse than death. Much like Stanley Kubrick‘s The Shining, Genki Kawamura‘s work reflects upon themes dissecting fatherhood, global ignorance, and male ego-driven violence, making this new release a perfect choice for a creepy movie night.

The premise is straightforward, but what unfolds is a psychological game of peeling back layers of past trauma to heal present issues in order to truly move forward. The film premiered at the 2025 Cannes Film Festival, gaining an award for best poster design and an appropriately poetic eight-minute standing ovation. Symbolized by the number eight, Exit 8 explores the nature of cycles, be them physical, mental, or emotional. At the core of the story, the narrative holds a magnifying glass to these men, questioning whether redemption should be on the table to begin with.

The Acclaimed Horror Movie ‘Exit 8’ Encourages Viewers To Have Empathy

The film follows The Lost Man (Kazunari Ninomiya) as he navigates an endless subway tunnel. Soon realizing there are rules he must follow that will allow him to leave, he begins to truly pay attention to his surroundings. If he notices an anomaly, he must turn back. If he doesn’t notice anything different, he must move forward. Due to expert camerawork, the film starts off with a first-person POV, transporting the viewer into the position of a player, engaging with the game. As The Lost Man receives a call from a former partner, she shares that she is pregnant and hasn’t decided how to best proceed. Distraught, he wanders into the hallway that will test his wit and resilience.

Kubrick’s adaptation of the Stephen King novel of the same name isn’t a game in the literal sense. However, it unfolds like one. The hotel presents various opportunities for the family to pack up and leave — plaguing Danny Torrance (Danny Lloyd) with visions — yet they stay, forcing the unfortunate as they must face the demons they’ve ignored. In Jack Torrance’s (Jack Nicholson) case, his ignorance of his family is for the sake of his craft. His ego drives him and ultimately makes him susceptible to the evil that consumes him in the end. For The Lost Man (Ninomiya), the hallway forces him to face and challenge his own ego. The hallway becomes more than a physical space. It stands as a main character, a monster, and a lesson all rolled into one.

‘Exit 8’ Is a Brilliant Vessel for Genki Kawamura’s Take on Fatherhood

During a post-screening talk back with director Kawamura in New York City, he admitted to having taken inspiration from works such as David Lynch‘s Eraserhead, Kenji Mizoguchi‘s Ugetsu, and, of course, Kubrick’s The Shining. His admiration went as far as to name two of the hallway sets as Kubrick and Hitchcock, after famed filmmaker Alfred Hitchcock. What these films have in common is their reflection upon parental roles and how they shift from decade to decade, generation to generation. In The Shining, Jack fancies himself a wordsmith, working on a novel. He is in desperate need of space to express himself creatively, which is the catalyst for him accepting the position as the winter caretaker at the Overlook Hotel. He types away while weary of the sinister forces at play until it’s too late. In the meantime, Wendy works long and hard around the hotel, duties that better suit Jack, considering his responsibilities brought them there in the first place.

In Exit 8, The Lost Man’s circumstances are due to his debilitating reaction at the news of him possibly becoming a father. Since the dawn of time, fatherhood has molded the greatest fears of man. In Jack Torrance’s case, it is the hindrance of greatness. For The Lost Man, it’s the uncertainty of being able to step up to the challenge. In both cases, Danny (Lloyd) and The Boy (Naru Asanuma) see things more clearly, yet are ignored by the adult males in their surroundings. That is, until someone comes along and takes the time to consider their input and way of seeing the situation.

Related

The 35 Highest-Rated Movies Since 2020 (So Far), Ranked According to IMDb

Expect to see these films on decade-end lists.

For Danny, it’s his visions and ability to see beyond what’s right in front of them. For The Boy, he’s more in tune with the changes in front of him in the hallway that the likes of The Walking Man and The Lost Man may overlook. It digs deeper into children’s ability to turn the volume down on the noise of the world such as natural disasters, stock market crashes, and online trends that plague most adults. For Jack Torrance, the noise swallows him whole. He becomes the absent father trope driven by vices, be it his career motivation, alcoholism, or carnal pleasures. For The Lost Man, it’s simpler. He overcomes his debilitating fear, and towards the end, he’s able to stand up to the noise, calling out verbal abuse on a packed train.

Through its repetitive nature, Exit 8 begs the user, protagonist, and the viewer to examine the anomalies of day-to-day life and make a conscious decision — in the film and game’s circumstances to actively turn back — instead of moving forward, forcefully ignorant. Especially within today’s social climate, the paradox of fatherhood takes a new face when outside circumstances influence internal emotional complications. Kawamura’s adaptation of the popular video game will resonate with fans of Kubrick’s The Shining for its outstanding ability to present basic human emotion and instinct as both flaw and virtue. To actively make a choice, to have empathy, and to be present are the ultimate tools for survival.

Advertisement

Release Date

Advertisement

April 10, 2026

Runtime

95 Minutes

Advertisement

Director

Genki Kawamura

Writers

Advertisement

Genki Kawamura, Kentaro Hirase

Advertisement

• 

  Kazunari Ninomiya

  The Lost Man

  Advertisement
• 

  Yamato Kochi

  The Walking Man

  Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

By Chris Snellgrove
| Published 7 seconds ago

When Star Trek: The Next Generation debuted its third season, the main cast members had snazzy new uniforms. They looked great, but they came at a very high cost. Each of these new uniforms cost about $3,000 at the time, which is why only main cast members got the upgrade; background actors continued to wear the older style uniforms because Paramount didn’t want to shell out too much cash. In a wild twist, however, they almost had to pay an exorbitant sum of money to some thieves who stole $82,000 worth of uniforms and attempted to ransom them for KITT, the tricked-out car from Knight Rider!

This story comes to us from Dropping Names With Brent and Jonny, a podcast hosted by TNG alumni Brent Spiner and Jonathan Frakes. That podcast has become a goldmine of cool trivia because, as you might imagine, these Trek icons have quite a few crazy stories to tell. But none have been quite as crazy as Frakes’ recent tale of some very specialized thieves. According to the former Riker actor, these criminals infiltrated the Paramount lot and walked off with $82,000 worth of Star Trek uniforms.

The ’80s Coolest Car

Their heist was a success, but it left the thieves with something of a problem: who was going to buy the stuff? Sure, these uniforms were worth a lot of money, but only to Paramount, which would be using them for future Star Trek productions. The average fan wasn’t going to shell out thousands for these uniforms, and trying to sell them to just anyone would be a great way to get caught. Accordingly, the thieves decided to contact Paramount with their demands, but this is where things get weird. Instead of asking for cash, the thieves wanted KITT, the car from Knight Rider.

If you’re too young to remember, Knight Rider was an iconic ‘80s show featuring David Hasselhoff. While the future Baywatch star made for a compelling lead, audiences cared more about his ride. Hasselhoff’s character drove KITT, a Pontiac Firebird Trans-Am. It looked great, but this car was more than a design classic: it was also a sentient car that could talk and deploy any number of weapons and gadgets worthy of 007. It had some stiff competition from Michael Keaton’s Batmobile and Marty McFly’s DeLorean, but many fans consider this the coolest car of the ‘80s.

Game On, Thieves!

The thieves apparently agreed with this assessment, which is why they tried to use the uniforms as ransom. They wanted to give them back to Paramount in exchange for KITT, and they set up a time and place to make the exchange. However, TNG producer Merri D. Howard had already contacted the FBI about the matter. When the thieves met with him in the desert to make a swap, they didn’t get KITT. Instead, they got swarmed by federal agents who promptly arrested the criminals and returned the stolen uniforms to Paramount.

While this was seemingly the craziest incident of theft, Jonathan Frakes and Brent Spiner made it clear that security on the Paramount lot was really bad. Apparently, it was a regular occurrence for people to steal the captain’s chair that had been ergonomically designed for Patrick Stewart. Fortunately, Paramount managed to get back the $82,000 of stolen uniforms and arrest the culprits, and Frakes and Spiner were left with the story of a lifetime.

KITT, sadly, was unavailable for comment.

By Henry Hards
| Published 47 seconds ago

Often, when fans say they could have done a better job than someone perceived to have ruined the object of their devotion, it’s just a lot of hot air. Just fans being fans without any real way (or ability) to back up the claims at all.

Unless, of course, that fan is That 70s Show‘s Topher Grace, who in 2012 made major waves when he actually showed something that few have tried to pull off. He made an 85-minute recut of the Star Wars prequels.

Topher Grace re-edited George Lucas’ three prequel films (which run a collective 418 minutes) into one coherent feature-length film. And it’s good.

In addition to slashing the running time (and making those cuts while still maintaining a coherent storyline), Grace shifted and refocused things a little from the prequels we know and argue over. Gone are all the pod racing, unnecessary exposition, and obnoxious CGI characters that clutter Star Wars: Episode I – The Phantom Menace. Instead, Grace begins his film with the end of that one: with the final showdown between Obi-Wan, Qui-Gon, and Darth Maul.

It’s hilarious to think that most of The Phantom Menace could effectively be eliminated without causing any real confusion in the overall story. Not a great look for George Lucas and company, but it does speak to the problems fans had with the first prequel when it originally hit theaters.

Topher Grace kept much of the action from the Lucas films but eliminated any lightsaber battles unless they were relevant to the actual storylines he emphasizes. Those are largely about the Anakin-Padme relationship and Obi-Wan’s search for the individuals trying to assassinate politicians.

Scenes like the one where Padme brings Anakin home to meet her family, which were deleted from Lucas’ films, but shed light on characters and relationships, are reinstated. In this way, Grace extracted relevant pieces of the story that could find their way into the original final cut.

Grace provides a smooth transition to the original trilogy by ending his film with an image of the menacing Darth Vader, sans that much-maligned “Nooo!

This is yet another example of less is more, especially when it comes to Star Wars. True fans already understand the depth of the pain here; it didn’t need to be hammered home in such an obvious (and kind of silly) way.

Of course, it’s not without its drawbacks. Cutting over 300 minutes from a series will leave a few holes and move things at a pace that might feel strange to those familiar with the originals. However, according to those few who have ever been allowed to see it, Grace’s film is thematically tight, action-packed, and enjoyable.

Topher Grace’s cut, first completed in 2012, went on to inspire others to take up the Star Wars editing mantle in the years that followed. Topher Grace even helped produce and splice a 5-minute cut of the entire franchise, trailer-style, that brings in elements from nearly every Star Wars production having to do with the original timeline and characters.

His 5-minute cut beautifully encapsulates the franchise’s central ethos while also setting the stage for movies like Solo, Rogue One, and, of course, the other timeline movies.

Unfortunately, Topher Grace’s 85-minute Star Wars cut won’t be coming to a big or small screen near you soon (or ever). Disney would never allow it.

Topher Grace doesn’t plan to hold any more public screenings or distribute the film, even though thousands of Star Wars fans would probably jump at the chance to see the prequels without Jar Jar Binks. He’s probably too afraid of being sued by Disney.

Few cinematic genres are as popular or versatile as the thriller. Covering everything from horror to comedy and action, the thriller is maliable and enduring, offering audiences stories of mystery and anxiety that will have them on the edge of their seats. However, if there’s one subgenre that stands out from the others, it has to be the psychological thriller.

These movies toy with the audience’s perception, focusing on suspenseful narratives that deal with themes of mental distress, anxiety, paranoia, and distorted realities. They toy with their characters as much as with their audience, resulting in some of the best and most riveting movies in cinema. Movies like Memento and Oldboy are among the best-known examples of the subgenre, but many other great psychological thrillers have gone unnoticed over the years, and this list is our way to do right by them. If you haven’t seen the movies on this list, then do yourself a favor and seek them out; you won’t regret it.

‘Possessed’ (1947)

Image via Warner Bros. Pictures

Joan Crawford received her second Oscar nomination for her work in Curtis Bernhardt‘s Possessed. The film sees Crawford as Louise, the nurse of wealthy Dean Graham (Raymond Massey) and his wife, who develops an unhealthy fixation with the neighbor, David (Van Heflin). When Dean’s wife dies, Louise becomes his new wife, but her enduring obsession with David will lead her down a path of violence.

Few classical actresses played women in various degrees of mental anguish as perfectly as Joan Crawford, and Possessed is one of her finest hours. Sure, the film is highly accentuated to the point of bordering on melodrama — it was made in 1947, after all. However, the film still offers a riveting story about the dangers of obsession and the past’s ability to ruin one’s future if one does not reconcile with it. Besides, Crawford’s work is reason enough to watch.

‘Manhunter’ (1986)

Image Via De Laurentiis Entertainment Group

You may or may not know, but Anthony Hopkins wasn’t actually cinema’s first Hannibal Lecter. Five years earlier, Michael Mann adapted Thomas Harris‘ 1981 novel Red Dragon into Manhunter, with William Petersen as Will Graham and Brian Cox as Hannibal Lecktor. The film adapts the novel’s plot, which sees Graham coming out of retirement to catch a serial killer known as the Tooth Fairy. To do so, he must confront Lecktor, who tried to kill him years earlier.

Today, Manhunter has been all but eclipsed by the subsequent success of Jonathan Demme‘s The Silence of the Lambs, the superior adaptation of Harris’ novel. However, Manhunter is still quite a gripping thriller, with a radically different but no less compelling take on Hannibal Lecter. It might not reinvent the wheel or explore as many themes as Demme’s masterpiece, but Mann’s adaptation is as stylish as it is engrossing. The film’s approach to forensic science was also quite refreshing for the time, inspiring countless future thrillers.

‘Green Room’ (2015)

Image via A24

Jeremy Saulnier‘s claim to fame came in 2015 with the horror psychological thriller Green Room. The film focuses on a punk band playing at a remote club in the Pacific Northwest. Their night descends into chaos and horror when they unwittingly witness a murder, finding themselves the targets of Neo-Nazi skinheads. The late Anton Yelchin stars alongside Imogen Poots, Callum Turner, and Patrick Stewart.

A pretty perfect horror movie from A24, Green Room is as wild as its premise makes it sound. It is unapologetically gruesome, hyper-violent, and grimy, making the most of its limited setting and remarkable cast to deliver a story that might lack depth, but it more than makes up for it in sheer thrills. That said, Green Room does have interesting things to say about morality and how it ebbs and flows when one’s life is on the line. Those with weak stomachs are wise to stay away, but all those who love their movies with a hard edge will love this underrated gem from the 2010s.

‘Take Shelter’ (2011)

Oscar nominee Michael Shannon and Oscar winner Jessica Chastain star in Jeff Nichols‘ 2013 psychological disaster thriller Take Shelter. Shannon plays Curtis, a husband and father plagued with apocalyptic visions about a coming storm. As he begins building a shelter to protect his family from the doom, his unexplained and seemingly unreasonable actions begin to strain his relationship with his loving wife, Samantha (Chastain).

A low-key masterpiece of the thriller genre, Take Shelter is as thought-provoking as it is elusive. The film isn’t really concerned with whether Curtis’ visions are actually prophetic or not; instead, the focus is on the psyche and the importance of human connection. Take Shelter is haunting and uneasy, but Shannon’s humane performance and Nichols’ nuanced approach make it a deep examination of duty and paranoia that never sensationalizes Curtis’ struggle. The ambiguous ending might be the best-known part, but the entire movie is rich in food for thought.

‘Strange Darling’ (2024)

Image via Magenta Light Studios

Advertisement

Strange Darling stars Willa Fitzgerald and certified scream king Kyle Gallner as a man and a woman who have a one-night stand that soon turns deadly. The plot follows a non-linear structure told across six chapters, each one a piece of a larger puzzle that only starts making sense about halfway through.

Subversive in the best possible way, Strange Darling makes the best out of its twisting narrative, largely thanks to a spectacular and frankly Oscar-worthy performance from Willa Fitzgerald. The film uses our preconceived notions of the psychological thriller to pull a trick on us, and the result is a refreshing game-changer that steps out of the genre’s boundaries. Released only two years ago, Strange Darling was severely underappreciated by both critics and audiences. Today, it continues to amass a small but loyal fanbase, but it still has a long way to go to secure cult classic status.

‘Don’t Look Now’ (1973)

Image via Paramount Pictures

Advertisement

Nicole Roeg‘s Don’t Look Now has become more popular in recent years; that is indeed true. However, it still lacks the recognition of other horrors of the ’70s. Donald Sutherland and Julie Christie star as a married couple recovering from the death of their daughter by traveling to Venice. However, the pair begins dealing with strange and potentially supernatural situations that will push their sanity to the breaking point.

Don’t Look Now is perhaps best known for its ending and the long-standing yet now-debunked rumor that Sutherland and Christie had unsimulated sex on camera during its most famous scene. However, the film is a poignant and genuinely chilling exploration of grief and the inability to move on. The occult themes further support the film’s thesis regarding the inevitability of tragedy, crafting a mood of lingering dread that refuses to let go. Sutherland is particularly affecting here, and his work during the final moments has cemented Don’t Look Now as a classic, albeit an unsung one.

‘Repulsion’ (1965)

Image via Compton Films

Advertisement

When you think of Roman Polanski‘s psychological thrillers, chances are you think of Rosemary’s Baby. However, he actually directed another one three years earlier, Repulsion, which was also his English-language debut. Starring a career-best Catherine Deneuve, the film sees the legendary French actress playing Carol, a young woman with an acute fear of interacting with men. Left alone in her apartment, she begins to experience hallucinations as she descends into mental anguish.

Repulsion is one of the best thrillers of the ’60s, a ruthless and profoundly eerie exploration of sexual repression, identity, and isolation. The film successfully places us in a claustrophobic and slowly escalating situation, often putting us in Carol’s actual perspective to enhance immersion. In its way, Repulsion is a statement on femininity and non-conformity, with Carol choosing violence rather than subjugation and submission. Powered by Deneuve’s outstanding work, Repulsion is a powerful chamber piece that’s hard to shake off.