Dear readers and friends, it’s time to return some videotapes. Since it’s not going to be a part of the 2025 movie schedule, we have some time to discuss what we know about American Psycho’s new adaptation. And while author Bret Easton Ellis has cast doubt about whether or not it’s actually as far along as we thought, things do seem to be moving along.
On one hand, I’m open to a new version of Patrick Bateman’s very R-rated shenanigans. However, I have to say that the perfect concept for tackling this tale of ‘80s excess, gore, and personal identity already exists; and all Hollywood needs to do is follow the music.
The American Psycho Remake Should Be An Adaptation Of The Musical
American Psycho dream casting of Mike Faist as Patrick Bateman a reality. Even Austin Butler would be able to carry a tune through a hypothetical retelling of the most recent incarnation of the controversially delightful novel from 1991.
Between Duncan Sheik’s music and lyrics and Roberto Aguirre-Sacasa’s sharp book, this show could have a lot of potential to revive interest in these adventures in murder and executions. The songs are actually super catchy, and to properly sell you all on this particular gospel of mine, I need to share. Here’s a clip of the Broadway cast performing that variant’s opening number, “Selling Out”:
American Psycho the Musical on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert – YouTube
Watch On
That’s not even half the fun, as the New York-based rewrite of the tune “Killing Spree” truly highlights the darkly comic tone that’s present here. Meanwhile, songs like “This Is Not An Exit” feature the melancholy that this takes on American Psycho embodies as our protagonists’ struggle with their sanity.
That angle in particular really sells Patrick Bateman’s ambiguous ending, and sticking that landing is something important to consider when casting. If any of the powers that be within this developing prospect happen to still be in the audience at this moment, consider that another reason for taking this concept a little more seriously.
(Image credit: American Psycho: The Musical / YouTube)
American Psycho’s Potential Musical Revival Could Attract Some A+ Veterans
Recalling the casts that have starred in the four major productions of American Psycho, some names stand out as ready to bring this project to the next level. Just looking at Patrick Bateman alone, the possibilities of either Matt Smith or Benjamin Walker are too good to pass up.
Your Daily Blend of Entertainment News
But looking into the roster, and my own memories of seeing the show in its 2015 Broadway run, there are even more deep cuts to be excited about. After Wicked’s insane box office run, and with the hype for its sequel still hanging in the air, you can’t tell me that bringing Jonathan Bailey back into the fold wouldn’t be spectacular.
Also, fans of HBO’s fan favorite comedy The Other Two are going to love what I’m about to say, as I can’t see anyone but Heléne Yorke returning to the part of Evelyn. I’d tell you to consider the Broadway cast recording of American Psycho to prove my point…if we had one.
(Image credit: American Psycho: The Musical / YouTube)
You can look through the cast lists of every major staging and pick out a handful of people who would be welcomed returns. No matter who happens to be cast in this project, going the musical route would be a sterling proposition. Unfortunately, there’s no real timetable on when to expect American Psycho to go into production.
Though ifDC’s cancelled Sgt. Rock film is any indication, this could become Luca Guadagnino’s next priority sooner rather than later. Until then, we’ll just have to keep our hopes in check and our reservations in order, as we should always want to know where we’re going.
After more than a decade spent away from each other onscreen, former NCIS mainstays Tony DiNozzo and Ziva David are finally being paired for their aptly-titled spinoff NCIS: Tony & Ziva. This Paramount+-exclusive series will premiere on the 2025 TV schedule this fall, and last month, the first images from the show were released. Now the first trailer for Tony & Ziva is here to watch as well, and in the midst of kicking so much ass, Michael Weatherly and Cote de Pablo’s characters are still figuring out their vibe together. Just like old times, am I right?
Not only does this spinoff mark the first time we’re seeing Tony and Ziva together since the NCIS Season 11 episode “Past, Present, and Future,” it’s also giving us our first taste of them parenting their daughter Tali, played by Isla Gie. While the characters look like they have the co-parenting down pat, their romantic relationship status is still very much up in the air, with Ziva describing it to her therapist as, “On again, maybe again, kind of again.” What on Earth could finally bring these two crazy kids together for good?
get out of this mess. The preview also amusingly highlights a moment when Ziva’s the one who has to be “charmingly persuasive” and Tony is kicking ass, a 180 from what we usually expect from these two.
Michael Weatherly and Cote de Pablo’s other co-stars in NCIS: Tony & Ziva include Amita Suman, Maximilian Osinski, Julian Ovenden, Nassima Benchicou, Lara Rossi, Terence Maynard and James D’Arcy. John McNamara is serving as the spinoff’s showrunner and executive produces with Weatherly, de Pablo, Laurie Lieser, Christina Strain, Shelley Meals and Mairzee Almas. For now, Tony & Ziva has been envisioned as a “single, serialized story of intrigue and espionage over 10 episodes,” as McNamara described it. So it’s hard to say whether Season 2 will happen if the limited series is successful, but for now, at least NCIS fans can take comfort knowing they’re only months away from getting Tiva back, as they’re so affectionately known together.
NCIS: Tony & Ziva doesn’t have a specific premiere date yet, but we’ll pass that along once it’s announced alongside our continuing coverage of the spinoff. This fall will also bring NCIS Season 23 and NCIS: Origins Season 2 to CBS, and it remains to be seen when NCIS: Sydney Season 3 will premiere.
The celebrities are starting to arrive! I really hope everyone wearing death-defying heels (or no heels like Kim Kardashian last year) practiced their stair-climbing in preparation for this. That’s honestly something I’d lose sleep over. Now, on to the fashion!
2025-05-05T21:43:05.347Z
Vogue Correspondent Emma Chamberlain Has Arrived
Not surprisingly, Vogue Editor Anna Wintour is among the first arrivals, along with co-hosts Teyana Taylor, La La Anthony, and Ego Nwodim. Emma Chamberlain has also arrived to serve as Vogue’s special correspondent. She is wearing a floor-length asymmetrical Courrèges pinstriped dress that is strapless and backless.
(Image credit: Photo by Neilson Barnard/MG25/Getty Images for The Met Museum/Vogue)
Emma Chamberlain accessorized with sheer black gloves and jewelry she found on eBay, per Vanity Fair. You’ve gotta love a good bargain find at the Met Gala!
2025-05-05T21:55:47.202Z
Sydney Sweeney Stuns In Miu Miu
Sydney Sweeney never disappoints in the fashion department, and she looks glamorous in black Miu Miu, a fully owned subsidiary of Prada, that features a cutout over her chest.
(Image credit: Getty Images)
Her hair is worn in an up-do, and she accessorized with earrings and rings. Lovely!
Horror fans are having a great year, with numerous new horror movies taking over the box office and dominating the 2025 movie release schedule. Many enthusiasts trace their love for horror back to childhood, often sparked by too much unsupervised screen time. Some even recall movies that “traumatized” them as kids, making it hard to watch them as adults. Sure, there are a ton of surprisingly scary scenes from ‘80s kids movies, but it turns out that a ton of fans were raised on horror!
In a recent Reddit post, users named the movies that have imprinted themselves in their gray matter, and it was no surprise to see some of the best horror movies ever, like The Exorcist, Poltergeist, and The Ring, popping up all over the place. One user, u/-Passenger, joked:
I never watched the full video in The Ring. When I watch the film at one part I’ll still close my eyes… My phone won’t ring mfers.
one of those 2000s horror movies that really got under people’s skin, especially for those who watched it way too young or thought it would be a good idea to check it out during a sleepover. Poster u/AnakinSexworker pointed out:
When I was about 11 we were having a sleepover at my friend’s house and decided it would be a good idea to watch his older brother’s Grudge movies… That crackling sound still haunts me to this day.
Of course, millennial nightmares wouldn’t be complete without a few formative viewings of Poltergeist. One user mentioned that the movie completely messed them up as a kid, and then they were retraumatized thanks, once again, because of The Ring. The user u/eurekadabra said:
I was traumatized by Poltergeist when I was real little and was terrified of TV static for years. As a teen, I was finally getting over it and then The f’ing Ring came out.
Fair enough. Television static is definitely creepy in its own way, but when it comes to Poltergeist, it was the scene in the bathroom where the paranormal investigator peels his own face off that really stood out. How was that movie appropriate for kids? It’s one of those classic movies that would never be rated PG today. And that bathroom scene, which I still think about, would easily push it into R territory.
The Ring and Poltergeist definitely stole the spotlight, the discussion quickly turned into a fun mix of deep cuts and cult classics that messed with people in all sorts of ways. Check out these fan responses that show how no decade was safe and no genre could escape childhood trauma:
Your Daily Blend of Entertainment News
“The Fly works so well because it’s a tragedy and an opera at the same time… Beautiful film just gross beyond imagination yet tangible in the horror.” – u/GODZILLA-Plays-A-DOD
“The first Nightmare on Elm Street, still can’t watch it to this day.” – u/Scheininho
“I saw Signs in the cinema around the same time time. “Move children! Vamanos! -OH!!” resulted in a similar nights sleep.” – u/budget-lampshade
“The descent. Fuck caves, and I can’t stand scenes with thumbs through eyeballs.” – u/MamasCupcakes
“Thirteen Ghosts. The damn Jackal just frightened the hell out of me as a kid.” – u/sizzlinpapaya
From creepy VHS tapes to scary clowns and crazy nightmares, the vibe from this thread is clear: a lot of us thought we were just watching movies, only to realize years later we were basically collecting trauma in surround sound.
After a two-year absence, and after the fifth and final-ish season of its predecessor Yellowstone, Taylor Sheridan’s 1923 landed on the 2025 TV schedule to wrap up its second season with a variety of deadly outcomes for multiple main characters, including Julia Schlaepfer’s Alexandra Dutton and Brandon Sklenar’s Spencer. Things were thankfully less fatal for Harrison Ford and Helen Mirren’s Jacob and Cara Dutton, propping the metaphorical door open for their potential returns. Just how much potential’s there, though?
One might think the answer is “zilch,” but that’d underestimate just how enjoyable both Ford and Mirren found filming 1923 to be. Both A-tier actors were on hand to talk about the Paramount+ series for an FYC Q&A — an event I doubt either would have attended if they weren’t all-in on the Duttons — and while Ford shared his interest level on potentially reprising Jacob for an upcoming Yellowstone show, Mirren talked baby John and the long-gestating sequel-prequel 1944, first announced in November 2023.
Harrison Ford On Possibly Returning To Yellowstone-Verse As Jacob Dutton
Indiana Jones, Harrison Ford isn’t an actor that’s ever been synonymous with sequels, and even his Jack Ryan movies are mutually exclusive enough. But he spoke quite highly about 1923‘s final episode, saying it was “fantastic” and “probaby the densest script” that he’s lent his efforts to in years.
So with 1944 on the way and no direct signs of when and/or how Jacob and Cara meet their makers, it’s still feasible for Ford’s now-retired rancher to survive into the next series in grandpa-mode. And it doesn’t sound like the actor would reject the offer to come back, either. As he put it:
I’m still alive. [If Taylor Sheridan] asks nice. I have no idea what his plans are.
One can only hope that franchise ringleader Taylor Sheridan himself has a clear idea of where he’s taking the Duttons’ story, and whether it’ll eventually link up directly with the mothership series. And logistically speaking, I don’t think he’d be that interested in having 100-year-old Jacob Dutton strutting around in 1944, but I think it would be a great move to pepper that show with flashbacks that lay out how Jacob, Cara and Spencer got on together after their extended time apart.
(Image credit: Paramount+)
But Helen Mirren’s Thoughts About Baby John Have Me More Curious
Interestingly enough, 1923 ends on an adorable note for Cara Dutton, whose final moments have her cradling Spender and Alex’s John Dutton II. And for all the speculation that’s gone into that baby’s existence – here’s what the cast told CinemaBlend about it – no one taking part in the FYC chat was coughing up any additional details.
But Mirren sounded pretty interested in the idea of 1923 closing out on youth and age coming together in such a way, and I have to wonder if she’d be interested in exploring Cara’s motherly skills with an actual infant instead of grown kids. Here’s how she described it:
Your Daily Blend of Entertainment News
I love the fact that the future of Yellowstone is left in this tiny baby, in the arms of two older people, grandparents age. I thought that was a very interesting concept. And Taylor now I think is going to do 1944 as I understand, so that will be interesting too, the next generation.
Indeed, that generation will likely be heavily impacted by both Cara and Jacob Dutton, as well as Spencer (whose flash-forward death was laid out in 1923‘s final moments). So it would possibly feel like too empty of a house if 1944 arrives and it’s just Spencer, another wife, and two kids that viewers don’t know anything about. Sure would be good to have something familiar around in that case, such as Harrison Ford’s face made up to look 20 years old. Or maybe that’d be frightening. I can’t quite tell.
I guess it’s worth pointing out here that 1923 technically hasn’t been canceled or anything, so it’s possible that Season 3 could happen and give fans a more direct look at Cara and Jacob raising John II. But we’ll have to wait and see if Paramount+’s execs make any publicized decisions going forward.
SPOILER WARNING: The following article contains major spoilers for Thunderbolts*. If you have not yet seen the new Marvel blockbuster, proceed at your own risk!
It was a little over a year ago that the latest Marvel Cinematic Universe blockbuster got an odd title change. Taking the stage at The Colosseum at Caesars Palace during the Disney presentation at CinemaCon 2024 in Las Vegas, Marvel Studios President Kevin Feige revealed that the developing feature Thunderbolts would henceforth be known as Thunderbolts* – with an emphasis on the new and mysterious asterisk. An explanation wasn’t provided for the new punctuation, with the executive/filmmaker instead simply teasing, “we won’t talk more about that until after the movie comes out.”
New Avengers butting heads with Sam Wilson’s Avengers as the universe grapples with the arrival of the Fantastic Four and Doctor Doom. What I don’t love, however, is the attempted title reveal gambit, and in my mind, it marks the second time that Marvel Studios has whiffed in that department.
(Image credit: Marvel Studios)
The “Big Reveal” With The Thunderbolts Asterisk Was A Little Too Obvious
With the title change I noted in the first paragraph, the goal of Marvel Studios was to create an air of mystery around Thunderbolts* and influence a year-plus of speculation. The filmmakers and executives/departments that conjured the idea clearly wanted people to ask the specific question, “What does the asterisk mean?” and ponder potential answers. It wasn’t just for niche comic book fans either; it’s the name of the film, and all movie-goers would hopefully question the punctuation. Then they would go see the blockbuster during its opening weekend in order to either affirm their suspicions or have their minds blown by something unexpected.
Ideally, a marketing plot like this would result in a nice split… but that doesn’t feel true in this particular case. The Thunderbolts, being a surreptitious way of assembling a new version of Earth’s Mightiest Heroe,s always seemed like the most obvious answer to the presented riddle, and I was hoping for something a bit more advanced.
One need not look further than the comics on which the movie is based for inspiration. The project is named after a standout development in the late 1990s Marvel Comics that saw the Avengers killed and the publication introduce a new series called Thunderbolts. It was said that the team was going to be a new group of heroes, but the first issue revealed the roster as being the Masters of Evil in disguise – eventually dubbed the Dark Avengers. It was a well-orchestrated surprise… and not one that could be replicated by Marvel Studios.
Your Daily Blend of Entertainment News
Again, I’ll note that I like the idea of a New Avengers vs. Avengers conflict brewing in the MCU, but it feels like the franchise worked really hard to drum up buzz for a shock that isn’t at all shocking.
(Image credit: Marvel Studios)
As A Fan, I’m Not Sure What I’m Supposed To Call The Movie Now
The other issue that the reveal presents is a unique conflict regarding how the movie is meant to be discussed – and I’ll admit that this is significant in my mind specifically because, as an MCU fan and CinemaBlend editor, I’m going to be writing about it a lot in the days, weeks, months, and years ahead. Simply put: are we meant to continue to call the movie Thunderbolts* (as I have been throughout this article), or are we meant to refer to it as New Avengers from now on?
At a certain point in the theatrical run, are marquees going to change? Are there going to be new TV spots and trailers developed? Will new posters be printed and sent out to cinemas? How will the movie be marketed when it goes to home video, both on digital platforms and when it comes to cover art for 4K UHD and Blu-ray? There are no indications anywhere to dictate conversation.
The film presently feels caught in a weird no man’s land, branding-wise. Perhaps it’s a bit too spoiler-y, but it feels like the movie is missing a big opportunity to unveil itself broadly now as being New Avengers in the hopes of boosting interest and new buzz in the days leading up to its second weekend.
(Image credit: Marvel)
The Thunderbolts* Asterisk Explanation Reminds Me Of The Disappointing Title Reveal For Avengers: Endgame
The Marvel Cinematic Universe has done many things quite well in its nearly two decades of existence, effectively changing the entire landscape of blockbuster filmmaking, but I think we can now say that one thing the franchise doesn’t do particularly well is hyped title reveals. It turns out that what the asterisk in Thunderbolts* was hiding was exactly what you thought it was hiding – and the underwhelming answer reminded me of how I felt when we first learned the title of Avengers: Endgame.
Fans will remember that there was a time when Avengers: Infinity War and Avengers: Endgame were dubbed Avengers: Infinity War Part 1 and Part 2, but there was a point during their development when that plan was altered: it was decided that the first movie would be called Avengers: Infinity War, and the name of the sequel was maintained as a secret. Directors Joe and Anthony Russo held on to the secret with the intention of letting people “absorb the first movie enough.”
The plan didn’t work out as hoped – and it’s not just me saying that. Prior to the reveal, Kevin Feige went on record saying that the situation had “gotten entirely out of hand” and that the spike in speculation and hype meant that the reveal was inevitably going to fail in trying to live up to expectations. He was right. The title of Avengers: Endgame is a callback to a specific line from Doctor Strange in Avengers: Infinity War, but it’s also pretty damn bland and unimpressive.
Generally speaking, I like the idea of Marvel Studios trying to trip up audiences and zagging left when there is expectation for it to zig to the right, but title reveals don’t seem to work out particularly well for the franchise, perhaps because it’s a victim of its own hype machine. I’m still lightly confused and disappointed by the Thunderbolts* title… but at least I liked the movie!
