NSW supreme court judge otherwise dismisses case brought by film’s co-producers and awards Wilson almost $400,000 after star countersued
Rebel Wilson has been ordered to pay A$10 (US$7, £5) in damages after emerging victorious from a bitter legal spat with her latest film’s co-producers.
The Pitch Perfect star directed, co-produced and starred in The Deb, a musical comedy that became the battleground for multiple legal battles in Australia and the US.
Continue reading...
© Photograph: Bianca de Marchi/AAP
© Photograph: Bianca de Marchi/AAP
© Photograph: Bianca de Marchi/AAP
Hollywood just can't help itself.
The entertainment industry has been in turmoil recently, thanks to a string of inconsistencies. While there have been notable outliers, films that were both critically and commercially successful, there's a much longer list of movies that have failed.
Disney's "The Marvels" was a financial disaster, as was "Madame Web," "The Flash," "Lightyear," the atrocious live-action "Snow White" movie, and of course, 2026's "Supergirl."
Massive financial losses. A dramatic decrease in audience trust and consumer interest in many entertainment industry projects. There are varying reasons for each, but most have one thing in common: Hollywood doesn't understand audiences or the material they're making, and they're committed to putting their political beliefs and ideology above competence.
Based on the early returns from one of Netflix's biggest and most expensive projects, the once-dominant streaming service is soon to release one of its own. And as with many other Hollywood mistakes, it was easily avoidable.
Several years ago, in 2023, news broke that Netflix hired director Greta Gerwig to make at least two films based on the legendary C.S. Lewis book series, "The Chronicles of Narnia." This announcement came after Gerwig's latest film, "Barbie," became a box office phenomenon during and after the "Barbenheimer" weekend.
Filming on "Narnia: The Magician's Nephew" started in 2025 and wrapped up in time for the first trailer to hit the internet this October ahead of a 2027 theatrical release. To say that the first trailer has been poorly received would be a dramatic understatement.
Several sites have reported that browser extensions showing YouTube "dislikes" found that it's racked up over 65,000 such ratings, though there have been positive reactions too. A quick watch of the preview, and some background on Gerwig and her take on "Narnia" explains why.
First, the trailer itself looks, well, awful. Special effects and visuals look like something out of a Marvel movie, overblown, obviously fake, and far too modern for the world that most fans of the book series imagine. To drive home the point that this would be for "modern audiences," the studio and creative team chose Led Zeppelin's "Stairway to Heaven" to play over the visuals. Nothing says: "A story written in the 1950s set at the turn of the century and during the early years of World War II in the late 1930's-early 1940s," like Led Zeppelin.
Second, Gerwig's preferred version of the story seems to purposefully remove the underlying meaning of it, of Lewis' work and the religious influence behind it. In an interview published in 2018, for example, Gerwig said that while she goes to church, she's "uncomfortable" with "Jesus is my lord and savior" talk, adding that she finds it "creepy."
Lewis, of course, famously converted to Christianity and the Narnia stories contain obvious Christian imagery and symbolism. Including the character of "Aslan," a representation of Jesus Christ. Aslan in this film will be voiced by Meryl Streep, a confusing choice, to say the least. Then the trailer depicted The Eagle and Child, the pub where Lewis and author J.R.R. Tolkien met to discuss writing and their stories, being destroyed by the villain in the film. Some interpreted that as a purposeful nod to the audience that this wouldn't be a faithful retelling of the story.
And why would it be, when Gerwig's filmography is littered with one specific ideology: feminism.
The message of Gerwig's "Barbie" had as much subtlety as throwing a brick through a window. The real world is an oppressive patriarchy, while the Kens taking over in the Barbie world is an abject disaster that must be fixed by the Barbies returning to rule their fictional world.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE OUTKICK SPORTS COVERAGE
Her adaptation of "Little Women" was similarly obvious in its goals, eschewing Jo's marriage from the novel because Gerwig thought it better represented Louisa May Alcott's vision.
There's nothing wrong with Gerwig making films that align with her worldview. The issue is that the Narnia story doesn't, and as we've seen over time, forcing ideology into movies where it doesn't belong simply does not work. While she's maintained that she's a devoted, life-long fan of the stories and Lewis himself, the trailer looked like it came from someone who's never thought about them, let alone understood them. Even worse for Netflix? They gave her a reported $250 million budget, at least, to make it.
At the time, Gerwig was the hottest filmmaker in the business, thanks to the runaway financial success of "Barbie." But throwing that much money at a director who wants to put a modern ideological spin on every movie she makes? It's insane.
And it's clear that Netflix CEO Ted Sarandos has seen the writing on the wall.
While there are likely other factors at work beyond just "Narnia" being a potential financial failure, Netflix this week went on a stunning spree of removing top film executives. After a decade there, Sarandos fired Chief Content Officer Bela Bajaria. Then Dan Lin, their now-former head of film, and his top lieutenant, Doug Belgrad.
Netflix is famously ruthless, but these are not decisions made on the spur of the moment, and it hints at broader problems within their film division. Years of poor quality content and politically motivated projects have taken their toll on subscriber growth. Problems that would only be exacerbated if "Narnia" flops.
It's been rumored that the film was subjected to extensive reshoots after dismal test scores at screenings over the summer. Rumors that seem likely to be true, given Netflix pushed the release date back from late 2026 to February 2027. Hardly a time for a blockbuster, $250 million+ movie. Now the first trailer's been greeted with a surge of negative reactions and disappointment. As it always would, given Gerwig's specific penchant for storytelling and inability to remove her own biases. Fittingly, Gerwig discussed the movie with of all people, Stephen Colbert, at a recent exclusive IMAX preview.
OUTKICK IS NOW AVAILABLE ON THE FOX NEWS APP: CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD
"Narnia" might turn out to be better than expected. Maybe the Streep casting as Aslan won't be the distraction many feared. Maybe Gerwig didn't pour her predictable beliefs into a story that can't accommodate them. Or the off-putting fever dream visuals might be less prevalent than the trailer makes them look.
But given the test screenings, her track record and the visuals, it's hard to give her the benefit of the doubt. If audiences don't either, it'll be the latest in a long series of predictable financial failures from Hollywood. And as always, it's their own fault.
© PA Wire
Paul Finebaum says ESPN did, indeed, sideline him after an interview with OutKick last year.
Last September, Finebaum told Clay Travis during a podcast that he was considering leaving ESPN to run for U.S. Senate in Alabama as a Republican, revealing that he had also voted for President Donald Trump in 2024. A week later, Travis reported that ESPN had removed Finebaum from his scheduled television appearances because of the interview.
"Per sources: Disney/ESPN has removed @finebaum from appearing on @ESPN since his @outkick interview expressing interest in running as a Republican for senate in Alabama. ESPN has canceled all network appearances on all shows, including some that have occurred for a decade plus," Travis posted on X.
An ESPN public relations executive disputed the report, despite the obvious fact that Finebaum had disappeared from his usual ESPN television appearances, even following a weekend of major college football upsets.
"This is not true at all. The below is TOTALLY FALSE," ESPN's Bill Hofheimer wrote above Travis' report.
Finebaum sided with Travis' version of events this week.
"Of course, I was sidelined," Finebaum told Awful Announcing when asked about the story. "I’d done the same shows every day for 13 years, and the next thing you know, I’m not on there after a college football weekend."
OutKick asked ESPN for comment Thursday following Finebaum's remarks. The network sent the following statement:
"As we stated last year, Finebaum was never banned."
The dispute is largely a matter of semantics. Finebaum was not booked for his regular appearances on shows like SportsCenter and Get Up the week after his interview with OutKick. He did, however, continue hosting his eponymous show on SEC Network and ESPN Radio. He remained on some ESPN platforms.
The network can also claim it simply chose not to book him for certain television appearances and tried out other personalities in case Finebaum ultimately left the company to run for office. In fact, that is what we hear ESPN told people who inquired at the time.
As a matter of technicality, ESPN did not "ban" Finebaum. However, what is technically true is not always the same as what is obvious.
What appears obvious is that ESPN responded to Finebaum's interview by not booking him on the shows he has spent the past decade appearing on during the college football season.
Further, it would have been understandable for ESPN to take issue with Finebaum making national news about a potential political campaign while still employed by the company. We wouldn't have faulted ESPN for deciding not to use Finebaum on television while he was publicly flirting with a run for office, which he ultimately decided against.
THE CRAIG CARTON SHOW–UNFILTERED, UNAPOLOGETIC AND UNMISSABLE. DOWNLOAD HIS DAILY PODCAST NOW!
The issue is the double standard.
Stephen A. Smith has spent years publicly discussing the possibility of running for president as a Democrat. ESPN did not respond by removing him from his regular television appearances or publicly preparing replacements in case he left the company to seek office.
That contrast makes ESPN's handling of Finebaum harder to dismiss as ordinary programming rotation.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Finally, there is the broader question of how much longer Finebaum will remain at ESPN.
Nearly every football season seems to bring another story about Finebaum potentially leaving the network, whether for political office or a media competitor. At some point, that recurring uncertainty begins to say something about the partnership.
Jazz and soul-influenced artist wowed the judges with her ambitious second album, beating competition from fellow stars including Sir Paul McCartney, Olivia Dean, Suede and Florence and the Machine
© PA Wire
Jazz and soul-influenced artist wowed the judges with her ambitious second album, beating competition from fellow stars including Sir Paul McCartney, Olivia Dean, Suede and Florence and the Machine
© PA Wire
Vanessa and Nick Lachey like to reiterate the titular question at the center of their hit Netflix dating show by saying, whenever possible, “Let’s find out if love truly is blind.”
But over the past few seasons of the globally popular reality series, the question that has come to dominate the so-called experiment is not whether love is blind, but whether love is political.
Just two episodes into Season 11, set in Boston this time, one couple confronted two increasingly charged political issues in one scene: vaccines and abortion. Enter John Shannon, a 33-year-old account executive, and Sarah Williams, a 34-year-old healthcare program manager whom the internet collectively adores.
The question that has come to dominate the so-called experiment is not whether love is blind, but whether love is political.
Shannon says, “I feel capitalism is injected into healthcare in our country. I feel like Covid really showed the worst side of it to me.” Williams responds with, “I work in a hospital and I got my master’s in this too [and] I feel like recently medicine gets a bad rep when it shouldn’t.”
Minutes later, Shannon pivots the conversation to access to abortion. He says, “I don’t at all think abortion should be illegal, but it’s a very sad thing. People will be like, ‘Well, what about this girl who’s 11 and she’s pregnant by her uncle. She doesn’t deserve to have an abortion?’ And it’s like, OK, that’s horrible. But why does that justify having an abortion at six months because you just never got around to it?” Williams explains: “The six-month thing? That’s where, from a healthcare perspective, I do think there’s a little misinformation as well. The number of women who do it late term, just because it’s almost, like, nonexistently low […] I hate that that’s used as an argument.”
What really made this scene a talker, though, is that after this clear display of a difference of values and belief systems, the two opted to get engaged.
Their exchange has launched a viral conversation, including a proliferation of TikTok videos. And part of what makes the discussion between Sarah and John so remarkable is how commonplace it feels. I’ve heard variations of this very conversation from single friends over drinks, via texts and in lengthy voice notes.
What both “Love is Blind” and my highly eligible single female friends have underscored is that politics, and increasingly conservative politics, is a part of contemporary relationships and dating. For progressive-minded women who find themselves dating men whose politics may fundamentally conflict with their own, the choices are limited: compromise on their political ideology, take on the herculean effort to change their partner or opt out of marriage or long-term partnership altogether.
The premise of “Love is Blind” has become ubiquitous, or perhaps notorious. But if you have yet to experience the pods, the reveal walks and those God-awful opaque gold wine glasses, it goes like this: Single men and women from one city speed-date through a wall, propose, lay eyes on each other for the first time, test their “physical connection” at a resort in Mexico and in a production-provided apartment, and then get married.
Eleven seasons and one streaming record later, criticizing “Love is Blind” is tedious, obvious work: a flawed premise, lack of physical representation, manufactured and manipulated drama, regressive heteronormative ideology and, apparently, exploitation. All of this is to say nothing of the show’s disjointed view of marriage: at once glorified as the ultimate transformative goal and degraded with an artificial timeline and flippant uncertainty at the altar.
Indeed, political misalignment between male and female contestants has become a consistent plot driver on the past few seasons of “Love Is Blind.” If production has a shot list, and I’m certain they do, then a pointed conversation about racism or abortion or health misinformation must top it. Politics has become an increasingly common reason for contestants to end a relationship and opt out of the “experiment.” In Season 8, for example, two men were left at the altar over political issues that mattered to their fiancées. Neither man was fundamentally opposed to Black Lives Matter or LGBTQ+ rights, respectively, but there was an unwillingness to engage intellectually.
Since then, “Love Is Blind” has become increasingly more conservative, more “trad,” so to speak. There is much, much conversation through those glowing walls about “traditional gender roles” and “traditional values.” In Season 9, there was an acutely controversial exchange between two contestants regarding the possibility of having an LGBTQ+ child. “Do you feel like it’s a fad?” Nick asked; “One hundred percent,” Annie answered.
“Love Is Blind” has become increasingly more conservative, more “trad,” so to speak.
This shouldn’t be surprising. Much has been made, including by me, of how media so often mirrors what is happening in American culture. And today mainstream American culture has become increasingly conservative and increasingly natalist: Look at the Trump administration’s plan to use money to ply women into having more children or Project 2025’s plan for women or the realities of the manosphere.
And women are becoming more liberal, more progressive. According to a recent Gallup poll, American women age 18 to 29 are 15 percentage points more likely to identify as liberal than their male counterparts are — a difference five times larger than it was in 2000.
I’m no marriage counselor or relationship expert, but I do not believe politics need to wholly align for a romantic relationship to be happy or healthy or fulfilling. My husband and I disagree on many political issues. What we do share, though, is mutual respect, fundamental values and a willingness to learn from each other.
Williams reflected on her conversation with Shannon on the digital platform Elite Daily, saying, “People are entitled to also make their own choices, and then we have to decide where we as individuals want to draw the line. I think John’s and my communication in that regard was great and healthy and productive.”
Perhaps it was bad editing, or bad luck. Perhaps Shannon and Williams shared something that viewers cannot see yet. Maybe they will walk down the aisle and exchange meaningful vows and then happily hold hands during the reunion special. But for this viewer, especially after watching the latest two episodes last night? It feels doubtful.
So what happens when the person you’re falling in love with, or could potentially fall in love with, holds political views that affect your body, your family or your sense of self? We don’t need a new reality-show premise to answer that question. We can just ask our single friends.
The post Viral ‘Love Is Blind’ exchange highlights an all-too-common dating struggle appeared first on MS NOW.
Lena Dunham herself cameos in Leo Reich’s new comedy – but it sometimes feels like a series of loose gripes and observations in search of a TV show
© Channel 4
Lena Dunham herself cameos in Leo Reich’s new comedy – but it sometimes feels like a series of loose gripes and observations in search of a TV show
© Channel 4
Singer who has had record-breaking Brit awards success adds to haul thanks to massively ambitious big-band album
Raye is the winner of the 2026 Mercury prize, for her second studio album, This Music May Contain Hope.
Her win – for a hugely ambitious 73-minute record that spanned big band jazz, power balladry, funk and more – caps an ongoing renaissance for a British singer who at one point was in the doldrums, lashing out publicly at her record label for not letting her release a studio album.
Continue reading...
© Photograph: JMEnternational/Getty Images
© Photograph: JMEnternational/Getty Images
© Photograph: JMEnternational/Getty Images
Actors in the mix to play 007 in Denis Villeneuve’s installment include Callum Turner and Jack Lowden
The search for the next James Bond may finally be nearing its end: according to reports, a very select group of actors will screen-test to become the next British agent 007 this weekend.
According to the Hollywood Reporter and Variety, citing several sources, a group of actors reportedly including Callum Turner and Slow Horses’ Jack Lowden, will appear in front of cameras as the secret agent this weekend in London.
Continue reading...
© Composite: Gisela Schober/Getty Images,Matt Baron/BEI/REX/Shutterstock
© Composite: Gisela Schober/Getty Images,Matt Baron/BEI/REX/Shutterstock
© Composite: Gisela Schober/Getty Images,Matt Baron/BEI/REX/Shutterstock
Login
