Entertainment
How To Save Christopher Nolan From Himself
By Robert Scucci
| Published
Christopher Nolan has spent the last 30 years going bigger and better, and I’m starting to wonder how much further he can push the medium of filmmaking. Having followed his career from Memento (2000) all the way through 2023’s Oppenheimer, there’s one pattern that’s become crystal clear: each production has to outdo the last. His first film, 1998’s Following, was produced for a modest $6,000, and it shows on screen. Meanwhile, his upcoming adaptation of The Odyssey tops out at $250 million.
Knowing how Christopher Nolan makes films, it’s safe to say not a single cent is wasted. When he wants to go epic, he goes epic. He’s so committed to scale and scope that I’m surprised he didn’t actually shoot Matthew McConaughey into space on an unsanctioned mission in order to prepare him for Interstellar (2014).
What goes up must come down, though, and I wonder how much bigger Christopher Nolan can realistically make another Christopher Nolan film. Like every privately owned company that demands to see a consistent increase in revenue and shareholder value quarter after quarter, Nolan keeps upping the ante. Most people would probably say the logical next step is to continue pushing the envelope and going even bigger.
Maybe after The Odyssey, Nolan decides he wants to make a film about Old Faithful and will only consider his vision fully realized once he causes the geyser to erupt prematurely, ushering in a new ice age. Or maybe, and feel free to call me crazy here, Nolan could go back to his roots, take a breather, and belt out another generation-defining thriller like Memento or Insomnia.
I’m Not Trying To Give Christopher Nolan Advice, He’s Much Smarter Than Me
While it would be easy to frame a piece like this as “Christopher Nolan Needs To Do This One Thing To Save His Career,” that’s not what I’m trying to do here. Christopher Nolan has made a career out of being Christopher Nolan, and I have not. I’ve been a fan of his filmmaking since his second film. While I can’t in good conscience say anybody can play Batman better than Michael Keaton, his Dark Knight trilogy is still the most cohesive Batman saga we’ve gotten so far, and often cited as responsible for redefining the superhero genre. Christopher Nolan has proven himself as an auteur and filmmaker who doesn’t need advice from anyone (especially me), and he has the clout and freedom to do whatever he wants, probably for the rest of his life.
What I keep thinking about, though, is what would happen if instead of scaling up again, he scaled back. The Odyssey will go down in history as the first major studio film shot entirely on IMAX film cameras. That’s cool and impressive. You know what else is impressive? Memento, one of the greatest psychological thrillers of all time, which was made possible with a $9 million production budget. It’s a perfect movie.
Insomnia takes that same energy and adds some serious star power to the mix in the form of Al Pacino and Robin Williams. It also had five times the budget, but given the talent roster, I’d imagine a healthy chunk of that went toward securing the cast. Even if you take a quick look at his first film, Following, it’s rough around the edges, but it’s still a tight thriller that holds up today despite being made with virtually no budget while Nolan still had to work various day jobs between shoots.
Christopher Nolan thrives in the psychological thriller space. He’s an expert at showing how troubled and conflicting personalities interact when they’re together, and how they act when they’re alone and ruminating. He also knows how to turn those character moments into tension once motives become clearer and the characters are forced to confront not only their demons, but their antagonists. He understands how to pace a man’s fall from grace as external forces beyond his control clash with the circumstances he can control. And he can do all of this for less than $50 million.
Not Asking For A Career Pivot, But Rather A Side Quest
Recently I’ve been thinking about how movie studios could benefit from putting out more titles with shorter runtimes and smaller budgets. My argument is that a movie like Zach Cregger’s Weapons (2025) cost $38 million to make and has already pulled in more than $270 million worldwide. It’s just over two hours long, and it’s a self-contained story. You don’t need to do homework or study history to enjoy what Weapons has to offer. Weapons just happens to you, and you either get it or you don’t.
Memento and Insomnia are cut from a similar cloth. They both clock in under 120 minutes and, in the grand scheme of things, didn’t cost a hell of a lot to make. Imagine the kind of film Christopher Nolan could make today with, say, $100 million. Strip the whole thing down so it’s shot through more conventional, readily available means, and use the budget to secure the appropriate A-list talent, if needed, for the project.
Meanwhile, films like 2023’s The Flash, which cost more than $200 million to produce, didn’t even break even once marketing and distribution costs were factored in.
The problem Christopher Nolan has, and it’s a good problem to have, is that he’s been in the freakin’ zone for nearly 30 years. He takes massive creative risks, and they’ve all paid off up to this point. He can literally do anything he wants. If he wanted to bring back LaserDisc for a one-off feature, he could probably secure an investor willing to make it happen. If he wanted to make a time travel flick, he could probably snap his fingers and somebody would materialize out of thin air to help him track down an entire lot of functional DeLorean DMC-12s.
I’m a dreamer, though, and I’d love nothing more than to see Christopher Nolan take everything he’s learned and perfected since bursting onto the scene, scale things back, and go smaller instead of bigger after The Odyssey. This isn’t an indictment of his filmmaking or creative direction, but rather a celebration of it. I can’t say Nolan has ever missed. What I can say is that I’d love to see him make something more reminiscent of his roots now that he’s older, wiser, and influential enough to do whatever he wants whenever he wants, and see what that kind of wisdom could do for the genre that launched his career.
And no, I’m not asking for Memento 3D. But a tight, lean, dark, gritty thriller made today with Christopher Nolan’s talent and passion for the craft would absolutely pop off if he ever decided to give it a shot. He’s already done so much more with less, so just imagine the kind of thriller he could make now with the resources currently at his disposal.
Entertainment
The best Hulu deals and bundles in May 2026
The best Hulu deals and bundles in May 2026:
There’s a wide range of excellent shows and films to watch on Hulu, including The Testaments, season two of Paradise, and a surprise new episode of The Bear. It’s a library that’s full of options to keep you entertained throughout the summer and beyond.
If these shows have caught your eye and have you itching to sign up for Hulu, we’re here to help you get the best deal. Outside of the standard ad-supported and ad free plans, there are quite a few bundle deals available with Hulu that are worth exploring if you’re looking to save some cash. This includes the Disney+, Hulu, and HBO Max package.
Disney has also dropped a new six-month offer on the Disney+ and Hulu bundle, though this is only accessible from their site at the moment. This drops its ad-supported plan to $11.99 per month when locking in for six months (before going back up to $12.99 per month). The ad-free plan is down to $17.99 per month (which will return to $19.99 per month after six months). Disney notes that this is an “ongoing offer for people who want to subscribe for a longer period to save on the average monthly cost.” It’s also available for new and eligible returning subscribers.
Below you can find details on Hulu’s best bundles at the moment — alongside information on both its ad-supported and ad free plans, if you just want the basics — offering you a way to save on the service right now.
Best Disney+ bundle deal
$12.99 per month with ads
Why we like it
For those interested in the ad-supported Disney+ and Hulu Bundle, which sets you up with Disney+ alongside Hulu, it starts at $12.99 per month. If you’d prefer the Premium ad-free version of this plan, this jumps to $19.99 per month.
If you’re curious about Disney’s new six-month offer, this is accessible on Disney’s site. Again, it offers the ad-supported Disney+ and Hulu bundle plan for $11.99 per month when locking in for six months, before returning to $12.99 per month. The Premium ad-free plan is $17.99 per month for six months, before returning to $19.99 per month.
Best HBO Max bundle deal
$19.99/month with ads, $32.99/month ad-free
Why we like it
This is one of the best Hulu bundles available at the moment. Starting at $19.99 per month, this bundle grants you access to Hulu, Disney+, and HBO Max’s streaming services for a much lower price than what you’d pay for the three of them separately. It’s an incredible deal to take advantage of, especially if you’ve already got Disney+ and HBO Max subscriptions. There are two plans to choose from with this bundle, and they are:
Best student deal
Hulu with ads for $1.99/month
Why we like it
If you’re a student enrolled at a university, you can score a Hulu (with ads) plan for even lower than the above bundles. Hulu’s Student Deal gives eligible college students the ability to buy a Hulu (with ads) plan for just $1.99 per month. Hulu notes that the deal lasts “so long as student enrollment status remains verified,” then it goes back up to the standard monthly price.
Best ESPN bundle deal
Why we like it
Alongside the big Hulu, Disney+, and HBO Max bundle, Hulu also has plans for sports fans that throw in ESPN Select or ESPN Unlimited. According to ESPN, “ESPN Select includes ESPN+ content only. Fans who want ESPN+ exclusively may subscribe to the ESPN Select plan. ESPN Unlimited includes all of the ESPN networks and services, including ESPN+.”
The Disney+, Hulu, ESPN Unlimited Bundle, which has ads, is available for $35.99 per month. The Disney+, Hulu, ESPN Unlimited premium bundle without ads is available for $44.99 per month.
Mashable Deals
Hulu’s monthly plans
If you’re just looking to jump straight into Hulu’s library without any fancy bundles, there are a couple of subscription options to consider. The ad-supported tier comes in at $11.99 per month, but you’ll get your first month free, which is a great way to test the waters and see if it’s the right fit for you. If you want to go ad free, that’ll cost you $18.99 per month. Unfortunately, this plan does not offer a free trial like its ad-supported sibling.
If you really want to go big on a streaming investment, there’s the Hulu + Live TV plan. This costs a whopping $89.99 per month for its ad-supported plan, but comes with plenty to keep you busy. Hulu + Live TV (with ads) gets you access to 95+ channels, unlimited DVR, Disney+ (with ads), ESPN Select (with ads), and Hulu (with ads). If you want to go even bigger with the ad-free plan — which offers Hulu (no ads), Disney+ (no ads), and ESPN Select (with ads) alongside Live TV — it’ll cost you $99.99 per month. The ad-supported plan also offers a free trial, but for just three days instead.
Wondering what to watch once you get set up with a Hulu plan or bundle? We’re here to help with that as well. Have a look at our roundups of the 30 best comedies on Hulu, the 25 best sci-fi movies on Hulu, and the 26 best horror movies on Hulu to start building your watchlist. And if you’re in the mood to binge-watch a show, check out our breakdown of the 25 best shows on Hulu.
Entertainment
The Worst Director’s Cut Ever Made Is Now Streaming For Free
By Chris Snellgrove
| Published
As a movie lover, there’s one phrase that always gets my blood pumping: “director’s cut.” We all know that studios often make changes that can absolutely ruin a movie, like when they added those awful voiceover narrations to Blade Runner. As soon as he could, Ridley Scott released a version without those voice-overs that is infinitely better.
While Scott might have gone a bit overboard in releasing so many different edits over the years, the point stands: a director’s cut is usually a way of improving a movie. Every now and then, though, a director comes along and does his best to ruin a classic.
One such man is Richard Kelly, best known as the director of Donnie Darko. The original film stalled out at the box office, but it’s now considered a cult hit due to its heady mixture of violence, time travel, and coming-of-age teen hijinks, complete with the creepiest bunny ever put on film.
The most compelling thing about the movie is that it refuses to explain most of its craziest events, forcing you to think about what the heck you just watched long after the credits roll. Unfortunately, Donnie Darko: The Director’s Cut ruins everything cool and mysterious about the original by painfully explaining everything in excruciating detail.
Not All Director’s Cuts Are Created Equal
If you loved Donnie Darko in 2001, then the arrival of the Director’s Cut in 2004 probably seemed like a big deal. This new cut promised over 20 minutes of new footage, new special effects, and improved sound quality. Sounds great, right?
Unfortunately, the new footage mostly comes from deleted scenes awkwardly shoehorned back into the movie, without any concern for pacing or characterization. The result is an overly lengthy film; while the original Donnie Darko was a comparatively svelte 113 minutes, the Director’s Cut’s 134 minutes makes it feel like a bloated, plodding mess.
There are some other unnecessary changes here, including tweaks to the soundtrack. For another film, such changes might not be a big deal. However, Donnie Darko had an absolutely perfect soundtrack, one which used a series of quirky bangers to set the scene for the surreal events of the film.
The original needle drops made everything feel hazy and dreamlike, so any changes to them (even minor changes, like replacing “The Killing Moon” with “Never Tear Us Apart”) feel like cinematic blasphemy that is as offensive as it is completely unnecessary.
A Frank Examination
The main reason the Donnie Darko director’s cut sucks, though, is that director Richard Kelly forgot the quintessential rule of sci-fi storytelling: less is more. The original movie presented plenty of time-tripping mysteries, including how (spoilers, sweetie!) the title character traveled into his own past, ensuring that he’d die when a jet engine inexplicably fell into his bedroom.
Donnie laughs right before he dies, secure in the knowledge that he is fixing a doomed timeline and saving someone he loves. As the credits roll, first-time viewers are always struck by the same question: “What the heck just happened?”
Unfortunately, the Director’s Cut answers that question in the most literal and boring way. You see, in the original cut, Donnie (Jake Gyllenhaal) takes an interest in time travel and receives a book, The Philosophy of Time Travel, written by a now-retired science teacher. But we don’t get much actual wisdom from the book and must figure out the timey-wimey narrative on our own.
In the Director’s Cut, we get pages from this book literally superimposed on the screen. Thanks to all this dreadfully boring exposition, we finally know what happened in the movie, and it’s pretty wild!
Ruining The Greatest Trip In Cinema
Apparently, the moment the jet engine landed in Donnie’s bedroom, it created a Tangent Universe. The young man is a Living Receiver who gains bizarre superpowers, including telekinesis and premonition, and has a seemingly impossible job: to return the jet engine to the Primary Universe, the only way to prevent the destruction of the entire universe.
By the end of the film, a traumatized Donnie creates a time portal and rips a jet engine off the plane that his mother and younger sister are in. He sends that engine and himself into the past, killing himself and closing the tangent universe while he laughs, knowing his sacrifice will save those he loved.
Is it a neat explanation? Maybe. But the one that you came up with in your head was probably way, way cooler. Unfortunately, this is the nature of science fiction: being handed the truth (like what the Smoke Monster is in Lost and what the Upside Down is in Stranger Things) is never as satisfying as trying to figure everything out on your own.
Donnie Darko: The Director’s Cut hands you every boring explanation on a plate, sapping the mystery from a movie it already ruined with new scenes and a botched soundtrack. If you want to watch the worst director’s cut ever made, though, it’s now streaming for free on Tubi.
Trust me, though: after seeing it, you’ll want to escape your new Tangent Universe and return to the timeline where you never watched this cinematic abomination!
Entertainment
The Unfairly Hated Sci-Fi Flop That's Suddenly Dominating On Streaming
Edit a lot of idiotic and stolen together into two hours of film, and you end up with a big, silly summer blockbuster in which legless men can be heroes, and the elderly can be useful.
By Joshua Tyler
| Updated
In theory, director Peter Berg’s Battleship is supposed to be based on the popular guessing game of the same name. In reality, there’s almost no connection between Battleship the movie and its Milton Bradley namesake at all, outside of a single thrilling ten-minute sequence involving buoys, missiles, and a big board. The rest of the movie is a puzzle made up of pieces cribbed from some of history’s most infamously ridiculous summer blockbusters.
Sometimes you want big, silly, and stupid on a random Friday night when you’re not going out.
Battleship is an alien invasion movie, I guess, but it’s also one of many Hollywood movies that only really uses aliens because killing them won’t offend anyone. Like any alien species imagined under such creatively corrupted circumstances, these extraterrestrials aren’t very good at their job.
They land in the middle of a naval exercise, which might not be tactically ridiculous if their ships had some sort of technological superiority that would enable them to crush their human opponents without a thought, but they don’t. Their ships can’t even fly.
Edit a lot of idiotic and stolen together into two hours of film, and you end up with a big, silly summer blockbuster in which legless men can be heroes, and the elderly can be useful.
Instead, they sort of flop about in the water and shoot at the Navy with weapons that, while weirder, aren’t all that much more effective than those used on the deck of a World War II-era battleship. Actually, they’re exactly that effective, as the movie later goes on to demonstrate.
Eventually, we find out they’ve arrived as some sort of pre-invasion force, we learn this via an out-of-place scene stolen from every alien invasion movie you’ve ever seen in which an ET mind-melds with one of the crew. So they’re here to wipe out humanity and take the planet for themselves, thus it makes sense when they set about blowing up our ships and attacking the Hawaii mainland. What doesn’t make sense is the alien attackers’ hesitance to shoot at anything that isn’t already shooting at them (later abandoned) or their refusal to kill little kids playing baseball (though they’re happy to murder the ones who use our highway system).
Taylor Kitsch is heroic, Rihanna steals scenes running around shooting guns, and Brooklyn Decker’s moves are so hypnotic it doesn’t matter what sort of dreck comes out of her mouth as dialogue.
So the aliens are ineffectual, ill-equipped, and their tactics don’t make a lot of sense. This leaves the film’s human component to carry the day and, well, they sort of do.
Taylor Kitsch is heroic, Rihanna steals scenes running around shooting guns, and Brooklyn Decker’s moves are so hypnotic it doesn’t matter what sort of dreck comes out of her mouth as dialogue. You won’t even mind that half the script seems like it was written as a PSA for the families of wounded soldiers.
Does it matter if you’re being manipulated if you know you’re being manipulated all along? I say it doesn’t.
Every moment of Battleship is either idiotic or stolen. Edit a lot of idiotic and stolen together into two hours of film, and you end up with a big, silly summer blockbuster in which legless men can be heroes, and the elderly can be useful.
Sometimes you want big, silly, and stupid on a random Friday night when you’re not going out. It’s unlikely anyone will make anything sillier or stupider than Battleship any time soon. Go ahead and watch it; just don’t tell anyone.
Battleship is now widely available on most streaming platforms, including Amazon Prime Video, YouTube, Apple TV+, and Google Play.
Giants' versatile Casey Schmitt pursues another big day vs. Athletics
The best Hulu deals and bundles in May 2026
