Entertainment
Gay dating app Sniffies just got $100 million from Match Group
Dating app conglomerate Match Group announced yesterday it’s making a $100 million investment in Sniffies, a gay cruising app that makes “getting laid as a gay man almost too easy,” according to Mashable’s review.
The investment is a minority stake in the company and includes the option to acquire the remaining equity in the future, according to a press release shared with Mashable. Founder and CEO of Sniffies, Blake Gallagher, shared on LinkedIn that it will remain led by him and independently operated.
“The product, the tone, and the community will continue to be shaped by the people who use it,” Gallagher continued, saying the app can now move faster to make improvements users are asking for while building it by being “grounded in real-world connection, with our community leading the way.”
Mashable Trend Report
Hookup apps for everyone
AdultFriendFinder
—
readers’ pick for casual connections
Tinder
—
top pick for finding hookups
Hinge
—
popular choice for regular meetups
In the press release, Gallagher stated that with Match Group’s support, the Sniffies team can improve the product and expand their network while investing in Trust and Safety (a growing issue on dating apps) and giving users what they want.
Sniffies has around three million monthly active users globally, according to the press release, and 20 million messages sent daily. And Sniffies’ iOS app only launched last year, only to be pulled from the App Store shortly after.
The investment comes around a year after Match Group acquired sapphic dating app HER, which drew mixed reactions from users. The same is true for this announcement, with a Reddit thread asking, “Are we cooked?“, and most comments answering in the affirmative. But how Sniffies changes with this investment is yet to be seen.
Entertainment
Beloved Star Trek Character Busted Franchise’s Biggest Myth With Single Line
By Chris Snellgrove
| Updated

Star Trek has some of the most passionate fans on the entire planet. For the most part, those fans are unified in their love for this decades-old sci-fi franchise. However, there are a few things the fandom has bitterly debated over the years. One of the most intense arguments involves a seemingly innocuous question: can Vulcans lie? Some fans are convinced that these logic-loving aliens are far too moral and upstanding to deceive anybody. Other fans believe Vulcans are fully capable of lying and have successfully convinced the galaxy that they always tell the truth.
This persistent Star Trek myth goes back to The Original Series and claims made by characters like Spock and Dr. McCoy. Eventually, this myth was busted by Tuvok, who reluctantly told Seven of Nine that Vulcans were capable of lying but generally preferred not to do so. After decades of fan debate, this finally settled the matter. However, what most fans don’t know is that Tuvok accidentally busted this myth far earlier in the show. In “Twisted,” he blatantly lies to Captain Janeway in a scripted exchange that seriously upset Tuvok actor Tim Russ.
The Man, The Myth

First, we need to talk about how the “Vulcans don’t lie” myth came about. Back in The Original Series episode, “The Enterprise Incident,” a Romulan commander asks Spock if it’s true that Vulcans can’t lie, and Spock responds, “It is no myth.” This idea is also backed up by Dr. McCoy, who offered his medical opinion on the matter in “The Menagerie, Part 1” when he says of Spock, “the simple fact that he’s a Vulcan means he’s incapable of telling a lie.” Even the android Data agrees. In the Next Generation episode, “Data’s Day,” he wrote a message to Bruce Maddox about how Vulcans couldn’t lie.
If you pay close attention, though, Spock himself sometimes justified telling blatant lies. In The Wrath of Khan, when Saavik realizes Spock told Kirk that Enterprise repairs would take longer than they did, she confronts him: “You lied!” Spock (who was speaking in code to Kirk) simply replies, “I exaggerated.” In The Undiscovered Country, his apprentice, Valeris, does something similar. When asked to name her fellow Starfleet traitors, she says she does not remember. When Spock asks, “A lie?”, she responds, “A choice.”
A Secret Onscreen Lie

When he began working on Star Trek: Voyager, Tuvok actor Tim Russ seemingly bought into the idea that Vulcans don’t lie. In an interview with Cinefantastique, the actor discussed some dialogue from the episode “Twisted” that he disagreed with. “There’s a line in an episode we just finished, ‘I’ve always respected the Captain’s decisions.’ And that line was difficult to say.” Elaborating, he said, “[The] line was difficult to say when, in fact, we know he […] violated protocols [in ‘Prime Factors’] by taking matters into his own hands.” He’s referring to an earlier incident where Tuvok traded Starfleet technology to aliens for technology that could transport the Voyager crew 40,000 light-years.
To those closely watching Star Trek: Voyager, this settled the old debate: Vulcans can lie, as we saw Tuvok do to Captain Janeway. On other occasions, Tuvok has found ways to (like Spock before him) justify his deception. After he tells Chakotay, “As a Vulcan, I am at all times honest,” the commander says that Tuvok clearly lied when he passed himself off as a loyal member of the Maquis. Tuvok replies, “I was honest to my own convictions within the defined parameters of my mission.” To this Vulcan, it seems, lies are in the eye of the beholder.
A Borg Assimilates The Truth

Later, Star Trek: Voyager would bust this old franchise myth in a much more blatant way. In the episode “Hunters,” Seven of Nine asks, point-blank, if Vulcans can lie. Tuvok reluctantly admits to her that Vulcans have the capability of lying, but that he has never found it useful or necessary. Given Tuvok’s previous moral flexibility, this information might square the circle with the line about always respecting Janeway’s decision. In Tuvok’s mind, he may respect her decision without following it.
With any luck, this helps settle the debate, once and for all. Vulcans can lie. They just mostly choose not to do so. This explains what they are capable of while also explaining their reputation for honesty. If nobody ever sees you lying, why would they doubt you are honest? If you doubt what I’ve written, though, you can always wait until First Contact Day and ask the first Vulcan you see about all this. Don’t worry: I’m sure he’ll tell the truth!
Entertainment
Charlize Theron Is Hunted For Sport In Relentless, R-Rated Netflix Thriller
By Robert Scucci
| Published

Confession time: ever since Mad Max: Fury Road came out in 2015, the fantasy of getting beaten up by Charlize Theron was born. Just two years later, Atomic Blonde hit theaters, and all bets were off. While I’ve always appreciated Theron’s dramatic range, with 2003’s Monster showing her menace and 2011’s Young Adult showing how brilliantly she could portray a woman’s ongoing mental health crisis and alcoholism, I will check out any action thriller she ever stars in because, like Keanu Reeves with the John Wick films, she’s clearly put in the work to be a total badass on screen.
Which brings us to her latest outing, a Netflix Original action thriller that dropped April 24, 2026, called Apex. After watching, the fantasy still stands. I would love to get into a fistfight with Charlize Theron and lose. I’m not a masochist, and this isn’t normal territory for me, but if I found out I only had six months to live, I’d make it a bucket list item and go out on my own terms by encouraging her to fight me on top of a skyscraper or a moving train.
You may say that I’m a dreamer, but I’m not the only one.

As for the movie itself, Apex is solid. It’s a chase thriller. It’s The Most Dangerous Game for a modern audience. Charlize Theron plays a grieving widow who is hunted for sport in the Australian wilderness by a total psycho with a home-field advantage, and she has to rely on grit and intuition to survive. If you’ve seen one of these movies, you’ve basically seen them all, but the performances here cannot be overstated.
Like The Ice-T Movie, But In The Forest
One of my favorite “hunting humans for sport” plots can be found in 1994’s Surviving the Game, starring Ice-T, Rutger Hauer, and Gary Busey. In this film, Ice-T’s Jack Mason is hunted by a group of wealthy men who regularly get together to let a human loose on their sprawling property designed for exactly this kind of activity. They give him a head start, then roll out on their ATVs, armed to the teeth and ready to kill.

It’s an inherently ridiculous premise, but it’s totally unhinged and worth your time because everybody knows the assignment.
Apex takes a more grounded approach while still exploring that same familiar territory. Context is everything, though, and it plays out as a much more serious film. Here, Sasha (Charlize Theron) takes a solo trip to the Grand Isle Narrows just months after her husband Tommy (Eric Bana) fell to his death during a climbing expedition in Norway.

During her travels, she has an unwholesome run-in with a couple of hunters, as well as a kindly stranger named Ben (Taron Egerton). While briefly talking shop at a petrol station, Ben tells her to start her trip at Blackwater Bay if she really wants to experience next-level hiking and kayaking. She takes his advice, but quickly learns she shouldn’t have when she crosses paths with him again the following day. This happens after she’s harassed by the same hunters from earlier and has her supplies stolen while sleeping in her tent.
At first, Ben is hospitable. He offers her warmth by the fire, food, and water. Sasha quickly realizes he’s the one who stole her bag, and his demeanor shifts immediately. He pulls out a crossbow and a boombox and tells her that her head start will only last as long as the song he’s currently playing. From here on out, the chase is on. Ben is the hunter, and Sasha has to move fast if she wants to avoid getting executed in the middle of nowhere by somebody who’s clearly engaged in this kind of activity before.
Far From Original, But Beyond Adequate

Apex does not offer anything new in this subgenre, but it’s still worth your time if you like movies with this setup. Plot-wise, there’s not much to it. You get some drama leading up to the hunt, and from that point forward it’s Sasha versus nature versus Ben. The real tension comes from the fact that Ben knows the terrain and Sasha doesn’t, while the fun comes from watching Sasha adapt and prove she knows how to survive in harsh environments.
The third act tension is palpable when things stop going according to plan for either of them, forcing a fragile truce when options run out. It’s a small twist on a tired setup that I appreciated. Add in some beautiful nature shots, and you almost forget this is a Netflix Original because the lighting actually holds up.

If you’re a fan of the tried-and-true chase thriller formula, you’ll likely find Apex satisfying. It’s in and out in 95 minutes, establishes its conflict quickly, and doesn’t overstay its welcome. Charlize Theron and Taron Egerton have strong chemistry as things escalate toward the inevitable breaking point.

Truth be told, if you’ve seen one movie like this, you’ve seen them all. But that applies to most subgenres that are this hyperspecific. If you know what you like and this is your lane, Apex should be your next Netflix watch, and you won’t be disappointed.

Entertainment
The Buffy Reboot Disaster Proves Oscar Winners Should Stay In Their Lane
By Chris Snellgrove
| Published

Buffy the Vampire Slayer fans are still reeling from the bad news that Hulu canceled the reboot of this iconic ‘90s show. The streamer had ordered a pilot, and things seemed to be going well: not only was Sarah Michelle Gellar returning to star in the new series, but the showrunner was going to be Oscar-winning director Chloe Zhao. The fandom had visions of Buffy returning as a prestige TV show, but Hulu’s cancellation put a stake through those dreams, leaving us only with dust.
As usual, battle lines were quickly drawn when it came to discourse about this show’s failure. Some (including Gellar herself) thought this was just a matter of out-of-touch executives not getting what Buffy was all about. Hulu, meanwhile, reportedly claimed the problem was that the show was too small, too focused on younger audiences, and (perhaps most importantly) didn’t have enough Gellar in it. Personally, I tend to believe Hulu, as they wouldn’t throw away a golden IP for no reason. With respect to Zhao (who has done some excellent work), the cancellation of the Buffy reboot clearly proves why Oscar-winning directors should stay in their own lane.
High “Stakes” Drama

What was the Buffy reboot about? While official details are relatively minimal, the show was reportedly going to focus primarily on a new Slayer played by Ryan Kiera Armstrong. She was going to have to deal with a new vampire menace that popped up in a very familiar location: Sunnydale. Like Buffy, this new Slayer named Nova was going to have a hard time learning the ins and outs of dusting vamps. Fortunately, Buffy herself was going to serve as this young warrior’s mentor, helping her keep the forces of darkness at bay.
Hulu didn’t like the initial pilot, believing that it was too small for an IP this big and that it had too much kiddie stuff and not enough Sarah Michelle Gellar. They demanded reshoots, but those weren’t enough to save this ambitious reboot. The streamer ended up canceling the new Buffy show, which Gellar ultimately blamed on an unnamed executive. As she told People, this exec “was not only not a fan of the original, but was proud to constantly remind us that he had never seen the entirety of the series and how it wasn’t for him.”
Getting The Bad News

Part of why Gellar is so upset with the cancellation is that she had worked with director Chloe Zhao for years to develop this reboot. To the Buffy actor, bringing the show back was a real no-brainer. One of the most beloved IPs of all time getting rebooted by an Oscar-winning director; what could go wrong? However, Hulu’s cancellation of the series (and, make no mistake, they wouldn’t cancel the show if they thought it would make money) reveals a simple truth: like most Oscar winners, Zhao is good at making a particular type of film, and her skills don’t necessarily transfer to the small screen.
Chloe Zhao is an excellent director of such films as The Rider, Nomadland (which won Oscars for Best Picture and Best Director), and Hamnet (which was nominated for a whopping eight Oscars, including Best Picture and Best Director). But Zhao is best when making indie films that focus on relatively unknown actors (Hamnet turned rising star Jessie Buckley into a Best Actress Oscar winner). But she seems to struggle when it comes to creating bigger films with more mainstream actors. This is most evident in The Eternals, her Marvel movie that ended up being a wall-to-wall snooze fest.
Eternals Was Our Warning

Obviously, hindsight is 20/20, but it seems like the failure of The Eternals effectively foretold the failure of the Buffy the Vampire Slayer reboot. Audiences hated this film because it lacked the mainstream appeal of the MCU. The pace was slow instead of brisk, the writing was serious instead of funny, and the villains were abstract rather than clearly defined. It just didn’t feel like a superhero movie for most of its runtime. Instead, it felt like a typical Chloe Zhao joint: an introspective indie film that just didn’t fly with fans of tights-and-flights films.
The exact same thing happened with the Buffy reboot on Hulu. Executives reportedly thought the show wasn’t “mainstream enough” for the audience. Those same execs worried the new show was trying to chase too much of a youth demographic compared to the original Buffy the Vampire Slayer, which appealed to both children and adults. Finally, they worried about the relative lack of Sarah Michelle Gellar, who reportedly had only one line of dialogue in the original pilot.
Letting The Past Die

To sum it up, the show was going to be a Buffy reboot that had hardly any Buffy in it. No other legacy cast members were in the pilot, so fans weren’t going to get to see any reunions between the Slayer and fan-favorite characters like Willow or Spike. That means most of the show would focus on the new Slayer and her new Scoobies, which is (let’s be honest) a bit like making an entire show out of Dawn’s Season 7 adventures with her forgettable Sunnydale High clique.
Left to her own devices, Chloe Zhao creates breathtaking works of cinematic art, the kind of awesome indies that remind you why you fell in love with movies in the first place. But she is clearly a poor choice when it comes to genre entertainment. The Eternals was dead on arrival, and the Buffy reboot died before it streamed a single episode. Ironically, Zhao found out the reboot was canceled on the same weekend that she attended the Oscars to see how many awards Hamnet would take home. It’s a juxtaposition that drives home a simple, stake-like point: this Oscar winner should stay in her own indie darling lane and stop dabbling in genre entertainment she clearly doesn’t understand.
