I don’t know why, but it continues to astonish me just how foolish politicians can be – and how easily persuaded they are by really bad advice from smart but tin-eared advisers. In less than a year, Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves have squandered the gift of the huge majority won at last year’s General Election on one key issue after another: their response to the genocide in Gaza; wantonly cruel cuts in disability benefits; failing to find creative ways of taxing wealth; dealing with the water companies – and, now, on the new Planning and Infrastructure Bill. On 23 May 23, the Wildlife Trusts and the RSPB (with a combined membership of more than 2 million) launched a devastating attack on Labour’s whole approach to streamlining the planning system through the Planning and Infrastructure Bill.Advertisement Part 3 of the bill will make it possible for developers to ignore existing environmental protections by paying money into a so-called ‘Nature Recovery Fund’, which will be used to pay for environmental projects elsewhere. Starmer and Reeves have gone out of their way, time after time, to claim that it’s these environmental safeguards that are responsible for delays and blockages in the planning process, even though they know this is completely untrue. According to the Wildlife Trusts, roughly 3 per cent of proposals for new housing are delayed for environmental reasons. As The Guardian reported: ‘the data from analysis of 17,433 planning appeals in England in 2024 found that newts were relevant in just 140 (0.8%) planning appeals, and bats were relevant in 432 (2.48%).’ ‘They pursue this path even though are no polls to show that this is what matters to Labour voters tempted by Reform’ So what makes Starmer and Reeves both stupid and totally dishonest? By all accounts the rationale of their tin-eared advisers is to demonstrate to ‘Reform-friendly’ Labour voters that the environment is as unsafe in their hands as it would be in Nigel Farage’s. That economic growth is all that matters. That caring for the natural world is a middle-class self-indulgence (‘the well-to-do prioritising the nice-to-have’ over the interests of working people). And that pouring as much concrete as possible is self-evidently the best way of achieving that growth. And they go on pursuing this ideological path even though there are no supporting polls to show that this is what really matters to Labour voters tempted by Reform’s populist bullshit.Advertisement So they lie. They dig in. They break promises left, right and centre, ready to die, apparently, in this self-constructed ditch of developer-led deceit. That’s why every single amendment put forward through the committee examining the bill was summarily dismissed by the loyal but lumpen Labour MPs on the committee. These included an amendment tabled by veteran Labour MP Barry Gardiner requiring all house builders to provide a specially designed brick (costing £35) to help cavity-nesting such as swifts, house martins, sparrows and starlings – a measure that Labour in opposition enthusiastically supported! And there’s huge public support for this one small, cost-effective biodiversity regulation. To get a measure of this government’s subservient obedience to the demands of the volume housebuilders, just listen to the words of housing minister Matthew Pennycook: ‘We are not convinced that legislating to mandate the use of specific wildlife features is the right approach, whether that is done through building regulations or a freestanding legal requirement'. It’s all so demeaning. So unnecessary. And now that the mainstream environment movement, urged on primarily by the Wildlife Trusts, has realised just how high the stakes are with this Planning and Infrastructure Bill, it’s reasonable to assume that there will be a much more serious debate in the House of Lords, bringing down on ministers’ helmeted heads the righteous outrage of the entire movement. As we’ve learnt, in less than one deeply depressing year, this is a government that needs to be kicked harder and harder until they get desperate enough to make the pain go away. P.S. If you want to read a brilliant summary of ‘reasons to be outraged’ (and what to do about it), check out George Monbiot’s take on this. Jonathon Porritt is a campaigner and author and co-founder of Forum for the Future This article first appeared on his blog 2025-06-06 Jonathon Porritt comment and share

Few companies in the history of capitalism have amassed as much wealth and influence as Meta.A global superpower in the information space, Meta — the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, and Threads — has a market cap of $1.68 trillion at the time of writing, which for a rough sense of scale is more than the gross domestic product of Spain.In spite of its immense influence, none of its internal algorithms can be scrutinized by public watchdogs. Its host country, the United States, has largely turned a blind eye to its dealings in exchange for free use of Meta's vast surveillance capabilities.That lack of oversight coupled with Meta's near-omnipresence as a social utility has had devastating consequences throughout the world, manifesting in crises like the genocide of Muslims in Myanmar, or the systemic suppression of Palestinian rights organizations.How do you uncover the harms caused by one of the most powerful companies on earth? In the case of public violence, the evidence isn't hard to trace. However, Meta's unprecedented corporate dynasty also creates less obvious harms, which scores of scholars, researchers, and journalists are devoting entire careers to uncovering.One prominent group of said investigators is GLAAD, the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, which recently released its annual report on social media safety, privacy, and expression for LGBTQ people.The report notes that Meta has undergone a "particularly extreme" ideological shift over the past year, adding harmful exceptions to its content moderation policies while disproportionately suppressing LGBTQ users and their content. The tech giant has also failed to give LGBTQ users sovereignty over their own personal data, which it collects, analyzes, and wields to generate huge profits.While Meta collects all of our data — from which it draws over 95 percent of its revenue — the practice is particularly harmful to LGBTQ users, who then have to contend with algorithmic biases, non-consensual outing, harassment, and in some countries state oppression."It's a dangerous time, certainly for trans people, who as a minority have been so ridiculously maligned, but also a dangerous time for gay people, openly bi[sexual] people, people who are different in any way," says Sarah Roberts, a UCLA professor and Director of the Center for Critical Internet Inquiry.To address these shortcomings and the dangers they introduce, GLAAD made a number of recommendations. One key suggestion was to improve moderation "by providing training for all content moderators focused on LGBTQ safety, privacy and expression." The media advocacy group doesn't mince words, adding that "AI systems should be used to flag for human review, not for automated removals."However, it doesn't look like Meta got the message.Weeks after GLAAD issued its findings, internal Meta documents leaked to NPR revealed the company's plan to hand 90 percent of its privacy and integrity reviews over to "artificial intelligence."This will impact nearly every new feature introduced to its platforms, where human moderators would typically evaluate new features for risks to privacy and safety, and the wellbeing of user groups like minors, immigrants, and LGBTQ people.Meta's internal risk assessment is an already opaque process, and Roberts notes that government attempts at risk oversight, like the EU's Digital Services Act, are likewise a labyrinth of filings which are largely dictated by the social media companies themselves. AI, chock full of biases and prone to errors — as admitted by Meta's own AI chief — is certain to make the situation even worse.Earlier this week, meanwhile, the Wall Street Journal revealed Meta's plans to fully automate advertising via the company's generative AI software, which will allow advertisers to "fully create and target ads" directly, with no human in the loop.This includes hyper-personalized ads, writes the WSJ, "so that users see different versions of the same ad in real time, based on factors such as geolocation."Data hoarders like Meta — which track you even when you're not using its platforms — have long been able to profile LGBTQ users based on gender identify and sexual orientation, including those who aren't publicly out.Removing any human from these already sinister practices serves to streamline operations and distance Meta from its own actions — "we didn't out gay users living under an oppressive government," the company can say, "even if our AI did." It's no coincidence that Meta had already disbanded its "Responsible AI" team as early as 2023.At the root of these decisions — Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg's right wing turn notwithstanding — is the calculated drive to maximize revenue."If there's no reason to rigorously moderate harmful content, then why pay so many content moderators? Why engage researchers to look into the circulation of this kind of content?" observes Roberts. "There ends up being a real cost savings there.""One of the things I've always said is that content moderation of social media is not primarily about protecting people, it's about brand management," she told Futurism. "It's about the platform managing its brand in order to make the most hospitable environment for advertisers."Sometimes these corporate priorities line up with progressive causes, like LGBTQ user safety or voter registration. But when they don't, Roberts notes, "dollars are dollars.""We are looking at multibillion-dollar companies, the most capitalized companies in the world, who have operated with impunity for many, many years," she said. "How do you convince them that they should care, when other powerful sectors are telling them the opposite?"Share This Article

Separating AI reality from hyped-up fiction isn’t always easy. That’s why we’ve created the AI Hype Index—a simple, at-a-glance summary of everything you need to know about the state of the industry. Large language models confidently present their responses as accurate and reliable, even when they’re neither of those things. That’s why we’ve recently seen chatbots supercharge vulnerable people’s delusions, make citation mistakes in an important legal battle between music publishers and Anthropic, and (in the case of xAI’s Grok) rant irrationally about “white genocide.” But it’s not all bad news—AI could also finally lead to a better battery life for your iPhone and solve tricky real-world problems that humans have been struggling to crack, if Google DeepMind’s new model is any indication. And perhaps most exciting of all, it could combine with brain implants to help people communicate when they have lost the ability to speak.

"AI is inevitable."That's a phrase that's rattled around my head for a month. Not willingly mind you. It's taken up lodging in my grey matter after hearing it in meetings, reading it in emails, and seeing it buffeted back and forth across Bluesky, LinkedIn, and Discord.It's not a convincing phrase. If you hear it from AI boosters it's easy to brush off as raw hype, and if you hear it from doomsayers it can lull you into a sense of fatalism. But as the philosopher Natasha Bedingfield told us in 2004, today is where the book begins, the rest is still unwritten. Nothing, for better or worse, is inevitable.But in those various calls another phrase—one you may have heard at your studio—has slipped past more unnoticed: "AI is just a tool. It can be used for good or evil, like any other tool."After all this is a business where we use tools for good or evil, right and wrong, correctly and incorrectly. We debate the effectiveness of Unity, Unreal, or Godot. We agonize over whether to use procedural versus hand-crafted content. We debate and discuss the topic so much that Game Developers Conference has a whole Tools Summit dedicated to craft of making game development software.Viewing generative AI through the neutral lens of tool assessment is natural—and I'll go so far as to say admirable—for our community. It's a method we use to get past hype and bombast, to try and take technology on its own terms and see how it fits our purposes. And as the 2025 GDC State of the Industry report tells us, some developers are adopting generative AI, plenty of them not bought in on the hype but through the act of seeking the right tool for the job.Related:But looking at generative AI as 'just a tool' is a deeply flawed lens. That phrase betrays a quiet cynicism (one we hear often from opponents of firearm regulation in the United Stats). Because nothing—not generative AI, not a firearm, not even a hammer—is "just a tool."The function of tools is influenced by their formConsider two tools found in many American households: the claw hammer and the handgun.Normally Game Developer restricts itself to the craft of making video games but I promise this is relevant. Guns are another tool where neutralizing rhetoric is deployed to downplay a tool's negative effects. I grew up in a gun-owning house in a gun-owning neighborhood in suburban Maryland. There were probably four handguns sitting in lockboxes across two rooms, a few rifles and shotguns in a vault in the basement, and one questionably legal World War I firearm tucked away in a closet. The NRA's mantra of "guns don't kill people, people kill people" was commonplace. A neighbor of mine laughed when I advocated for stronger regulations on gun ownership on the basis of "guns are meant to kill." "Guns aren't meant to kill," I recall him saying. "Cars can kill people. Does that mean cars are meant for killing?"His point boils down to this: The outcome of the tool's use is not worth considering when discussing regulation, only its potential use. A gun is a tool and the user has control over a tool is used.Cars are already tightly regulated and cost thousands of dollars, making his point moot, so we'll break down the construction of the claw hammer instead. We generally refer to hammers as being used to pound nails into wood, but I mainly use mine for hammering anchors into drywall because I'm a theater kid and was taught in crew to trust screws.In either case, the physical shape of the claw hammer dictates its most common purpose. The handle extends into a metal object that is blunt at one end, and clawed on the other. The design follows the swing of the human arm, transferring kinetic energy generated by the bicep, down the elbow, through the wrist, and into the blunt end.We also know that claw hammers are not useful for every form of transferring this energy. Variations on hammer design like the ball-peen hammer show how this basic purpose needs to be altered for different tasks. The shape and the material changes depending on the purpose. To sell more hammers, companies invest in better materials and affordances like rubber grips to make their use more comfortable.Like a firearm, hammers can be used as weapons. That same transference of force can be used to harm another living being. Video games sometimes place hammers in a players' loadout alongside guns, grenades, and weapons of war.Neither the hammer nor the firearm is "just" a tool. They are tools that are optimized for a purpose. We can study that purpose, and cast judgements about a tool's safety, merits, and need to be regulated based on that.But. The shape of the hammer is not an efficient way to inflict harm. This is supported by data from the FBI Crime Statistics survey, which gathers data filed by police departments that participate in assembling data. "Handgun" is the most common weapon used in homicides, and "knife/cutting instrument" ranks higher than "blunt objects." That's because handguns are an incredibly efficient means of wounding living beings.Let's break down the handgun the way we did the hammer. Handguns are assembled from an assortment of components that transfer the squeeze of a trigger into the strike of a hammer against a firing pin, which strikes the primer of a bullet's cartridge and sends it propelling out of the tube. Though some bullets seen in larger firearms are meant to penetrate metal, a handgun's bullet is envisioned and designed to cut through flesh.Image via Adobe Stock.These constraints make handguns efficient at few other tasks. In a pinch you could use the butt of a handgun as a hammer. I can't find any data about them being used for that purpose. I can only wander onto a construction site and count the number of firearms in toolboxes as a general sample size.Neither the hammer nor the firearm is "just" a tool. They are tools that are optimized for a purpose. We can study that purpose, and cast judgements about a tool's safety, merits, and need to be regulated based on that. Firearm advocates oppose this process through neutralizing language because it's difficult to dispute the correlation between the number of guns versus the number of murders and assaults with guns in a geographic area.Generative AI proponents sometimes regurgitate that language when defending this new technology. Because like the gun lobby, they don't want the purpose of generative AI decided by its outcomes, only its potential.What is that purpose? It may be the death of truth itself.Generative AI is broadly used to deceive through mimicryGenerative AI is a tool for deception.That's not what its biggest backers will tell you. It's broadly pitched as a tool for efficiency. But efficiency is hard to measure and easy to game. Deception is loud and obvious. Students are using it to cheat on papers. Scam calls with AI-generated voices are on the rise. The Department Human Health and Services published a study citing secretary Kennedy's unfounded health views that cites nonexistent studies, likely generated through AI. There was that cadre of YouTubers creating AI-generated fake movie trailers to attract clicks and make money off people who don't follow entertainment use. Apple marketed Apple Intelligence with advertisements showing people deceiving their neighbors, family, and coworkers. Activision Blizzard used generative AI to advertise games that don't exist.Now here's the rub: games—and all of entertainment—are also a form of deception. We use the phrase "magic circle" to describe how we attract players into our worlds. We use camera tricks, rendering technology, and even VO barks to simulate digital worlds. People engage with games, film, TV, books, and especially magic shows because on some level they want to be not just deceived, but lied to. AI has also been sold as technology that will let every player make their own perfect experience tailored for them by generating worlds, visual assets, and audio on the fly. But the best pitches I've heard for AI tend to "hide" the presence of the LLM, only mildly asking the player for prompts in order to accomplish behind-the-scenes computing tasks. These lies can make shared realities, not wholly distinct ones.That is the difference between telling lies to make virtual worlds and and telling lies to shape the real one. Lies in virtual worlds create shared realities. Lies in the real world tear them down.How appropriate that one such "shared reality," the Star Wars show Andor, recently warned us about the price we pay with treating AI as "just a tool." "The loss of an objective reality is perhaps the most dangerous," said the character Mon Mothma in a climactic speech decrying the whitewashing of a carefully executed genocide."When truth leaves us, when we let it slip away, when it is ripped from our hands, we become vulnerable to the appetite of whatever monster screams the loudest."Game Developers Conference and Game Developer are sibling organizations under Informa.

Elon Musk's father Errol is once again sounding off about his billionaire son — and as usual, he has nothing nice to say.In an interview with England's Sky News, the elder Musk heaped on the criticism when asked to describe his famous spawn's political prowess."He's not a very good conversationalist," the patriarch said. "He's not a very good politician at all."The former emerald miner went on to say that Musk doesn't have the "gift of gab" and suggested that he tried to warn his son against going into politics, which he bizarrely characterized as a bottomless "human swimming pool" in which nobody, including Winston Churchill or Donald Trump, can stay afloat.Notably, the Sky interview aired just before the younger Musk announced that his time as a "special government employee" in the United States was up. Soon after, the father — with whom Musk has been estranged since learning that he'd impregnated his step-sister — told GB News that his son and Trump still have a "good relationship."During his Sky interview, the older Musk also argued with broadcaster Gillian Joseph, a Black woman, about whether or not a so-called "white genocide" is taking place in South Africa, his and Elon's home country.When Joseph pointed out that a recent videos Trump shared purporting to show attacks against white farmers in SA was actually filmed in the Democratic Republic of Congo and taken out of context, Musk — who's shared fond memories of how "well-run" the country was during apartheid — kept insisting that was "not true.""Where's the evidence?" Joseph asked, as the elder Musk kept repeating "no, no, no" and spoke over her. Coincidentally, his billionaire son gave an extremely similar performance when speaking at Bloomberg's Qatar Economic Forum earlier in the month when reporter Joumanna Bercetche had the audacity to not laugh at one of his dumb jokes.For all their animosity, it seems Elon and Errol have a lot in common when it comes to being weird with women. Maybe the apple doesn't fall far from the emerald mine.More on the younger Musk: You Can Suddenly Sense Elon Musk's DesperationShare This Article

After spending several months doing not much besides watching Tom Cruise movies, I now spend a lot of time wondering about Tom Cruise running. The Mission: Impossible star is a high-cadence runner. He’s famously short of stature, low to the ground and with short legs. But that build is perfect for cinema, because those arms swing and those legs churn and convey a viscerality, a violence, a constant labored activity that translates perfectly to the screen. What they convey is a man of action, a man summoning all of his energy and will in a single direction: to move as quickly as he can. What is he thinking about when he’s running? I like to think the answer is nothing. That Tom Cruise is able to empty his head when he runs, blanking out his career, his cultural meaning, his past and present personal relationships, and move in a state of pure being. Maybe he’s doing one of his infamous stunts, a run towards a large dangerous vehicle, or off the side of a cliff. Maybe that makes him run faster. Maybe he feels a drive toward oblivion (and for Oblivion), to make the ultimate sacrifice to cinema, resulting in a cultural afterlife even longer than eternal stardom allows. This, in many ways, has been Tom Cruise’s career-long relationship with action movies. They’re his port in the storm, a safe harbor, a place to go and find love and acceptance when there seemingly is none to be had elsewhere. When the press is digging into your religion or snickering about your failed marriages or accusing you of being awkward or crazy or scary, you can find refuge in a MacGuffin to track down, a bad guy’s plot to foil, a world to save. The challenge each writer and director must face is how to handle Cruise’s well-known persona. Do they lean in or subvert? And to what end? When gifted with perhaps the most charismatic, committed movie star ever, are you willing to grapple with this stardom, how it explains the actor at a given point in his career, and what our response to him means? Or do you run? The following is a ranking of Tom Cruise’s greatest action films. In the interest of gimmicky symmetry, we’ve once again capped ourselves at 26 titles. We didn’t cheat… much. The films below all contain shootouts, fistfights, corpses, and missile crises. Most importantly, they are (mostly) tense, suspenseful, violent, escapist popcorn, not to be confused with the other half of Cruise’s equation: the pool-playing, the bartending, the litigating, and the deeply felt character work with auteurs, intended to get him the ultimate prize, which has eluded him for nearly half a century. Let’s run the numbers. 26. Valkyrie (2008) Director: Bryan SingerWhere to watch: Free on Pluto TV, Kanopy, Hoopla You could make a decent argument that this piece of shit doesn’t even belong on this list. It’s mostly a plodding chamber drama about “good Germans” ineffectually plotting to not kill Hitler at the end of World War II. But there’s an explosion, a dull shootout, and a bunch of executions at the end, so it seems to qualify as an action movie. Making Valkyrie is one of the most baffling decisions in Cruise’s entire career. And yet it’s also one of the most important films of his career, one that arguably defines his late period, because it’s how he first met his future M:I steward Christopher McQuarrie. Run report: Ominously, Tom Cruise doesn’t run in this movie.   25. Oblivion (2013) Director: Joseph KosinskiWhere to watch: Rent on Amazon, Apple Like Valkyrie, Oblivion technically qualifies as an action movie, but there’s little actual action or narrative tension to any of it. Cruise essentially plays the source code for a clone army created by a weird super-intelligence in space that runs Earth via killer droids, and the clones to service them. It comes out of a filmmaking period packed with sci-fi puzzlebox movies that were all atmosphere and often led nowhere, though this is probably the “best” example of that tiresome trend. The silver lining is that, like Valkyrie, this film led to Cruise meeting an important future collaborator: Top Gun: Maverick director Joseph Kosinski. Run report: Cruise literally exercises by running on a giant sleek modern hamster wheel in this. It’s the physical manifestation of everything I hate about this film. 24. Legend (1985) Director: Ridley ScottWhere to watch: Rent on Amazon, Apple This 1985 fantasy movie has its defenders, but I am not one of them. The action is completely disjointed and chaotic, a fractured fairy tale composed of an incoherent, weird/horny unholy union of J.R.R. Tolkien, Jim Henson, Peter Greenaway, Ken Russell, and a handful of psilocybin mushrooms. Legend looks like something pieced together by Jack Horner on a camcorder, so it’s hard to fault Cruise for looking clunky and uncomfortable. Who knows what a good performance in that role would look like?  Run report: A lot of odd almost skipping around in this, which adds to the “high school play” quality of the film. Cruise has a proper run toward the end, but it’s not fully baked yet.  23. The Mummy (2017) Director: Alex KurtzmanWhere to watch: Rent on Amazon, Apple Rewatching 2017’s The Mummy actually made me slightly disappointed we didn’t get the Dark Universe Universal Pictures briefly promised us. The setup had potential: Cruise as Indiana Jones, with Jake Johnson as Short Round and Courtney B. Vance as the archetypal no-bullshit sergeant? Potential. But Alex Kurtzman’s take on Karl Freund’s 1932 Boris Karloff Mummy needed less plot and more screwing around. This is an instance where Spielbergian pacing actually ruins a blockbuster, because it entirely lacks Spielberg Sauce. It becomes a horror movie after the first act, with Cruise as a largely personality-free, mentally unsound Black Swan/Smile protagonist. Then they spend all this time with Russell Crowe as Dr. Jekyll, introducing this universe of monsters that never gets off the ground. No fun! Run report: Notable because co-star Annabelle Wallis did a ton of press speaking to how much thought Cruise puts into his on-screen running. She specifically said he initially didn’t want to run on screen with Wallis, because he doesn’t like to share his on-screen run time. He relented, to little effect.  22. Mission: Impossible II (2000) Director: John WooWhere to watch: Free on Hulu, Paramount Plus Folks, I rewatched this recently. I really wanted to love it because some close and valued colleagues sing its praises, and I love a good, hot contrarian take. Respectfully, I don’t know what the hell they’re on. The camera work in Mission: Impossible II is so berserk, it borders on amateurish. The series hadn’t figured out what it was yet, but not in an interesting exploratory way: This installment is more like trying on a pair of pants that are not your vibe. The idea that Ethan Hunt lost his team in Mission: Impossible and now he’s a broken lone wolf (plus Ving Rhames’ Luther and Thandiwe Newton’s Nyah), an agent with the weight of the world on his shoulders, is not a bad premise. But in the role that ruined his career, Dougray Scott is a wooden, toothless bad guy. And somehow, the stakes feel impossibly low, even with a world-killing bioweapon on the line. Mission: Impossible II does, however, get points for being far and away the horniest movie in the franchise. Run report: Unsurprisingly, Woo is great at filming running, and there’s a lot of clay to work with here: Cruise’s long hair flopping in the wind, slow motion, a rare mid-run mask-rip, the inevitable dove-release: It’s all good! A definitive ranking of love interests and partners in the Mission: Impossible movies 6. Claire Phelps (Emmanuelle Béart) in Mission: Impossible5. Julia Meade (Michelle Monaghan) in Mission: Impossible III and Fallout4. Grace (Hayley Atwell) in Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning and The Final Reckoning3. Nyah Nordoff-Hall (Thandiwe Newton) in Mission: Impossible II2. Ilsa Faust (Rebecca Ferguson) in Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation, Fallout, and Dead Reckoning1. Jane Carter (Paula Patton) in in Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol 21. American Made (2017) Director: Doug Liman Where to watch: Rent on Amazon, Apple It’s a funny idea: What if Top Gun’s Maverick was a schmuck pilot turned drug-runner? It’s clearly Cruise reaching for a Blow of his own, but decades into this type of narrative, we know the beats by heart. American Made is sorely lacking in depravity. Cruise’s affected good ol’ boy Southern accent both has nothing to do with the film’s disposability, and explains everything. It’s a sanitized drug narrative in which we never see Cruise blow a line or fire a gun. We don’t even see his death on screen — Cruise dying in a movie is a big deal, and has only happened a few times. It’s almost like he knew this nothingburger wasn’t worth the distinction. Run report: Not much running, which is indicative of a larger problem with this film. But at one point, Cruise runs after a car with Caleb Landry Jones in it, and it explodes, in arguably the highlight of the film, for whatever that’s worth.  20. The Last Samurai (2003) Director: Edward ZwickWhere to watch: Rent on Amazon, Apple The one’s a weird movie about a mercenary who, after participating in the genocide of Native Americans, goes native in 19th-century Japan, in the wake of the Meiji Restoration. But it’s a somewhat unusual approach to the standard Cruise narrative arc. In this, he begins as a broken, drunken husk, a mercenary arm of the growing American empire who belatedly regains his honor by joining up with some samurai. The aspects of that plotline which feel unusual for a Cruise movie don’t make up for all the story elements that have aged terribly, but they’re something.  Run report: Less running than you’d expect, but running with swords while wearing leather samurai armor. 19. Jack Reacher: Never Go Back (2016)  Director: Edward ZwickWhere to watch: Rent on Amazon, Apple A lot of the films in the lower ranks of this list suffer from the problem of filmmakers settling, simply putting Cruise on screen and letting his iconography do the heavy lifting, sans interesting backstory or dialogue. In this sequel, thanks to Lee Child’s blunt dialogue, the deep-state rogue-army plotting in the source material, and Cruise’s typical level of meticulous fight choreo, it’s simply really entertaining, solid, replacement-level action. This sequel to 2012’s Jack Reacher gives the title troubleshooter (played by Cruise) a surrogate daughter and a foil in Cobie Smulders, which is great. But its primary sin is replacing Werner Herzog, the villain from the first movie, with a generic snooze of a bad guy. Run report: Some running and sliding on rooftops with guns, as fireworks go off in the night sky. Impressive for some action movies, a bit ho-hum compared to the bigger hits on this list.  18. Taps (1981) Director: Harold Becker Where to watch: Rent on Amazon, Apple Fascinating film. A Toy Soldiers riff interrogating the military-school system, and suggesting that it’s probably not a bad thing that former American ideals like patriotic honor, duty, and masculinity are fading. It’s Cruise’s first major role (with George C.Scott, Sean Penn, and baby Giancarlo Esposito!), and you’ll never believe this, but he plays a tightly wound, thrill-addicted, bloodthirsty maniac. Run report: Great characterization via run here. Cadet Captain David Shawn is a hawkish conservative dick, and Cruise’s running reflects that. He’s stiff, carrying an automatic rifle that he looks like he’s going to start firing wildly at any minute.  17. Mission: Impossible III (2006)  Director: J.J. Abrams Where to watch: Free on Hulu, Paramount Plus In the last Mission: Impossible installment made before the filmmakers really figured out what the series was doing, J.J. Abrams assembles a mostly incoherent, boring clunker that has a few very important grace notes. It’s a film about Ethan Hunt trying to carve out a normal life for himself, with the great Philip Seymour Hoffman playing the bucket of ice water dumped on his domestic fantasy. Hoffman’s Owen Davian is the greatest bad guy in the Cruise filmography, and there’s really no close second. (I suppose, if there was a gun to my head, I would point to Werner Herzog in Jack Reacher, or Jay Mohr in Jerry Maguire.) There are many moments I could point to in Hoffman’s wonderful performance, but the one I’d recommend, if you want to feel something, is when Hoffman gets to play Ethan Hunt playing Owen Davian with a mask on for a few scenes during the Vatican kidnapping, roughly 50 minutes in. He was so fucking great.  Run report: A lot of running, but none of it is very good. No knock on Cruise, but Abrams is doing perfunctory work, shot poorly via shaky cam that has trouble keeping Cruise in the frame, from a perfunctory director making a perfunctory action film. There are two notable exceptions. “The Shanghai Run,” which we may have more on later, and Cruise running straight up a wall. A definitive ranking of Mission: Impossible villain performances 10. Dougray Scott in Mission: Impossible II9. Eddie Marsan in Mission: Impossible III8. William Mapother — that’s right, Thomas Cruise Mapother IV’s cousin! — in Mission: Impossible II7. Lea Seydoux in Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol6. Sean Harris in Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation and Fallout5. Jean Reno in Mission: Impossible4. Esai Morales/The Entity in Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning and The Final Reckoning3. Jon Voight in Mission: Impossible2. Henry Cavill in Mission: Impossible – Fallout1. Phillip Seymour Hoffman in Mission: Impossible III 16. Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning (2025) Director: Christopher McQuarrieWhere to watch: In theaters The franchise potentially falls with a thud — or is it an AI-generated death fantasy that plays out entirely in Ethan Hunt’s head when he gets trapped in a digital coffin early in the movie? Either way, the resulting film is something the McQuarrie-Cruise collaboration has never been before: clunky and imprecise, a disjointed watch that delivers some high highs, but is unfortunately thin on story. McQuarrie seems unconcerned with character arcs, or any substantive grand narrative that might land in any meaningful way. This movie plays out like an aimless succession of beats, allowing boredom to creep in. That hasn’t been a part of the franchise since M:I 3. It’s a Simpsons clip show masquerading as a Mission: Impossible film, signaling that this iteration of the franchise is exhausted, with little left to say or explore. Perhaps there was no other way for this series to go out than on its back.  Run report: A run through the tunnels to save Luther, oddly reminiscent of the run attempting to save Ilsa Faust, followed by the run out of the tunnels, allowing Ethan to escape the film’s first trap (or does he?) A definitive ranking of Ethan Hunt’s “best friends/allies” (non-love interest/boss division) 17. Wes Bentley16. Greg Tarzan Davis15. Aaron Paul14. Jonathan Rhys Meyers13. Maggie Q12. Shea Whigham11. Hannah Waddington 10. Katy O’Brian9. Pom Klementieff8. Rolf Saxon7. Vanessa Kirby6. Keri Russell5. Simon Pegg4. Jeremy Renner3. Emilio Estevez2. Bogdan (Miraj Grbić)1. Luther (Ving Rhames) 15. War of the Worlds (2005) Director: Steven Spielberg Where to watch: Free on Hulu, Paramount Plus A curious movie I liked better on a rewatch than I did on my initial watch 20 years ago. Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom is often misremembered as Spielberg’s darkest movie, but I’d argue that War of the Worlds beats it: It’s a divorced-dad-anxiety horror movie that has the most nightmare-inducing, traumatic, post-9/11 visuals in the master’s oeuvre. It can be read as Spielberg wrestling with his relationship with his son Max, who would’ve been around the age of Cruise’s disgruntled, estranged son in the movie. War of the Worlds has issues: Cruise never works when he’s cast in a “just some guy” role, as he’s meant to be here, and the plot goes off the rails in the third act. But it has some of the best set pieces Spielberg ever directed. What will haunt me for the rest of my life is a scene where Cruise’s character is forced to essentially make a Sophie’s Choice between his son and daughter (a great Dakota Fanning), and lets his son go. The ominous music at the end when he’s magically reunited with his son is completely bizarre and unsettling, and I don’t think is meant to be taken at face value.  Run report: This is why Cruise is the king. He’s playing a supposed normal, everyday schmoe in this movie. When you focus on the running, compared to other roles, you can see he’s running like a mechanic who is still a little athletic, but doesn’t know where he’s going, or what is happening from one moment to the next. It’s building character through running. Incredible. 14. Knight and Day (2010) Director: James Mangold  Where to watch: Free on Cinemax; rent on Amazon, Apple Knight and Day is a sneakily important film in the Cruise action canon because it’s the first time a movie really puts Cruise into the role of the creepy, charismatic, psychotically intense, beleaguered, put-upon invincible cartoon character he became in the Mission: Impossible franchise as of Ghost Protocol. This movie is based around a funny idea: It’s basically a Mission: Impossible movie from the perspective of a clueless civilian. It helps that the civilian is phenomenal, physical, funny, and fucking ripped: Cameron Diaz plays the world’s hottest mechanic, and makes me wish she had gotten her own Atomic Blonde-style vehicle. Run report: Some co-running with Cameron Diaz here, which is as you might imagine, is good.  13. The Firm (1993) Director. Sydney PollackWhere to watch: Free on Paramount Plus It’s easy to put The Firm on a pedestal because of Sydney Pollack, the jazz score, the ’90s outfits, Gene Hackman, and every other significant gravitas-oozing “That Guy” as a mobster, shady lawyer, or Fed in a great “They don’t make them like that anymore” legal thriller. But what really stood out to me on a recent rewatch is this movie is two and a half hours about the now laughably quaint notion of rediscovering purity in the law. It isn’t much more than a story about a shady law firm that gets hit with mail-fraud charges, plus several deaths and a few smartly tied up loose ends. Run report: A clinic in Tom Cruise running, a draft-version highlight reel of his running scenes. In my memory, this contains some of his most iconic early runs, and it signals the moment when “Tom Cruise running” became a whole cultural thing.  12. Top Gun (1986) Director: Tony Scott Where to watch: Free on Paramount Plus Top Gun set the template for Tom Cruise’s on-screen narrative, and it took a decade before filmmakers were willing to start subverting that narrative again. This is straight-up hero porn, without any of the humbling that the sequel eventually dishes out. Tom Cruise as Maverick is the best pilot on Earth. He loses his best friend and co-pilot Goose, due to a combination of a mechanical failure and another pilot’s fuck-up. He then has to find the courage to fly with the exact same lack of inhibition he did at the outset of the film, which he finally does, based on essentially nothing that happens in the plot. Scott makes the wise decision to center the action (or non-action) of the film on pure Cruise charisma and star power, and it works. Run report: Believe it or not, Tom Cruise does not run in this movie.  11. Days of Thunder (1990) Director: Tony Scott Where to watch: Free on Paramount Plus Scott and Cruise’s Top Gun follow-up is essentially Top Gun with cars instead of jets — but yes, it’s marginally better. Why? Because this is a quintessential “We didn’t know how good we had it” classic. It’s the film where Cruise met his future spouse Nicole Kidman on set. Robert Duvall is swigging moonshine. It’s Randy Quaid’s last performance actually based on planet Earth. Plus there’s John C. Reilly, Michael Rooker, Cary Elwes, Fred Thompson, Margo Martindale, and a rousing Hans Zimmer score. Need I say more? Run report: They cut the climatic race off, but Cruise’s character Cole potentially gets smoked by 59-year-old Robert Duvall?! 10. Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning (2023) Director: Christopher McQuarrieWhere to watch: Free on Paramount Plus The metaphor that the Mission: Impossible franchise is a manifestation of Tom Cruise’s deep-seated need to save blockbuster filmmaking and the Hollywood star system has never been more overt. Cruise is literally up against AI, which is always a step ahead of him, dismantling his every gambit. It’s an update/remix of Ghost Protocol’s premise: The only antidote to the world-spanning AI known as The Entity is becoming a refusenik anti-tech Luddite in the spirit of John Henry, and using the raw materials of humanity to defeat an invincible machine.  Run report: Cruise running in confined spaces is a lot of fun, but the heavily CGI’d running up the side of a train losing its battle with gravity isn’t.  A definitive ranking of Mission: Impossible MacGuffins 8. Ghost Protocol’s Russian launch codes7. Fallout’s plutonium cores 6. Rogue Nation’s $2.4 billion Syndicate bankroll5. M:I2’s Chimera Virus4. Final Reckoning’s Sevastopol3. M:I’s NOC list 2. Dead Reckoning Part One’s cruciform key1. M:I3’s rabbit’s foot 9. Jack Reacher (2012)  Director: Christopher McQuarrie Where to watch: Free on Paramount Plus I loathe hyperbole: it’s a shortcut for unimaginative writers. I’ve never resorted to it in my entire life. So I hope you’ll take me at my word when I say that this movie is a fucking masterpiece. Amazon’s great Reacher series is made more in the image of Lee Child’s books, with a distinctive breakout lead in Alan Ritchson, who appears to have been designed in a lab to draw striking contrast to Tom Cruise in this role. But Reacher made us forget how good Jack Reacher gets. It’s a perfect elevated action programmer with a remarkable cast: David Oyelowo! Richard Jenkins! Rosamund Pike! A Days of Thunder reunion with Robert Duvall! Werner Herzog showing up in a completely brilliant, bonkers heel turn! McQuarrie made this one in vintage Shane Black ’90s style, with a dash of Don Siegel and Clint Eastwood. I totally get why Cruise decided to turn his career over to McQuarrie after this. I don’t understand why he didn’t let McQuarrie direct the sequel. Run report: There isn’t much running in this. At one point, Cruise is darting from shelter point to shelter point because a sniper is trying to pick him off, but that’s it. It’s because Jack fucking Reacher doesn’t have to run, which is simply good writing and filmmaking.  8. Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation (2015)  Director: Christopher McQuarrieWhere to watch: Free on Hulu, Paramount Plus This film famously opens with Tom Cruise hanging from the side of a plane as it takes off. But to me, the key moment comes when he’s broken into the plane, attached himself to a package which isn’t named, but looks like a crate of rockets the size of a minivan. He gives a final raised eyebrow and shrug to a gobsmacked henchman, who watches helplessly as Cruise deploys a parachute and falls out the back of the plane’s cargo bay with a ton of atomic weapons, and no plausible way to land without killing himself and creating a Grand Canyon-sized nuclear crater in Belarus. This scene was practically drawn by Chuck Jones, which sets the tone for a film that repositions Ethan Hunt on the border of superherodom, in a film about Tom Cruise as the literal manifestation of destiny.  It also marks the return of Alec Baldwin, the first (but not last) M:I handler who carried over from one film to the next. Evaluating the handlers’ position in the franchise (see below) is challenging: They’re constantly shifting allegiances, at times working in service of Hunt’s mission, at times in direct opposition to it, either attacking him with governmental red tape, or colluding with nefarious forces. Run report: A lot of different looks when it comes to the running in this. Shirtless running, running with Rebecca Ferguson, running across the wing of a moving plane. It’s all good. A definitive ranking of the “most fun” M:I handlers 6. Theodore Brassel (Laurence Fishburne) in Mission: Impossible III5. Erika Sloane (Angela Bassett) in Mission: Impossible – Fallout and The Final Reckoning4. Eugene Kittridge (Henry Czerny) in Mission: Impossible3. John Musgrave (Billy Crudup) in Mission: Impossible III2. Commander Swanbeck (Anthony Hopkins) in Mission: Impossible II1. Alan Hunley (Alec Baldwin*) in Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation and Fallout * One of my only lingering complaints about the M:I movies is that aside from Ving Rhames and Simon Pegg, we don’t get enough big family continuity. The Fast & Furious franchise is an exemplar/cautionary tale of how found-family dynamics can be a great source of fun and emotion — and also tank the series, if creators keep piling on new recurring elements. It sounds like Baldwin didn’t want to stay on board, but I would love to live in a world where he didn’t jump ship — or where, say, Henry Cavill’s August Walker joined Ethan’s team at the end of Mission: Impossible – Fallout, as he would have if he’d had a similar role in an F&F installment. 7. Minority Report (2002) Director: Steven SpielbergWhere to watch: Free on Paramount Plus I’m guessing this placement on this ranking will upset some people. I’m surprised it’s this low in the rankings too — but that’s how good the next six films are. And honestly, Minority Report doesn’t hold up as the masterpiece I remember it being. It’s a very cool story. It marks the first fantasy-team matchup of Tom Cruise and Steven Spielberg. They’re adapting a paranoid Philip K. Dick story, and largely delivering on the promise that implies. Minority Report is an inventive, dark, weird future horror movie, made with Spielberg’s standard stunning visual economy. But among the perfect elements in this film, I have to call out some aspects that didn’t age well. Janusz Kaminski’s lighting effects feel like the whole movie is stuck inside an iPod halo. and this dutch-angled high melodrama, sauced with a dash of Terry Gilliam dystopian/gross wackiness, which lends the film a degree of occasionally atonal, squishy gonzo elasticity you’ve likely forgotten.   Run report: Mileage may vary on white pools of light, but running through them in futuristic uniforms is decisively cool.  6. Mission: Impossible (1996) Director: Brian De PalmaWhere to watch: Free on Hulu, Paramount Plus Because MI:2 and MI:3 struggle with tone (and long, listless patches), and because it’s actually Brad Bird that sets the template for the McQuarrie era of the franchise, you could argue the first Mission: Impossible is the strangest, most personal vision of what this series is and what it can be. DePalma is asserting himself with every practical mask and stylized shot. Your mileage may vary with that approach to what has become this Swiss set piece machine, I love it. A few things stand out nearly three decades on: Of course, how ridiculously young Cruise looks, but perhaps crucially, how collegial, intimate, and even tender the first act is before his first team is eliminated and the movie becomes a DePalma paranoid thriller. It’s an element we never quite get from Mission: Impossible again, one that brings the arc of the franchise into focus and explains Ethan Hunt if you extend continuity: He’s a character betrayed by his father figure and his government in the first film, and spends the rest of the franchise running from this largely unspoken trauma, determined to never let that happen again. In the wake of this, he reluctantly pieces together a life, semblance of a family, and all the risks that come with those personal attachments. In honor of my favorite set piece in any of the films, one of DePalma’s finest taught masterpieces: A definitive ranking of the top 10 M:I set pieces  Honorable Mention: The Sebastopol Extraction- (Tie) The Train Fights– MI:1 & Dead Reckoning 10. The Plane Door- Rogue Nation9. The “Kick In The Head” Russian Jail Break- Ghost Protocol8. The Water Vault Ledger Heist Into The Motorcycle Chase- Rogue Nation7. The Handcuffed Car Chase- Dead Reckoning6. The Red Baron Plane Fight- Final Reckoning5. The Burj Khalifa- Ghost Protocol4. Kidnapping At The Vatican- MI:33. The Opera House Hit- Rogue Nation2. The Louvre Halo Jump Into the Bathroom Fight- Fallout1. The NOC List Heist- MI:1 Run report: Fitting that this franchise opens with Cruise putting on a running clinic, as that first op falls apart, then of course his run away from Kittridge and the massive fish tank explosion.  5. Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol  Director: Brad Bird (2011) Where to watch: Free on Hulu, Paramount Plus Nothing is working like it’s supposed to. Not the Impossible Mission Force, not the mask machine, not the radio comms, not the magnet gloves keeping Ethan Hunt tethered to the side of the world’s tallest building, not the Mission: Impossible franchise, and not Tom Cruise’s at-the-time fading movie stardom. But somehow, one incredible film made by a career animation director solves all of these problems, by stripping down, getting back to basics and reminding us what we always loved about these films and its star. It was supposed to be the beginning of a franchise reboot, with Jeremy Renner stepping in. Bird (and McQuarrie, in for a pass at the troubled screenplay and on deck to become Cruise’s Guy For Life) fights this decision off, gets away from trying to figure out the character Ethan Hunt and lets him be a superhero, more annoyed than concerned by the escalating difficulty of the impossible problems he has to solve. Through this, Bird correctly identifies the difference between Cruise and these other Hollywood candy asses: He’s a reckless warrior with a death wish who will do whatever is necessary to win, and he does. The team concept is back in full force with a genuinely showstopping stunt, and without the masks and tech, Cruise has to do it all with his wits, his hands, and his pure bravado. The series, and Cruise, never looked back.  Run report: Some of the most fun, imaginative set pieces built around running in this installment. A definitive ranking of who should replace Tom Cruise in the inevitable M:I reboot 10. Aaron Taylor Johnson9. Charlie Cox8. Sterling K. Brown7. Florence Pugh6. John David Washington5. Haley Atwell4. Miles Teller3. Jeremy Renner2. Aaron Pierre 1. Glen Powell 4. Top Gun: Maverick  Director: Joseph Kosinski (2022) Where to watch: Free on Paramount Plus It’s a death dream, it’s red meat nationalist troopaganda, it’s the greatest legacyquel ever made that no one asked for and you didn’t realize you desperately needed, it’s nostalgia porn, it saved the movie going experience post-COVID, it’s a finely calibrated joy machine. Cruise is downright mystical, shimmering in the sun’s reflection off the surf, dominating an endless football game with no rules that doesn’t make sense. He has actual chemistry with Jennifer Connelly, and he has the grace to cede the floor to his old nemesis — both in the first Top Gun and as a once contemporary Hollywood star/rival — the late Val Kilmer, to drive home the crush of time and destroy everyone in the theater, no matter how many times they went to see this monster hit that first summer back in theaters.  Run report: Immediately coming off of the stunning, emotional high point of the film, we get Cruise running in salt water soaked jeans shirtless on the beach. Are you not entertained? 3. Collateral  Director: Michael Mann (2004) Where to watch: Free on Paramount Plus An elemental, visceral faceoff that is radical in its simplicity of purpose. A film made by the second-best director on this list, and on a very short list of Cruise’s finest performances ever. He’s the salt and pepper terminator in a taxi, playing a pure evil bad guy, a classic Mann anti-hero samurai nihilist that also lives by a code and values being good at his job. Of course Cruise retains a kind of charm, but is also willing to get slimy and be deeply unlikeable and die on screen. Well worth the sacrifice.  Run report: Incredible running on display here. Once again he is running like a professional killer probably runs, almost always holding a gun, the hair matches the suit, so fucking bad ass.  2. Mission: Impossible – Fallout  Director: Christopher McQuarrie (2018) Where to watch: Free on Hulu, Paramount Plus As much time and energy as I just expended exalting Ghost Protocol, at a certain point you have to eschew poetic narratives and tip your cap, by the slightest of margins, to a fucking perfect movie. Ghost Prot is close, but you can feel its lack of a nailed-down shooting script at certain points towards its conclusion, as the action begins to wind down. McQuarrie becomes the first director in the franchise to get a second bite of the apple, and the result is a finely cut diamond. Fallout is about exhaustion and the impossibility of that manifestation of destiny idea from Rogue Nation. It makes the argument that you can’t actually save the day and save everyone without making any sacrifices forever, and because of that, sets up The Trolly Problem over and over again to try and get Ethan Hunt to compromise and/or give up. But, of course, he won’t, and neither, seemingly, will Cruise.  Run report: You can tell McQuarrie loves watching Cruise run as much as we do. He frames the runs in these wide shots and takes his time with them. It’s not conveying any additional information, a beat or two less would suffice, but the camera lingers and you get to just sit and appreciate the form and it really connects. It’s why he was the logical choice to take control of this franchise. He understands how a Tom Cruise action flick operates and what makes it special. And of course: A definitive ranking of the best runs in the franchise 10. The Opening Plane Run- Rogue Nation9. The Sandstorm Run- Ghost Protocol8. The Mask Rip Run- MI:27. Running through the alleys of Italy- Dead Reckoning6. Running Through the Tunnels for Luther (then out)- Final Reckoning5. Running down the Burj Khalifa- Ghost Protocol 4. Running from the fishtank explosion- MI:13. The Rooftop Run- Fallout2. The Shanghai Run- MI:31. The Kremlin Run- Ghost Protocol 1. Edge of Tomorrow  Director: Doug Liman (2014) Where to watch: Rent on Amazon, Apple Edge of Tomorrow is the best Tom Cruise action film had to be made in his late period of action stardom. You need the gravity and the gravitas, the emotional baggage earned through those decades of culture-remaking roles, the toll that exerted effort took on him, and the time spent and time passed on his face. The late, largely perfect Mission: Impossible films that dominate the top 10 of this list do much of that work: They feint, they allude, they nod to the realities of stardom, of life and death. But Ethan Hunt is a superhero, an inevitability, so the outcome is never in doubt — until, perhaps someday, it is. But for now, the masterpiece from Doug Liman — a director who either hits dingers or strikes out looking, with no in between — is a movie that punctuated Cruise’s post-Ghost Prot action renaissance: Edge of Tomorrow, or Live. Die. Repeat. It’s the unlikely on-paper melding of Starship Troopers and Groundhog Day, but in practice it’s the action film equivalent of Jerry Maguire, a movie that relies on your history with Maverick, and Mitch McDeere, and Ethan Hunt, and uses it to dismantle and subvert Tom Cruise, the infallible hero.  Liman is at the top of his game, particularly in editing, which uses repetition and quick cuts masterfully to convey the long and slow transformation of a public relations major named Cage — who becomes trapped in a disastrous, endless intergalactic Normandy scenario — from a marketing clown in a uniform to an alien killer badass while he falls in love and saves the world. We watch as Cruise has all his bravado and bullshit stripped away by “a system” (maybe the single best Paxton performance?!) with no time for that, a woman smarter and stronger than he is and immune to his charms, and an invading force that tears him to pieces over and over again. We watch the five-tool movie star — robbed of all his tools — regroup, rebuild, and in the process, grow a soul. It’s the platonic ideal of what a great blockbuster action film can be, one that only could’ve been made by one of its most important, prolific, and talented stars.  Run report: A beautiful physical metaphor for this film is watching the evolution of Cruise’s ability to move in that ridiculous mech suit. 

"Grok is left leaning and continues to spread fake news and propaganda," Greene wrote. Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call via Getty Images 2025-05-23T21:04:07Z Save Saved Read in app This story is available exclusively to Business Insider subscribers. Become an Insider and start reading now. Have an account? Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene is feuding with Grok, a chatbot created by Elon Musk's xAI. "The judgement seat belongs to GOD, not you," she wrote. It came after the AI chatbot called her Christian beliefs into question. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene has it out for Grok.The Georgia Republican lit into the AI chatbot, which was created by Elon Musk's xAI and is available to users on X, on Friday after it called her Christian beliefs into question."The judgement seat belongs to GOD, not you a non-human AI platform," Greene wrote. "Grok is left leaning and continues to spread fake news and propaganda."The congresswoman also offered a warning about AI chatbots in general, saying: "When people give up their own discernment, stop seeking the truth, and depend on AI to analyze information, they will be lost."In response to a post from a user asking whether Greene was "really a Christian," the chatbot said that the question was "subjective," mentioning the congresswoman's prior association with the QAnon conspiracy theory and her self-declared status as a Christian nationalist. While Greene contends that Groke has a left-leaning bias — a contention that many make about AI — the chatbot took a different turn recently, bringing up the topic of "white genocide" in South Africa in response to unrelated inquiries.And according to documents previously obtained by BI, xAI has been training the chatbot specifically to avoid being "woke" like other chat bots. "The general idea seems to be that we're training the MAGA version of ChatGPT," one xAI worker told BI in February.Spokespeople for Greene and xAI did not immediately respond to a request for comment.The congresswoman has also previously praised Grok, writing on X in September that she was "impressed how much Grok knows"

doops. Member Jun 3, 2020 5,141 Many thanks to MoonlitSeer for the more accurate screenshots taken from Twitter. You can cross-reference these with his account on there for yourself. I won't be linking to it here, since it's (rightfully so) a banned source. Apparently also, Twitter now only shows a selection of follows, so the original screenshot from Reddit may well still be accurate, but this one is at least more verifiable currently.   Savinowned Member Oct 25, 2017 1,493 Nashville, TN That's a bummer. Do we have any history of him saying sketchy stuff? I loved the last rematch beta and was excited to play the upcoming one next weekend   MoonlitSeer Fallen Guardian Member Jun 9, 2023 1,977 I'll just add that I was in the process of cross-referencing these with the prior post when the topic was locked. I personally checked all of the ones listed here and can verify they are accurate as of about 30 minutes prior from the time of this post.   Rosebud Two Pieces Member Apr 16, 2018 51,258 .   OP OP doops. Member Jun 3, 2020 5,141 MoonlitSeer said: I'll just add that I was in the process of cross-referencing these with the prior post when the topic was locked. I personally checked all of the ones listed here and can verify they are accurate as of about 30 minutes from the time of this post. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Appreciate you! ❤️  CaptainFreud Banned Aug 19, 2022 8 User banned (permanent): Troll account Unless he's actively reposting and sharing anti-trans or genocidal rhetoric, I really don't care. News flash: the people that make the games you play have a variety of backgrounds and won't always ace your purity tests.   skillzilla81 "This guy are sick" The Fallen Oct 25, 2017 11,316 CaptainFreud said: Unless he's actively reposting and sharing anti-trans or genocidal rhetoric, I really don't care. News flash: the people that make the games you play have a variety of backgrounds and won't always ace your purity tests. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Good for you.  Nocturne Member Oct 25, 2017 2,217 thanks for the heads-up. know a couple people who sounded interested in this game who'd probably wanna know about something like this.   Firmus_Anguis AVALANCHE Member Oct 30, 2017 8,491 CaptainFreud said: Unless he's actively reposting and sharing anti-trans or genocidal rhetoric, I really don't care. News flash: the people that make the games you play have a variety of backgrounds and won't always ace your purity tests. Click to expand... Click to shrink... That's all you got? Ya'll are getting so incredibly predictable. Just report and move on, people. Incoming permaban.  Qwark Member Oct 27, 2017 10,251 Incredibly disappointing. Another one to avoid.   DanDanderson Member May 7, 2024 298 As a general note, this is not only the creative director but also a co-founder of the studio. MoonlitSeer said: I'll just add that I was in the process of cross-referencing these with the prior post when the topic was locked. I personally checked all of the ones listed here and can verify they are accurate as of about 30 minutes prior from the time of this post. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Same. The original screenshot is accurate. You don't see all followers on Twitter, and the ones you do see change - it's not a static list. He does follow all the people in the original screenshot including RadioGenoa and Grummz.  Bricks "This guy are sick" Member Nov 6, 2017 746 Well, I got Sifu for free from the Epic Games Store, so... that's fine, I guess? Who am I kidding, I'll never have time to play it anyway.   JoeInky Member Oct 25, 2017 4,075 CaptainFreud said: Unless he's actively reposting and sharing anti-trans or genocidal rhetoric, I really don't care. News flash: the people that make the games you play have a variety of backgrounds and won't always ace your purity tests. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Ok and? There are 100s of games released every day, why are people like you constantly so bothered about the idea that people might skip one of those games for ideological reasons?  Eevea Member Sep 23, 2022 485 CaptainFreud said: Unless he's actively reposting and sharing anti-trans or genocidal rhetoric, I really don't care. News flash: the people that make the games you play have a variety of backgrounds and won't always ace your purity tests. Click to expand... Click to shrink... It's not a "purity test", it's a decency test. When it comes to the matter of real people's lives, it's not an "opinion", it's not "politics". Just because you can overlook shitty people doesn't mean everyone has that luxury.  Buttonbasher Member Dec 4, 2017 5,752 Thanks for the heads up. Will avoid.   GTOAkira Member Sep 1, 2018 13,401 Not afraid to defend my country lmao Following that first account is enough to show what kind of person he is.  DrScruffleton Member Oct 26, 2017 14,889 CaptainFreud said: Unless he's actively reposting and sharing anti-trans or genocidal rhetoric, I really don't care. News flash: the people that make the games you play have a variety of backgrounds and won't always ace your purity tests. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Messages: 8 Joined: 2022  OP OP doops. Member Jun 3, 2020 5,141 CaptainFreud said: Unless he's actively reposting and sharing anti-trans or genocidal rhetoric, I really don't care. News flash: the people that make the games you play have a variety of backgrounds and won't always ace your purity tests. Click to expand... Click to shrink... the irony of having your pronouns under your name and saying dumb shit like this. go back to r/reseterainaction you rat  Sande Member Oct 25, 2017 7,176 CaptainFreud said: Unless he's actively reposting and sharing anti-trans or genocidal rhetoric, I really don't care. News flash: the people that make the games you play have a variety of backgrounds and won't always ace your purity tests. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Congrats for not caring...? Like yeah, there's all kinds of people working in games but not all of them broadcast where they stand like this. And this is in a leadership position.  Zigludo Member Aug 17, 2020 59 CaptainFreud said: Unless he's actively reposting and sharing anti-trans or genocidal rhetoric, I really don't care. News flash: the people that make the games you play have a variety of backgrounds and won't always ace your purity tests. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Nice alt account you got there.   METAL GEAR REX Member Jun 11, 2023 2,550 Edit: I regret ever asking questions on here.   Last edited: 10 minutes ago TheCat Member Dec 20, 2023 917 Eevea said: It's not a "purity test", it's a decency test. When it comes to the matter of real people's lives, it's not an "opinion", it's not "politics". Just because you can overlook shitty people doesn't mean everyone has that luxury. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Aren't you literally playing the new Doom Game? You know who sees your money, right?  Fat4all Woke up, got a money tag, swears a lot Member Oct 25, 2017 107,533 here turns out Twitter is a shit website that doesn't accurately show followers, who knew   JoeInky Member Oct 25, 2017 4,075 doops. said: the irony of having your pronouns under your name and saying dumb shit like this. go back to r/reseterainaction you rat Click to expand... Click to shrink... I genuinely believe some people set up their pronouns just to mock the concept and not because they want people to respect their identity, like that guy who got banned in one of the offtopic threads with an LGBT flag avatar spouting a bunch of bigoted shit  Kudo Member Oct 25, 2017 4,300 Wait, following? Am I missing something here?   RomanceDawn Teacher of Superheroines Member Oct 29, 2017 1,240 Los Angeles I know some of the martial artists who worked on this game. Good people who completely align themselves with much of this board. The world isn't so black and white. In all that you love you will find something you hate, and in all that you hate you will find something you love.  Fat4all Woke up, got a money tag, swears a lot Member Oct 25, 2017 107,533 here love all the folks coming out of the woodwork to defend following anti-trans bigots very organized  Eevea Member Sep 23, 2022 485 TheCat said: Aren't you literally playing the new Doom Game? You know who sees your money, right? Click to expand... Click to shrink... As far as I know, Hugo Martin is not a bigot.  MoonlitSeer Fallen Guardian Member Jun 9, 2023 1,977 DanDanderson said: As a general note, this is not only the creative director but also a co-founder of the studio. Same. The original screenshot is accurate. You don't see all followers on Twitter, and the ones you do see change - it's not a static list. He does follow all the people in the original screenshot including RadioGenoa and Grummz. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Yea, and you can also follow the account to verify who they follow by visiting, since it will show on those pages. For example: You can see here he follows Grummz (taken just now).  Ultrapop Member Aug 19, 2022 206 R’lyeh Fat4all said: love all the folks coming out of the woodwork to defend following anti-trans bigots very organized Click to expand... Click to shrink... Funny how bigots always get the benefit of the doubt, huh?  Kyuuji The Favonius Fox Member Nov 8, 2017 38,393 Rowling's twitter feed is just wall to wall the vilest transphobia, and has been for years. If you didn't want to see it, you wouldn't be following her.   JoeInky Member Oct 25, 2017 4,075 The three genres of dismissive posts in these types of threads: "And yet you participate in society" "What about the poor workers at the studio who aren't bigots? It's not fair on them to skip the game just because of a little thing like this!" "The game looks great! Anyone else looking forward to it too?"  sillyGecko Member Mar 14, 2025 1,551 DanDanderson said: Same. The original screenshot is accurate. You don't see all followers on Twitter, and the ones you do see change - it's not a static list. He does follow all the people in the original screenshot including RadioGenoa and Grummz. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Are you sure? I refreshed it multiple times and it was always the same, didn't see grummz and what not. Either way the current list are people I saw and aren't great of course Edit: Saw the picture up above, very strange how the following list doesn't show everyone  Last edited: 5 minutes ago Fat4all Woke up, got a money tag, swears a lot Member Oct 25, 2017 107,533 here Kyuuji said: Rowling's twitter feed is just wall to wall the vilest transphobia, and has been for years. If you didn't want to see it, you wouldn't be following her. Click to expand... Click to shrink... 💯   Fat4all Woke up, got a money tag, swears a lot Member Oct 25, 2017 107,533 here sillyGecko said: Are you sure? I refreshed it multiple times and it was always the same, didn't see grummz and what not. Either way the current list are people I saw and aren't great of course Click to expand... Click to shrink... scroll up   EvilBoris Prophet of Truth - HDTVtest Verified Oct 29, 2017 18,082 Is it possible to follow these people just so you can see what dumb shit they are saying and be involved in refuting their awful views? Lots of people follow Elon Mush and Donald Trump and hate them. Personally I wouldn't , I'd rather not see it, but I know other people feel more strongly about that. Or is this person agreeing with them in public?  thirtypercent Member Oct 18, 2018 746 Rosebud said: I draw the line at Thomas Mahler Click to expand... Click to shrink... When not even the worst person on a list already makes you instabarf all over the place ....  Friendly Bear Member Jan 11, 2019 3,955 I Don’t Care Where (Just Far) That's really disappointing. Really disappointing. I'm not surprised anymore when someone is revealed as Chud or Chud adjacent, but it still disappoints me. I don't expect everyone to share my opinions, but I think it's reasonable to be critical of someone who is a fan of omega bigots. EvilBoris said: Is it possible to follow these people just so you can see what dumb shit they are saying and be involved in refuting their awful views? Lots of people follow Elon Mush and Donald Trump and hate them. Personally I wouldn't , I'd rather not see it, but I know other people feel more strongly about that. Or is this person agreeing with them in public? Click to expand... Click to shrink... I mean, it's possible. But that list seems pretty deliberate.  sillyGecko Member Mar 14, 2025 1,551 EvilBoris said: Is it possible to follow these people just so you can see what dumb shit they are saying and be involved in refuting their awful views? Lots of people follow Elon Mush and Donald Trump and hate them. Personally I wouldn't , I'd rather not see it, but I know other people feel more strongly about that. Or is this person agreeing with them in public? Click to expand... Click to shrink... Also possible, it's why a lot of people used to have "likes arent an endorsement" in their bio when they would like something to bookmark it for later. Hard to say   Kudo Member Oct 25, 2017 4,300 I guess it is suspicious, following Trump etc. I'd understand for "news" but Grummz and Rowling tweets are wild.   Fat4all Woke up, got a money tag, swears a lot Member Oct 25, 2017 107,533 here Ultrapop said: Funny how bigots always get the benefit of the doubt, huh? Click to expand... Click to shrink... gotta bend over backwards so far their heads touch the ground   BabyDontHurtMe Member Dec 9, 2018 30,854 New Jersey There are plenty of games that aren't made by dipshits so it's good to know which games that are. It's not that complicated why these threads exist, especially in this day and age. If you don't care then more power to you, but that's not the point of these threads lol   Gotchaforce Member Oct 31, 2017 6,634 I really want to play Sifu (I love martial arts games) but I'm also happy to not support shitheads.   CandySTX Member Mar 17, 2018 1,988 Scotland Can't un-buy Sifu years ago, but can certainly avoid them in the future. Thanks for the heads up.  niccoolnic Member Nov 20, 2020 1,240 Salt Lake City, UT We're still doing "is a follow an endorsement" deflections in 2025 huh? Yeah fuck this guy.  Adulfzen Member Oct 29, 2017 3,955 Eevea said: As far as I know, Hugo Martin is not a bigot. Click to expand... Click to shrink... ID Tech is owned by Microsoft and Microsoft (which includes Xbox) is officially part of the BDS list https://bdsmovement.net/microsoft Microsoft is perhaps the most complicit tech company in Israel's illegal apartheid regime and ongoing genocide against 2.3 million Palestinians in Gaza. Microsoft's complicity in Israel's apartheid and genocide is well documented, exposing its strong ties to the Israeli military, its collaboration with Israeli government ministries, and its involvement in the Israeli prison system, which is notorious for systematic torture and abuse of Palestinians. Microsoft knowingly provides Israel with technology, including artificial intelligence (AI), that is deployed to facilitate grave human rights violations, war crimes, crimes against humanity (including apartheid), as well as genocide. In light of the International Court of Justice's legally-binding rulings to prevent Israel's plausible genocide in Gaza, as well as its July 19 Advisory Opinion affirming Israel's illegal occupation and apartheid system, Microsoft has failed its corporate obligation to prevent genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. Microsoft, as well as its boards of directors and executives, may face criminal liability for this complicity. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Hugo Martin being a bigot would be irrelevant in this case if you care about the genocide.  OP OP doops. Member Jun 3, 2020 5,141 EvilBoris said: Is it possible to follow these people just so you can see what dumb shit they are saying and be involved in refuting their awful views? Lots of people follow Elon Mush and Donald Trump and hate them. Personally I wouldn't , I'd rather not see it, but I know other people feel more strongly about that. Or is this person agreeing with them in public? Click to expand... Click to shrink... Given that several of these accounts post offensive shit to stir up hate and bigotry for the sake of it (Radio Genoa, JK Rowling), you can't really give Jordan the benefit of the doubt here. I mean following JK Rowling alone negates this take either way. Who the FUCK wants to hear what she has to say with all the shit she's said and done?? You only do that if you already agree with her.  ALXJ REFANTAZIO SWEEP Uncle Works at Nintendo Member Feb 16, 2021 1,212 yikes... i was looking forward to consider this because some friends will play, now i'll honestly try to change their minds. there's no reason to follow that amount of trash...   EvilBoris Prophet of Truth - HDTVtest Verified Oct 29, 2017 18,082 doops. said: Given that several of these accounts post offensive shit to stir up hate and bigotry for the sake of it (Radio Genoa, JK Rowling), you can't really give Jordan the benefit of the doubt here. I mean following JK Rowling alone negates this take either way. Who the FUCK wants to hear what she has to say with all the shit she's said and done?? Click to expand... Click to shrink... I can't say I understand it , it's all horrid and hateful. I deleted my twitter account because it's all so upsetting.  HellofaMouse Member Oct 27, 2017 8,412 i mean its too late for sifu, that game sold 99% of the copies its gonna sell. but noted for the soccer game, not that i was planning to buy it.. 

The leaders of OpenAI and Google have been living rent-free in each other’s heads since ChatGPT caught the world by storm. Heading into this week’s I/O, Googlers were on edge about whether Sam Altman would try to upstage their show like last year, when OpenAI held an event the day before to showcase ChatGPT’s advanced voice mode. This time, OpenAI dropped its bombshell the day after.OpenAI buying the “io” hardware division of Jony Ive’s design studio, LoveFrom, is a delightfully petty bit of SEO sabotage, though I’m told the name stands for “input output” and was decided a while ago. Even still, the news of Ive and Altman teaming up quickly shifted the conversation away from what was a strong showing from Google at this year’s I/O. The dueling announcements say a lot about what are arguably the world’s two foremost AI companies: Google’s models may be technically superior and more widely deployed, but OpenAI is kicking everyone’s ass at capturing mindshare and buzz. Speaking of buzz, it’s worth looking past the headlines to what OpenAI actually announced this week: it’s paying $6.5 billion in equity to hire roughly 55 people from LoveFrom, including ex-Apple design leaders Evans Hankey, Tang Tan, and Scott Cannon. They’ll report to Peter Welinder, a veteran OpenAI product leader who reports directly to Altman. The rest of LoveFrom’s designers, including legends like Mike Matas, are staying put with Ive, who is currently designing the first-ever electric Ferrari and advising the man who introduced him to Altman, Airbnb CEO Brian Chesky. OpenAI’s press release says Ive and LoveFrom “will assume deep design and creative responsibilities across OpenAI.”When LoveFrom’s existing client work is wrapped up, Ive and his design team plan to focus solely on OpenAI while staying independent. OpenAI, meanwhile, already has open “future of computing” roles for others to join the io team it brought over. One job listing for a senior research engineer says the ideal candidate has already “spent time in the weeds teaching models to speak and perceive.” (Total compensation: $460K to $555K plus equity.)The rough timeline that led up to this moment goes as follows: Altman and Ive met two years ago and decided to officially work on hardware together this time last year. The io division was set up at LoveFrom to work with a small group of OpenAI employees. OpenAI and Laurene Powell Jobs invested in the effort toward the end of 2024, when there were quiet talks of raising hundreds of millions of dollars to make it a fully standalone company. (The OpenAI startup fund, which is bizarrely not owned by OpenAI, also invested around this time.) Importantly, Ive ended his consulting relationship with Apple in 2022, the year before he met Altman. That deal was highly lucrative for Ive, but kept him from working on products that could compete with Apple’s. Now, Ive and Altman are teaming up to announce what I expect to be a voice-first AI device later next year. Early prototypes of the device exist (Altman mentioned taking one home in his promo video with Ive). Altman told OpenAI employees this week that it will be able to sit on a desk or be carried around. Supply chain rumors suggest it will be roughly the size of an iPod Shuffle and also be worn like a necklace. Like just about every other big hardware company, Ive and Altman have also been working on AI earbuds. Altman is set on bundling hardware as an upsell for ChatGPT subscriptions and envisions a suite of AI-first products that help lessen the company’s reliance on Apple and Google for distribution. With his Apple relationship in the rear-view mirror, Ive now seems set on unseating the company he helped build. Google, meanwhile, was firing on all cylinders this week. AI Mode in Google Search is being rolled out widely. Its product strategy is still disjointed compared to OpenAI’s, but it’s starting to leverage the immense amount of personal data it has on people to differentiate what Gemini can do. If Gemini can hook into Gmail, Workspace, YouTube, etc., in a way that people want to use, it will likely keep many people from shifting to ChatGPT — just like Meta did to Snapchat with Stories in Instagram. After meeting with Google employees up and down the org chart, I came away from I/O with the feeling that the company doesn’t see a catastrophe on the horizon like a lot of outsiders. There’s a recognition that the ability to buy out distribution for search on Apple devices is probably coming to a close, but Gemini is approaching 500 million monthly users. ChatGPT is undoubtedly eating into search (it’s impossible to get Google execs to comment on the actual health of query volume), but Google has shown a willingness to modernize search faster than I expected. The situation differs from Apple, which isn’t competitive in the model race and is suffering from the kind of political infighting that Google mostly worked through over the last couple of years.There’s also no question that Google is well-positioned to continue leading on the frontier of model development. The latest Gemini models are very good, and Google is clearly positioning its AI for a post-phone world with Project Astra. The company also has the compute to roll out tools like the impressive new Veo video model, while OpenAI’s Sora remains heavily gated due to GPU constraints. It’s still quite possible that ChatGPT’s growth continues unabated while Gemini struggles to become a household name. That would be a generational shift in how people use technology that would hurt Google’s business over the long term. For now, though, it looks like Google might be okay. ElsewhereAnthropic couldn’t sit this week out either. The company held an event on Thursday in San Francisco to debut its Claude 4 models, which it claims are the world’s best for coding. With OpenAI, Google, and Meta all battling to win the interface layer of AI, Anthropic is positioning itself as the model arms dealer of choice. It was telling that Windsurf, which is in talks to sell to OpenAI, was seemingly intentionally left out of getting day-one access to the new models. “If models are countries, this is the equivalent of a trade ban,” Nathan Benaich wrote on X. (Also, what does it say about the state of the industry when the supposed safety-first AI lab is releasing models that it knows want to blackmail people?) Microsoft Build was overshadowed by protests. There were several interesting announcements at Build this week, including Elon Musk’s Grok model coming to Azure and Microsoft’s bet on how to evolve the plumbing of the web for AI agents. All of that was overshadowed by protestors who kept disrupting the company’s keynotes to protest the business it does with Israel. The situation has gotten so tense that Microsoft tried unsuccessfully to block the ability for employees to send internal emails with the words “Palestine,” “Gaza,” and “Genocide.” I tried Google’s smart glasses prototype. I spent about five minutes wearing the reference design prototype of Google’s new smart glasses. They had a small, low-res waveguide in the center of each lens that showed voice interactions with Gemini, a basic version of Google Maps directions, and photos I took. They were… fine? Google knows this tech is super early and that full AR glasses are still years away. In the meantime, it’s smart of them to partner with Warby Parker, Gentle Monster, and Kering to put Android XR in glasses that I expect to start coming out next year. With Apple now planning a similar pair of AI-powered glasses in 2026, Meta’s window of being the only major player in the space is closing.Personnel logYouTube hired Justin Connolly from Disney as its head of media and sports, a move that Disney is suing over. Tinder CEO Faye Iosotaluno is stepping down. Her role will now be overseen by parent company Match Group CEO Spencer Rascoff. Vladimir Fedorov, a longtime Meta engineering exec, joined Github as CTO.Will Robinson, Coinbase’s former VP of engineering, has joined Plaid as CTO.Stephen Deadman, Meta’s VP of data protection in Europe, is leaving due to “structural changes.”Link listMore to click on:If you haven’t already, don’t forget to subscribe to The Verge, which includes unlimited access to Command Line and all of our reporting.As always, I welcome your feedback, especially if you have thoughts on this issue, an opinion about stackable simulations, or a story idea to share. You can respond here or ping me securely on Signal.Thanks for subscribing.See More: