Blogroll

Connections is the latest New York Times word game that's captured the public's attention. The game is all about finding the "common threads between words." And just like Wordle, Connections resets after midnight and each new set of words gets trickier and trickier—so we've served up some hints and tips to get you over the hurdle.

If you just want to be told today's puzzle, you can jump to the end of this article for April 5's Connections solution. But if you'd rather solve it yourself, keep reading for some clues, tips, and strategies to assist you.

What is Connections?

The NYT's latest daily word game has become a social media hit. The Times credits associate puzzle editor Wyna Liu with helping to create the new word game and bringing it to the publications' Games section. Connections can be played on both web browsers and mobile devices and require players to group four words that share something in common.

Tweet may have been deleted

Each puzzle features 16 words and each grouping of words is split into four categories. These sets could comprise of anything from book titles, software, country names, etc. Even though multiple words will seem like they fit together, there's only one correct answer. If a player gets all four words in a set correct, those words are removed from the board. Guess wrong and it counts as a mistake—players get up to four mistakes until the game ends.

Tweet may have been deleted

Players can also rearrange and shuffle the board to make spotting connections easier. Additionally, each group is color-coded with yellow being the easiest, followed by green, blue, and purple. Like Wordle, you can share the results with your friends on social media.

Here's a hint for today's Connections categories

Want a hit about the categories without being told the categories? Then give these a try:

• Yellow: Home goods

• Green: Bottling things up

• Blue: Taste of wine

• Purple: Metal words

Featured Video For You Connections: How to play and how to win Here are today's Connections categories

Need a little extra help? Today's connections fall into the following categories:

• Yellow: Pieces of Furniture

• Green: Carry, As A Feeling

• Blue: Wine Tasting Descriptors

• Purple: Starting with Metals

Looking for Wordle today? Here's the answer to today's Wordle.

Ready for the answers? This is your last chance to turn back and solve today's puzzle before we reveal the solutions.

Drumroll, please!

The solution to Connections #299 is...

What is the answer to Connections today

• Pieces of Furniture: BED, CHAIR, COUCH, TABLE

• Carry, As A Feeling: BEAR, HARBOR, HOLD, MAINTAIN

• Wine Tasting Descriptors: BALANCED, DRY, FULL, SWEET

• Starting with Metals: GOLDILOCKS, IRONIC, LEADERSHIP, TINDER

Don't feel down if you didn't manage to guess it this time. There will be new Connections for you to stretch your brain with tomorrow, and we'll be back again to guide you with more helpful hints.

Is this not the Connections game you were looking for? Here are the hints and answers to yesterday's Connections.

OpenAI still hasn't divulged when Sora will be available — or details about its training data — but that hasn't stopped the company from cultivating intrigue by releasing a music video created by the AI video generator.

On Wednesday, OpenAI posted the music video for a song called "Worldweight" by indie musician August Kamp. The video, made with Sora, is a compilation of dreamlike scenes like a giant crystal in a garden, psychedelic glowing plants, and grainy archival-esque footage of underwater coral reefs. The visuals are all very befitting of a musical vibe reminiscent of electronic artists Boards of Canada and Aphex Twin.

SEE ALSO: 8 wild Sora AI videos generated by the new OpenAI tool you need to see

When OpenAI announced Sora in February, it amplified the murky ethical and legal generative AI conversation. Existing questions about training data, copyright infringement, and job replacement regarding ChatGPT and DALL-E are now asked of Sora.

We have some answers, but nothing specific yet. In an interview with The Wall Street Journal, OpenAI CTO Mira Murati said Sora was trained on "publicly available data and licensed data," but didn't know if that included videos from YouTube, Instagram, and Facebook.

When asked about the potential upheaval of filmmaking and creative industries, Murati reiterated OpenAI's line of getting early feedback from a select group of testers. "We want people in the film industry and creators everywhere to be a part of informing how we develop it further," she said to the Journal. The reportedly slow, deliberate rollout hasn't stopped OpenAI from courting Hollywood film studios and agents.

For Kamp, using Sora to make her video was "how the song has always 'looked'" in her mind. "That's what I think is special about this tool. I get to share what was once locked behind my shut eyes - all alone," she said in an Instagram post.

That's all to say, the polarizing new technology is both terrifying and exciting, depending on who you talk to.

Apple wants to get smart home robots into our households, according to a new report from Bloomberg. Arguably, the Cupertino-based tech giant already had a successful foray into a new category (i.e., mixed-reality headsets), so why not take another risk?

The iPhone maker is reportedly working on a personal bot that can follow owners around their home, Bloomberg said, similar to Samsung's Ballie or Amazon's Astro.

Everything we know so far about the Apple smart home robot

Citing "people who asked not to be identified," Bloomberg wants us to believe that, behind the scenes, Apple engineers are currently exploring personal robots for the home. The project is still in the beginning stages, though, so it's unclear whether it'll be released in the future.

All we know so far is that it supposedly features a built-in display that uses robotics to move automatically. However, this screen has been a source of contention for the company.

At first, Apple reportedly wanted the display to mimic the head movements of callers on FaceTime (e.g., nodding). Engineers also allegedly conceived an idea in which the smart display would have the ability to frame a single person within a crowd during a call.

However, you know how expensive Apple products can be, so the Cupertino-based tech giant was concerned whether consumers would shell out their hard-earned money for such ho-hum features.

Another issue is that engineers have been reportedly struggling with balancing the display's weight on the personal robot's motor. According to Bloomberg, Apple executives are questioning whether the personal smart home robot is a worthy investment at all.

If Apple does, indeed, move forward with the project, it faces huge competition with Roomba, the most popular home robot.

Personal robotics isn't the only category Apple has been diving into behind the scenes. Rumor has it that Apple is focusing its efforts on artificial intelligence more than ever, with Siri potentially benefitting from some of the advancements.

Only time will tell whether Apple's reported personal robotics project will take off like the Apple Vision Pro — or be scrapped like the Apple Car.

Perhaps your FYP is different than mine, but it appears Chappell Roan is everywhere right now. TikTok seems to be falling in love with Roan, and with good reason — she rules.

For those on a different side of TikTok or social media in general, Roan is a musician. She puts out smart, fun pop songs she called "slumber party pop" in a recent NYLON feature. Her 2023 debut album, The Rise and Fall of a Midwest Princess, is fantastic — Pitchfork called it "a bold and uproarious introduction" — and has sparked a sharp rise in popularity for the campy singer-songwriter. Things like magazine features and an NPR Tiny Desk Concert have helped her gain traction online. And, most notably, she opened for Olivia Rodrigo on her Guts World Tour.

TikTok has a massive effect on the music industry, so it tracks that Roan would be all over our feeds because she's an artist of, and for, the moment. Google Trends is an imperfect measure of interest, but it still shows she's on the rise.

Credit: Screenshot: Google Trends

Everyone seems to be posting about Roan. Concert videos. Fancams. Her kissing Rodrigo. Dancing along to her song "Hot To Go." Running on treadmills. Even the Empire State Building's account is doing it (lol).

Tweet may have been deleted

Roan's rise on TikTok adds up. It's a platform dominated — at least in what's considered "cool" — by young people. And Roan, 26, is a decidedly Gen Z artist. She gets how to be online. She's commits to an image and a bit, including her look, which often includes bold makeup, lipstick-stained teeth, wigs, and striking colors. Her lyrics are also confessional, explicit, and bubbly fun, like a Tumblr dashboard come to life. She clearly grew up on the internet.

In some ways it reminds me of Boygenius, who also saw their popularity skyrocket online last year.

SEE ALSO: How Boygenius went from indie supergroup to internet darlings

If you didn't quite know Roan yet, you're about to — so long as you spend a decent amount of time on your phone. This week she teased a new song "Good Luck Babe," and it's bound to be all over everyone's FYP.

According to Oscar Wilde, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. If that's true, then TikTok must be the most flattered app out there. Everyone wants to be it or beat it or both — and Facebook just made another move to do just that.

On Wednesday, Facebook announced the newest TikTok-ification of its site by rolling out a new full-screen video player on its app, much like the vertical video format TikTok made so famous. All of the Reels you see on Facebook, along with longer videos and Live content, will all be shown to you via a full-screen, vertically-oriented video. The social media giant also purports to have "improved recommendations for videos of all lengths we think you’re most likely to enjoy based on your interests."

SEE ALSO: Instagram is copying TikTok, and the strategy is working

"For example, we may recommend a Reel giving you inspiration for a quick, daily makeup routine or a longer tutorial video on DIY house improvements from experienced homeowners," Facebook wrote in a blog post about the change. The new player also includes the scrubber at the bottom so you can rewind or fast forward a video, pause it, and change the playback speed. TikTok also already has this.

This change will begin rolling out over the next few weeks. If a video is made specifically to be viewed horizontally, users will have the option to watch it in landscape view and flip your phone to view it in full-screen mode, but it will still automatically appear vertically. 

Because of the format change, creators will probably want to start posting Reels if they want their videos to get seen on Facebook. It'll certainly be interesting to see how this affects video formats that are typically horizontal by design, like movie trailers and music videos, on the app.  

Time to add more fuel to the "new iPads" fire.

As spotted by 91Mobiles, the Bureau of Indian Standards (or BIS) let slip that two new iPads are coming soon by putting their model numbers on the BIS website. Basically, that means the new iPads have passed India's regulatory standards and can legally be sold there.

SEE ALSO: 3 iPads are reportedly not getting iPadOS 18 — and we're confused

That's not surprising, as there have been rumors about new iPads launching in the first half of 2024 for months. What is sort of unexpected, however, is that MacRumors spotted some text strings in iPadOS 17.5 beta 1 suggesting that the iPhone's "battery health" menu is coming to iPads.

On iPhone, this is something you can access via the Settings app and it tells you how healthy your device's battery is, expressed as a percentage of its total original capacity. As this percentage decreases, the more urgent it becomes to either replace the battery or acquire a new device.

Whether that feature comes to older iPads or not, it's reasonable to expect you'll be able to access it on the rumored new models. As far as anyone knows, there will be two iPad Pro models with new OLED displays, and two iPad Air models, with one of them coming in at 12.9-inches.

SEE ALSO: OLED iPad Pro is reportedly in production. Here’s when it’s expected to launch.

So, if you were thinking about getting a tablet soon, maybe wait a few weeks.

Dating sites and apps are a great way to meet people, but with so many out there these days, finding the site with the right features for you is pretty important if you're not keen on wasting your time. There's Tinder's famous easy swiping, Match's longer profiles for the more serious daters, Hinge's prompts that help the conversation going — the list goes on.

So what about a dating site that can take you back in time?

To be clear, we're not talking about actual time travel, so much as the immediate burst of Facebook-circa-2010 energy that Zoosk offers upon loading up its website or app. That's courtesy of an interface and features that make it clear this dating site was one of the first Facebook apps back in December 2007.

While the other longstanding online dating players like Match, eharmony, and OkCupid have managed to (mostly) update to stay current and somewhat fresh, Zoosk's initial draw of making international dating simple and a matching users with a unique algorithm feels more and more gimmicky and unrealistic as the years go by.

SEE ALSO: The best dating sites for finding serious, long-term relationships Who is on Zoosk?

Allegedly, there are 40 million users on Zoosk across 80 different countries. If you're not trying to see the same 10 profiles within a 20 mile radius, these are pretty appealing numbers.

The age range of users seems to vary widely, too — from my two weeks on the app, I saw profiles from 21-year-olds to 51-year-olds. Users as young as 18 can sign up, and my age filter maxed out at 51, though users up to age 98 can also make accounts — I'm unsure why I wasn't able to adjust my age filters any higher. With that said, I'm not sure this app is great for older crowds. I'm in my mid-20s and I found Zoosk's interface to be kind of confusing. There are definitely better dating apps for seniors out there.

Sorry to all the 99-year-olds out there. Credit: Screenshot: Zoosk It's not the most queer-friendly dating app out there

When it comes to diversity of options for LGBTQ+ users, Zoosk could be doing a whole lot better. For starters, if you're interested in more than one gender, you'll have to take it up with Zoosk customer service, as there's no built-in option to select that preference on your profile. They'll then have to set you up with an additional profile. If you don't want to go through that process, you'll only get these four choices upon sign up:

Ah yes, the expansive range of human sexuality, reduced to four options. Credit: Screenshot: Zoosk

I'd just like to take a moment to speak directly to Zoosk — baby, it's 2024. I should not have to email your customer service team to a) change my preferences to switch my profile from seeing men to seeing women or b) ask you to pretty please allow me to see both — gasp — men and women at the same time. That should just be an integrated feature on your site, and there's no reason to have a needless hoop for any bi- or pan-sexual users to jump through. Speaking of, might be cool to recognize nonbinary people exist, too!

And it's got a bit of a bot problem

Forty million users is an impressive user base. But that impressive user base needs to be taken with a grain of salt: Dead or fake profiles seem to make up a decent portion of that 40 million. Now, Zoosk does have a huge collection of success stories on its social media and blog (though the latter hasn't been updated since 2020). If the person of your dreams doesn't message you back, you can tell yourself it's probably because they haven't logged on in two years.

SEE ALSO: AdultFriendFinder is a borderline-porn hookup site that's stuck in the past

If you're looking for more accurate numbers on how many users are actually using Zoosk, there aren't many out there. However, on The Date Mix, a blog owned by Zoosk, an article updated in 2021 mentioned that Zoosk has 3 million active users. During my two weeks, I saw a couple of repeat profiles pop up, leading me to believe the lower number is likely the more truthful one.

If you are wary of accidentally flirting with a bot, Zoosk does offer several profile verifications, including photo, Facebook, Twitter, and phone number verification. It's not uncommon to come across profiles that have none of these, but I would say about half of the users I came across were at least photo verified. Still, the chances that you'll get messages from clearly fake profiles aren't slim. Before I'd put in any pictures or my name on my profile, I had 34 people who were into me. While I'd like to believe my charm is just that potent, likely, it was bots.

A green check mark lets you know that a user is photo verified and (probably) a real person. Credit: Screenshot: Zoosk Making your account on Zoosk

It makes sense that there are a lot of fake profiles because making an account on Zoosk is easy and takes at most five minutes.

Here's how it works: When you first log on, you can decide if you want to create an account from an email, Google, or Facebook account. Unlike more involved websites like eharmony or EliteSingles, you won't have to slog through a long questionnaire. Instead, you'll be prompted to fill out information that's pretty standard dating app fare: your location, preferences, education, ethnicity, religion, and so on. You'll also be prompted to pick a username, and if you can't think of any, Zoosk provides some creative options.

Please respect the amount of restraint it took not to choose "RoyallyBeautiful" as my username. Credit: Screenshot: Zoosk

You also have the option to fill out a short bio ("My Story"), and some ice breakers about your ideal first date, and who you imagine your perfect match to be. Those prompts were a bit too on the nose for my taste — I don't know exactly what I'm supposed to glean about potential compatibility from someone who imagines our first date to be "enjoying a meal together" or whose perfect match is "happy." Other apps like Bumble, Hinge, and OkCupid have mastered the art of the more specific prompts that actually might reveal something about someone's personality, but I guess Zoosk's are good jumping off points for someone very new to the online dating game.

SEE ALSO: The best dating sites for introverts, wallflowers, and anyone hesitant to try online dating

Finally, you have the option to fill out your interests when signing up, which was maybe the most early-Facebook the app ever felt, mostly due to the fact you chose your interests from the classic Facebook group pages. Again, knowing that you and a potential partner both have an interest in basketball, Rihanna, or FarmVille (the Facebook JUMPED out here), might be nice, but something about this feature doesn't give the sense it's inspiring a ton of robust conversation. If anything, it seems like Zoosk is holding on to the remnants of what used to be a winning formula, and aging itself in the process.

From Rihanna to FarmVille, Zoosk's preset interests have got you covered. Credit: Screenshot: Zoosk Something about this doesn't scream "dating app in 2022." Credit: Screenshot: Zoosk Verifying your profile

At this point, you can also choose to verify your profile and let other users know you're a real person. As mentioned above, you have a few choices about how to do this, with the most extensive being the photo verification. First, you need to have a picture uploaded onto your page.

Then, you have to hold your smartphone at arm’s length and press record when prompted. It’s not as effortless as taking a selfie, but Zoosk wants to know if you’re an actual person holding a phone and not just placing a photo in front of its camera. The site will then ask you to turn your head to the right and then left, as if you’re taking a mugshot. Your photo is then sent to administrators, who will make sure that your "video" lines up with the one on your profile. Although it takes some time, you can now rest easy knowing your matches are real (or at least verified) when you see that green check mark on their photo.

Credit: Screenshot: Zoosk Credit: Screenshot: Zoosk The website is better than the app

For all the issues I've had with Zoosk feeling out of touch, I will say that the website does better than the app. You know when you open an old app you downloaded in like 2013, and the font is huge and doesn't fill out your whole phone screen? The Zoosk app doesn't do that, but it somehow still captures that energy. I don't know if it's the overly simple color-blocked header on pages or the basic font that looks like it was pulled straight from Microsoft Word, but this app feels old.

And despite the simplicity, it's difficult to navigate — I say this as a person who has never found a single other dating app that difficult to get around after a day or two of using it. Between the Connections, Online Now, Carousel, Views, Smart Pick, and (inexplicably) the Live stream pages, I felt overwhelmed and confused every time I wanted to look at people's profiles.

The website, though in some need of an update, looks much cleaner and more of this time. Something about the way buttons are highlighted, the spaces between page titles, and the way user profiles look makes it feel like this website has actually been updated post-2012.

There were moments when I saw clearly the how the site was superior. When clicking on the app message page, I would be hit with the words, "283 people are into you!" and there is actually no world where that's not overwhelming.

One of these is objectively less stressful than the other. Credit: Screenshot: Zoosk Credit: Screenshot: Zoosk

On the desktop message page, however, I was notified that I had "69 messages and 176 greetings," which was still a lot, but felt much more manageable (though the math didn't add up between the app and the site, which was interesting). Still, if I wanted to, on the site I could decide to only pay attention to the people that had bothered to write something out instead of those who sent just a heart or smiley face. The specificity helped, and made the entire experience feel less spammy.

The Zoosk algorithm

So if it's confusing and outdated, why would anyone use Zoosk? Well, its "Behavioral Matchmaking" algorithm is supposed to be great. Basically, the more people you like and pass on, the more Zoosk learns about what kind of profiles you're looking for. This used to be a novel idea, but these days, it seems that's how most dating app algorithms work.

One place you can teach the app is the Carousel feature. It functions similarly to Tinder with swiping to send a like, pass, or say maybe, but you don't get to see beyond one picture on the person's profile when making your choice. I get this is supposed to be the more "rapid fire" section, but it felt restrictive for no real reason. If I wanted a barebones Tinder experience, I'd go on Tinder to swipe on people who didn't bother to fill out their profile. I also had to sit through short video ads every few swipes, which again, made it feel less like a serious dating app and more like a cheap, old mobile game downloaded on an iPod Touch.

SEE ALSO: Is Tinder Platinum worth it? I tried it for 3 months to find out.

You can also inform the app through your daily "SmartPick" choices, which is where the algorithm is really supposed to kick in to high gear, combining profile preferences and how you interact with other user accounts to find your perfect matches. Limiting to 10 daily picks made this one of the most simple and effective ways to look for other users on the app. If I were a regular Zoosk user, I imagine I'd just bother checking this page to avoid sinking hours of my time.

With that said, I didn't see any verification checks on the profiles presented to me through the SmartPicks. I don't think it's because they were all on unverified, but because the profiles themselves were laid out differently in this section, and the verification checks didn't make it over, which is a huge oversight when a website has its share of fake profiles.

Notifications on Zoosk

As I mentioned, there are a million (seven) main pages to interact with on Zoosk, which means it's beyond easy to rack up notifications. I am the type of person who can't stand when I'm unable to make the little red bubble go away from any app I use, whether it be iMessage or my email. As a result, Zoosk became my personal hell.

What my notifications looked like on a typical day. Credit: Screenshot: Zoosk

Let's start with the "Views" page. What I have learned is I have no interest in knowing who has viewed my profile, especially if they've not interacted with it, because it leads to so many unnecessary notifications. Some apps have the (usually paid) feature of showing you who has liked you, which feels like a much better version of seeing your views. Ultimately, I am not a YouTube video, I don't care about my view count.

Next, the push notifications. I got a notification that someone was "curious" about me, and I still don't know what the hell that means. I got notifications about profile views, when I had a connection, when my SmartPicks were ready, when people who I'd never exchanged a single message with wanted to meet me, and so on. There are two kinds of push notifications I want with a dating app: when someone matches with me, and when someone sends me a message. Simply put, it was way too much and made the entire process feel less engaging.

The messaging experience

You don't have to match with people on Zoosk to send and receive messages. Zoosk even offers some pre-written messages to help you get the ball rolling. However, you do have to have a subscription, and thus pay money, to message most users. You can respond to any premium messages you receive for free, but for most messages you'll receive, you have to pay to see what was said and respond.

For most conversations, it's not free to message back. Credit: Screenshot: Zoosk

Obviously, that presents a problem for ever clearing out your notifications if you want to continue using this app for free.

One part of messaging that didn't cost money (at least for the first and only time I tried it) was Super Send, which allows you to send a mass message to a bunch of users to get some conversations going. If you don't think about too hard, this sounds like it could be nice for making a connection, and if you think about it a little more, it sounds awfully similar to a spam message.

"I'd love to talk to you. For reals. No fakesies." Sounds human to me. Credit: Screenshot: Zoosk

Yes, it can take a lot of patience and effort to start talking to someone you really hit it off with. But that patience and effort is kind of essential for making an authentic connection. Sending a pre-written "Want to chat sometime?" selected from a bulleted list doesn't go a long way when you're trying to intentionally date and get to know people.

Zoosk price

For most parts of the app, such as liking people that have viewed your profile, matching with your SmartPicks, and messaging users (as mentioned above), or use the integrated "Great Dates" video chatting, you have to be a paying member of Zoosk. So what exactly does that cost you?

• One month membership: $14.99

• Three month membership: $24.99

• Six month membership: $74.99

Compared to other apps, Zoosk's prices aren't outrageous — in fact, they're cheaper in many cases. One month of OkCupid will cost you $14.99 too, one month of Hinge $34.99, and one month of Match can run you close to $50. What's more is Zoosk's prices have gone down in the past couple of years. However, its subscription fees would be way more competitive, if it had the features and user base these other apps and sites have, to back up what it's trying to sell.

OkCupid and Hinge both have fully functional free versions, and Match has a user base that knows it's looking for something serious. Zoosk feels confused in comparison, with its swiping feature and quick sign up that make it seem casual, along with its space for a full profile and marketing about finding love that make it seem serious. Having users pay to experience most of the app also lends an air that this is not the place for hookups or uncommitted dating.

But it's not clear if that is 100 percent the case, and there are way more bot profiles than on the other websites. When there's no straightforward messaging as to what you're even supposed to be paying for, it makes you wonder why you would pay in the first place.

Let's talk about Zoosk coins

It used to be that much of the app was free, and you could use Zoosk coins to pay and access special features. Now, you have to subscribe to use many features, and you can pay extra for coins.

With coins, you can "buy" matches virtual gifts, browse anonymously, and see read receipts (though you do need a subscription on top of using coins to do this last item.)

You can also use coins if you're feeling impatient — the "Boost" feature puts your profile front and center for all users in your area to spike your views (and hopefully your matches), but each boost costs 100 Zoosk Coins.

Here's what that means in real money:

• 180 coins = $19.95

• 480 coins = $39.95

• 1800 coins = $99.95

To Zoosk's credit, coin prices haven't gone up in the past few years, and the same can't be said for other sites and apps prices in the same time frame. However, the very existence of coins to access features on top of a paid subscription does feel like a rip off in and of itself.

Data breach issues

Outside of the app experience, it's important to note that Zoosk has run into some legal trouble. In 2020, they faced a negligence suit after a leak of 30 million users' private data. Spark Networks, the company that owns Zoosk, had sent emails to those affected by the leak, but some users feel it was not within a reasonable time frame. It's been reported that the original notice sent to affected users stated that Zoosk was unaware of the breach until it was publicly reported.

Is Zoosk worth trying out?

Zoosk's pricing structure is on par with other dating sites, but not competitive enough considering all of its flaws, especially when it comes to its subscriptions and coins system. While paying for upgrades makes sense for "freemium" games like Clash Royale, Pocket Frogs, and The Simpsons: Tapped Out, it just doesn’t always make sense for a dating site — especially one that's essentially making users pay to weed through tons of seemingly dubious profiles.

To add insult to injury, this app doesn't have the active user bases of other options out there. To be fair, every dating app has its share of problems with bogus and inactive users — it just seems like they’re more prevalent here.

It also never felt entirely clear who this app was for, which seems to make it a subpar time for everyone. In my experience, the best apps are the ones that know they're for casual dating or serious dating or even something in between, and fully lean in to that identity with features that cater to those experiences.

Zoosk, on the other hand, wants to be the best of all worlds, but ended up feeling like the mediocre option for most. Sure, there seem to be some people who've genuinely found love on the app, but it's still hard to name it a top choice for anyone. All I can really imagine is if you're opposed to the idea of being on a Match Group-owned app, Zoosk is technically there. Just don't expect it to wow you.

Opens in a new window Credit: Zoosk Zoosk Learn More

If your PlayStation gaming collection is feeling a bit stale, you're in luck. PlayStation's Spring Sale has discounted thousands of games at up to 70% off. Here are a few of our favorites to grab today.

Best games at PlayStation's Spring Sale A Mashable top pick from 2023 Alan Wake 2 $47.99 at PlayStation (save $12) Get Deal A PlayStation collection must-have The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt $14.99 at PlayStation (save $35) Get Deal A must-play from Rockstar Games Red Dead Redemption 2 $19.79 at PlayStation (save $40.20) Get Deal

The wonderful world of gaming has expanded beyond many of our reaches. There just aren't enough hours in the day/week/year to keep up on the latest and greatest games that span numerous consoles.

If you feel like you missed the hype on some must-play games, PlayStation's Spring Sale is offering epic discounts on some older games that still deserve our attention. With discounts of up to 70%, now is the perfect time to fill in the gaps of your PlayStation game collection. Here are a few of our top choices to grab during the PlayStation Spring Sale.

A Mashable top pick from 2023 Opens in a new window Credit: PlayStation Our pick: Alan Wake 2 $47.99 at PlayStation
$59.99 Save $12.00 Get Deal Why we like it

Scoring the number one pick on Mashable's list of the best games of 2023, Alan Wake 2 is still a fan favorite. From Finland's Epic Games, Alan Wake 2 has over 18,000 reviews at the PlayStation store with an impressive rating of 4.77 out of 5. If you've yet to dedicate a weekend (or several) to Alan Wake 2, today's sale price will save you $12 on the PS5 standard edition.

A PlayStation collection must-have Opens in a new window Credit: PlayStation Our pick: The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt $14.99 at PlayStation
$49.99 Save $35.00 Get Deal Why we like it

Looking for something to get totally lost in? The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt offers over 100 hours of open-world adventures. This complete edition version also comes with two story expansions that add up to an extra 50 hours of gameplay. In total, 150 hours or more at a sale price of $14.99 seems like a pretty great deal. The offer extends to both the PS4 and PS5 versions. But you'll want to hurry because this offer expires on April 10 at 11:59 p.m. PT.

A must-play from Rockstar Games Opens in a new window Credit: PlayStation Our pick: Red Dead Redemption 2 $19.79 at PlayStation
$59.99 Save $40.20 Get Deal Why we like it

In case you missed one of the more popular games from Rockstar Games, now's your chance to grab Red Dead Redemption 2. The PlayStation Spring Sale has the PS4 standard edition on sale for just $19.97, marked down from the normal price of $59.99, a 67% discount. Winning countless awards, Adam Rosenberg's Mashable review of Red Dead Redemption 2 mentions the game has a minimum of 50 hours of gameplay. The discounted price plus lengthy storyline means this is a great option if you're looking for maximum time spent engrossed in a game without overspending.

More games on sale at the PlayStation Spring Sale:

• Grand Theft Auto V — $19.99 $39.99 (save $20)

• Star Ward Jedi: Survivor — $31.49 $69.99 (save $38.50)

• Hogwarts Legacy (PS5 version) — $34.99 $69.99 (save $35)

• Gran Turismo 7 — $39.89 $69.99 (save $30.10)

• Call of Duty: Modern Warfare III — $45.49 $69.99 (save $24.50)

Musica is not your typical musical film. Rudy Mancuso and Camily Mendes reveals how his film 'Musica' breaks with convention and why he considers it an "anti-musical musical." Musica premieres on Prime Video April 4th.

The First Omen has the grand misfortune of coming out hot on the heels of Immaculate, a nun-centered horror movie that bears more than a glancing resemblance to this prequel to 1976's The Omen.

Both plots revolve around a young and beautiful American novitiate, new to an Italian convent, facing stern Catholic authority and penetrating forces of evil. Stylistically; however, they are quite different. Immaculate relishes in the sexy star power of Sydney Sweeney in its delve into nunsploitation, but shows a modern squeamishness when it comes to onscreen violence. The First Omen is a pastiche in 1970s style and pacing, but pulls no punches when it comes to gore.

If you're after a movie about a tormented nun that really goes for the gusto, The First Omen should be your pick.

What is The First Omen about? Bill Nighy as Lawrence. Credit: Moris Puccio / 20th Century Studios

Set in 1969 Rome, The First Omen begins with Margaret (Servant's Nell Tiger Free), a doe-eyed young woman from Pittsfield, Massachusetts, who grew up as a ward of the Catholic church. Invited by Cardinal Lawrence (Bill Nighy) to join a convent, where the sisters care for orphaned girls and unwed mothers, Margaret is eager to contribute and to take her vows. But shortly after her arrival, this fish out of water begins to suspect something is off in the religious sanctum, and it seems to revolve around a problem child named Carlita Scianna (Nicole Sorace). 

SEE ALSO: 10 terrifying religious horror movies you can stream right now

Where the other children have bright smiles, rosy cheeks, and flowers in their hair, Carlita carries bags under her dark eyes and a perpetually grim expression. She draws troubling images and is uncomfortably close to a creepy nun (a requisite of this subgenre), whose high-pitched giggle is like nails on a chalkboard.

While a fellow novitiate (a beguiling Maria Caballero) cajoles Margaret to focus on the positive and embrace her youth and body before signing herself over to the church for good, the harried heroine is plagued by dark visions of vicious nuns and a horrid clawed hand reaching out for her. Are these hallucinations of an overactive imagination? Or is Margaret getting omens of something terrible to come? 

How does The First Omen tie to The Omen (1976)? Ralph Ineson as Father Brennan in "The First Omen." Credit: Moris Puccio / 20th Century Studios

There are some connective characters in common with the original, including Father Brennan. The priest played by the late Patrick Troughton in the 1976 version is portrayed by Game of Thrones' Ralph Ineson. Here, Brennan is an ally of Margaret's who is researching rumors about a conspiracy to bring about the antiChrist. Other cryptic connections and callbacks will be made, including a grisly death that evokes the chilling catchphrase, "It's all for you!" 

How else this prequel sets up its predecessor can likely be guessed by The First Omen's very existence. The point of this film is not too much the destination but the journey. To the credit of director and co-writer Arkasha Stevenson (Brand New Cherry Flavor), she imbues the film with atmospheric dread that feels true to the original. The score courses with choral singing distorted to turn the human voices into nightmarish squalls. The color scheme is fit for shadows, allowing creeping nuns to emerge as mighty and terrifyingly as Michael Myers in a suburban closet. 

Featured Video For You Sydney Sweeney on finding a church that would let them film 'Immaculate'

At times, the scares are predictable, but in a smartly intentional way. Stevenson knows a horror savvy audiences will be hip to the beats of such tricks, and uses that to her advantage. For instance, as a character fearfully retreats to cross a street — we might rightly predict he'll be hit by a car. This expectation pulls us to the edge of our seats in anxious anticipation. But when we're proven right, Stevenson doesn't let us off the hook with a jump scare and a quick demise — as was often the case in The Omen.

She lingers on the aftermath, the injury, the blood, the physical agony and emotional anguish, not allowing us the relief a jump scare often offers. However, the close-ups of such garish graphic violence can offer diminishing returns. Sometimes the prolonged exposure to such intense imagery is affecting, as if we are stuck in a nightmare from which we can’t look away. But other times Stevenson's generosity in displaying such graphic violence sours to silly, as some practical effects look better in glimpses than long gazes. (See the editing of Jaws for a classic example.) 

Nell Tiger Free gives her all in The First Omen.  Nell Tiger Free as Margaret and María Caballero as Luz. Credit: Moris Puccio / 20th Century Studios

While this perturbing prequel delivers on graphic violence in a way Immaculate willfully avoids, it falls prey to the same pitfall of characterization.

Make no mistake, Free is devoted in her performance. Playing a heroine who is put through the ringer, emotionally, physically, and psychologically, — hell, even ideologically — Free is pushed to express herself not only through bulging eyes, panicked screams, and full-body shivers, but also physical contortions that could veer into goofy in a lesser actor's hands. However, her efforts are undermined by the screenplay, penned by Stevenson, Tim Smith, and Keith Thomas. 

Chockful of twists, turns, and Omen lore (new and old), the film has so many hoops to jump through in its runtime that what is shortchanged is establishing Margaret. Like Immaculate, the nun heroine is introduced upon her arrival to Italy, fresh-faced and eager to serve Jesus. Sure, a tragic backstory is plopped down in dialogue to give her some context. But Margaret is clumsily defined as sweet and innocent, and not much else.

These traits make her a suitably angelic archetype for the horror story that will follow, which delves into how religious authority dehumanizes women, reducing them to Madonna, whore, or vessel. But the lack of depth in the protagonist's personality deadens the impact of her pain. Margaret feels more like a caricature than a person, and so, while the metaphor works, the emotional follow through does not.

Is The First Omen scary?  Nell Tiger Free as Margaret and Nicole Sorace as Carlita. Credit: Moris Puccio / 20th Century Studios

Moderately.

Admittedly, growing up Catholic I am a particularly hard critic on horror movies around Christian ideology. Any given Sunday a priest might say something on the pulpit more horrifying than the things I’ve seen in dozens of these movies. Still, I respect this Stevenson's dedication to striving for the tone and the original. Too often in reboots and prequels and whatever the Scream franchise has devolved into, the aim to achieve the tone of the original feels like winking set dressing intended as fan service. Here, the mood brings us back to 1976 and the unique terror of Richard Donner's classic film, but without feeling hollow in its admiration.

By mimicking the pacing of the original, Stevenson neatly folds in the classic and the contemporary, bringing in a post-torture porn era thirst for blood that leads to some genuinely alarming on screen violence. While overall the film left me a bit underwhelmed, Stevenson's depiction of demons is undeniably nightmare fuel and will assure The First Omen a place of honor in the maternity horror canon for one snatching shot in particular. However, Stevenson's lust for carnage leads to indulgence, and being thin on character development makes the film's emotional terror more frail than fraught. 

In the end,The First Omen offers generous splashes of gore, jump scared, and dread. So if you're seeing something more spooky than scary, or more haunting than horrifying, this religious thriller will scratch that itch with a long, putrid claw.

The First Omen opens in theaters April 5. 

Oura, the company behind the sleek wearable health ring all over wellness circles and the likes of Gwyneth Paltrow, debuted its new Oura Labs beta testing site for members last month. It's an incubator for experimental health features like its recently announced, illness-spotting Symptom Radar.

The radar, which detects biometric levels like temperature, resting heart rate, and respiratory rate, is specifically not advertised as an illness detection tool, but rather a tool to "help you understand your body's signals," the company explained in a March post.

"Symptom Radar assesses your biometric data each morning to detect signs of respiratory symptoms, and will prompt you to activate Rest Mode when there is a low or moderate risk detected, or when there’s a significant elevation in body temperature," explains Oura. According to the company, such data can help in early detection of common respiratory illnesses, like the flu or common cold.

As the Verge reports, Oura and other wearable health companies previously explored illness detection as the demand for COVID-19 early detection grew. Most companies shelved the venture, or pivoted specific illness detection efforts toward general symptom management, like the new radar.

SEE ALSO: Tracking your stress may be more stressful than you imagined

The company's 2022 Gen3 ring debuted with an expansion of its originally limited health features, including menstrual cycle prediction, blood oxygen measuring, and even new stress tracking (although the benefits of such metrics are murky at best). Many of these were still in testing periods, however, and are now joined by the Oura Labs family of upcoming additions.

Wearables are quickly expanding across the health tech market, with brands like Samsung debuting their own versions of small, sleep-tracking health devices. Last month, Google announced a new research endeavor with Fitbit, known as Fitbit Labs, to develop a new AI health model that can analyze health data and offer recommendations to users. Meanwhile, the FDA is keeping a watchful eye on wellness trackers making dubious, data-collecting claims.

How to use Oura Labs and Symptom Radar

Oura Labs is currently available to active Gen3 members on iOS. The first group of members were invited to test Labs in March. The testing environment can be found in the under the drop down menu in the top left corner of the app. New and available features will be added periodically, and users can opt out of testing at any time.

Credit: Oura

The best deals on Amazon as of April 4 include a TherGun Pro massager, plus more of our top picks below:

Amazon deals of the day: OUR TOP PICK TheraGun Pro $299 at Amazon (save $200) Get Deal BEST FITNESS DEAL Sunny Health & Fitness SF-B1805 magnetic indoor cycling bike $503.99 at Amazon (save $95.99 with on-page coupon) Get Deal BEST HOME DEAL Google Nest Cam 2-pack (2nd Gen, indoor/outdoor) $259.99 at Amazon (save $70) Get Deal BEST HEALTH DEAL Waterpik Cordless Advanced water flosser $69.99 at Amazon (save $30) Get Deal

You never know what sort of deals Amazon will dish out on any given day. It doesn't need to be a big promotional event or a shopping holiday to save big bucks, and the deals below are living proof. We've sorted through the noise and handpicked a few of the best Amazon deals you can shop on April 4, with health and fitness products particularly coming in hot.

Here are our top picks for the best Amazon deals of the day. And don't forget to check out our top picks from April 2 and April 3, as many of those discounts are still going strong.

Our top pick Opens in a new window Credit: Theragun Amazon deal of the day: TheraGun Pro (4th gen) $299.00 at Amazon
$499.00 Save $200.00 Get Deal

TheraGun is essentially the Apple of massage guns, with a product line that stands out in a crowded market and meets multiple price ranges. The fourth-gen TheraGun Pro is Mashable's top pick for a massage gun due to its intense percussions (it packs 60 pounds of force into each 16mm punch), five speed options, six attachments, and adjustable angles. It's a bit pricey at $499, but you can save $200 at Amazon as of April 4 and snag it for only $299. It's also sitting at the same discounted price at the TheraGun website, but potentially without free two-day shipping.

Opens in a new window Credit: Sunny Health & Fitness Sunny Health & Fitness SF-B1805 magnetic indoor cycling bike $503.99 at Amazon
$599.98 Save $95.99 with on-page coupon Get Deal

Looking to kick off the spring season with a new workout routine? The Sunny Health and Fitness SF-B1805 magnetic bike is on sale for just over $500 as of April 4 — that's a 16% discount from its usual $600 and just $8 away from its lowest price in six months. For those keeping track, that's also about $940 cheaper than a Peloton bike. The Sunny Health and Fitness bike is more simplistic than a Peloton, sure, but it still offers smooth resistance, adjustable tension, and a fully customizable setup. While there's no screen onboard, there's a device holder that allows you to easily slip a tablet or phone in and follow along to your favorite workout videos. You can even add a cadence sensor (sold separately) to turn it into a smart bike if you want extra features.

Opens in a new window Credit: Google Google Nest Cam 2-pack (2nd Gen, indoor/outdoor) $259.99 at Amazon
$329.99 Save $70.00 Get Deal

One of our top picks for a home security camera, the Google Nest Cam is a slick, waterproof camera that can be placed inside or outside to catch 24/7 live HD video with 6x digital zoom. A two-pack of these babies is on sale for just $259.99 at Amazon as of April 4 — that's just $20 away from its lowest price ever, which it hit during Black Friday season last year. The Google Nest Cam allows you to share your stream with anyone using a public or password-protected link and will show you recordings from the past three hours for free. You can add a Nest Aware plan for an extra fee and enjoy intelligent alerts, continuous video recording, clip sharing, emergency alerts, and more.

Opens in a new window Credit: Waterpik Waterpik Cordless Advanced water flosser $69.99 at Amazon
$99.99 Save $30.00 Get Deal

Improve your oral hygiene with a Waterpik Cordless Advanced water flosser, a handheld, dentist-recommended flosser that's ideal for home and travel. It has a rechargeable battery, a seven-ounce reservoir, three pressure settings, a travel bag, a tip case, and four included tips. It's also waterproof so it can be used in the shower (which prevents messes all over your sink). It's on sale at Amazon for just $69.99 as of April 4 — that's just $10 away from its Black Friday pricing.

None of these deals catching your eye? Check out Amazon's daily deals for even more savings.

Samsung Galaxy users are on Reddit and the Samsung Community forum posting complaints about their devices' unresponsiveness.

The AI-filled One UI 6.1 update, which debuted with the new Galaxy S24 series in January, was released to older to March 28, according to SamMobile.

Unfortunately, for some, the rollout hasn't been smooth, particularly for Samsung Galaxy S23 series users.

SEE ALSO: Galaxy AI: Any Android, iOS phone can try it now. Here’s how. What's going on with the Samsung Galaxy S23 series?

One UI 6.1, as we reported in late February, expanded its Galaxy AI features to older models, including the Galaxy S23 series, S23 FE, Z Fold 5, Z Flip 5 and Tab S9 series. This means that they're getting new AI features Samsung boasted about during Galaxy Unpacked 2024, including Circle to Search and Generative Edit.

However, as TechRadar pointed out, the rollout apparently hasn't been seamless, with Samsung Galaxy S23 series users reporting unresponsive displays after the One UI 6.1 update.

"After installing version 6.1 (14) on my phone the touch screen is no longer responding to a finger touch but works with the S Pen, how do I fix this?" anyirongo posted on Samsung's Community forum

Among 41 replies, many chimed in to say they're experiencing the same issue.

"After hitting the 6.1 update, I'm stuck with the same problem: the touch screen is totally unresponsive. It's downright disheartening. Can't believe a brand would drop an update this messed up," cyberplanete said.

"Has anyone found a fix for this yet? So frustrating!!!!" said halllpppp.

Reddit has its complaints, too: u/RetroXStyles1 said, in part, "Since updating my screen is totally unresponsive to finger touch and only works when I use the S Pen. I've restarted my phone multiple times with no luck in fixing this problem."

SEE ALSO: Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra review Is there a fix after downloading the One UI 6.1 update?

One Redditor claims they were able to resolve the issue by rolling back their device to the previous 6.0 update. That, however, is a bit extreme. Others have said that restarting their device rectifies the problem, particularly after waiting for their apps to be fully optimized after the One UI 6.1 update.

As such, if you're experiencing this problem, wait a few days after the One UI 6.1 update and trigger a restart. If the issue persists, Samsung will have no choice but to address the problem with a patch in the near future.

It's difficult to say whether this is a widespread issue, but the complaints are certainly beginning to pile up online. We reached out to Samsung for comment; we'll update this article if we get a response.

The red-band trailer for Indian action film Kill is here, and it has certainly earned its rating. If you're squeamish about eye injuries, maybe give this one a skip.

Kill follows army commando Amrit (Lakshya), who boards a New Delhi-bound train to save his sweetheart Tulika (Tanya Maniktala) from being forced into an arranged marriage. Unfortunately, his journey soon becomes derailed when a ruthless gang led by Fani (Raghav Juyal) begins terrorising passengers. In response, Amrit embarks on an exceedingly bloody rampage to protect his fellow commuters — and probably work off a bit of his frustration.

Purely judging from the trailer, Kill looks like if Old Boy met Die Hard and Train to Busan — only with exceedingly graphic, gory knife fights instead of zombies for the latter.

Kill arrives in theatres on July 4.

Mashable entertainment editor Kristy Puchko speaks with Ripley star Andrew Scott to discuss what it was like to play Tom Ripley and the challenges of bringing Patricia Highsmith's novels to the screen.

Ripley is now streaming on Netflix.

Zola's new AI wedding planner tool proves generative AI doesn't need to be ethically complicated to be good.

On Thursday, the wedding site released "Split the Decisions," a custom GPT to help couples divvy up wedding planning tasks. Both halves fill out a brief questionnaire about their excitement level, preferences, strengths and weaknesses, and so on.

First, Zola's bot asks the couple some questions to gauge their strengths and preferences. Credit: Zola

Then, Split the Decisions bot creates a personalized task list of responsibilities for each person.

Then it provides a detailed list of tasks for each person to take on based on their responses. Credit: Zola

Zola, which started as an online wedding registry and has grown to offer wedding planning, website building, advice, and more, created Split the Decisions to address two major findings from a recent survey. The first was that almost 70 percent of the 7,000 couples surveyed "didn’t feel prepared for the sheer number of decisions" in wedding planning. The second had to do with the lopsided division of labor. The survey found that the number one societal expectation those surveyed wanted to change was the antiquated assumption that one partner will take on the majority of wedding planning.

"So that really led us to, how can we as a brand and accompany support couples on this journey, and ensure that they are able to start the wedding planning process on equal footing versus with this pressure or expectation that one person is going to do all the work," said spokesperson Allison Cullman.

The tool's tone and voice was trained to have Zola's brand in mind, which is conversational and inclusive, but candid. For example, if one partner was giving apathetic responses to the questionnaire, the bot would almost "act as a mediator and say, 'You might not care about the details, but having the wedding be balanced is really important,'" said Cullman.

And while Split the Decisions is a wedding expert, its knowledge doesn't come from personal data scraped from Zola or elsewhere. (OpenAI's GPT is trained from mass corpora of internet data, but Zola hasn't trained the GPT with additional personal data). Instead, the bot is built from OpenAI's customizable GPTs and trained with planning duties, links, and assignment logic developed by the Zola team. Because it's a custom GPT, Split the Decisions requires a ChatGPT Plus subscription, which is $20 a month.

Plus, all of the articles and resources that Split the Decisions links in its responses are from Zola, so there's no potential for plagiarizing or copyright violations by appropriating or inaccurately attributing content from other sources. That's all to say, Zola seems to have launched a useful generative AI tool without any privacy trade-offs or controversial data practices. And that's an intriguing proposal.

Split the Decisions is available on OpenAI's GPT Store and in the expert advice section of Zola's website.

If you're one for rapid-paced, action-packed thrillers, Patricia Highsmith's classic 1955 novel The Talented Mr Ripley is already not for you. But if you're one for slow-burn, sinister, underhandedly amorous thrillers, pour yourself the driest of martinis and settle into the latest adaptation of it, Ripley.

A meticulously captured suspense tale with a cold, classy, and understated performance from Andrew Scott, Netflix's Ripley distills its long-revered source material into eight elegantly tailored acts. Brimming with afternoon aperitifs, foreboding and omniscient seascapes, and a series-long obsession with the artist Caravaggio, series creator Steven Zaillian lets his interpretation of Highsmith's novel drip slowly into those gloriously cobbled, 1960s Italian streets.

SEE ALSO: 'Ripley' vs. 'The Talented Mr. Ripley': The tiny change that makes a big impact

Highsmith's tale of obsession and manipulation, imitation and identity theft, class divide and repressed sexuality, in which a young man of little means from New York shrewdly and violently manoeuvres his way into the upper echelons of society, finds an opulent new rendering in Zaillian's Ripley. And for obvious reasons, you will probably think of Saltburn every few episodes, despite the downplays.

Ripley savours Highsmith's novel like an ice cold martini Andrew Scott as Tom Ripley. Credit: Philippe Antonello / Netflix

Based on the first of Highsmith's Ripley novels, the series sticks to its source material with sophisticated ferocity, entirely shot in black and white (but for one teeny, tiny moment). For those who haven't encountered definitive unreliable narrator Tom Ripley before, the story follows the eponymous con artist (Scott), who finds himself mistakenly recruited by a shipping magnate to convince his dilettante son Dickie Greenleaf (Johnny Flynn) to come home to New York from the impeccable Amalfi Coast — good luck with that. More interested in gallivanting around Italy with his girlfriend Marge Sherwood (Dakota Fanning), Dickie's probability of coming home is about as high as his probability of becoming the artist he believes he is. But as Tom ingratiates himself into la dolce vita with Dickie and Marge, slowly but surely, his deceptive tendencies become dangerously obsessive.

The series isn't the first time the author's devious protagonist has manipulated his way on screen, from René Clément's 1960 film Purple Noon to Anthony Minghella's 1999 film The Talented Mr Ripley, and Liliana Cavani's John Malkovich-starring Ripley's Game, one of which accounts for a truly wondrous cameo in Ripley I won't entirely spoil here. But with an infatuation over the minutiae of the novel and by allowing his leading man the time to simmer, Zaillian crafts a superb adaptation of his own.

Dakota Fanning, Johnny Flynn, and Andrew Scott as Marge, Dickie, and Tom. Credit: Philippe Antonello / Netflix

Like its source material and anti-hero, Zaillian's series fixates on the smaller details, attempting to replicate those of Highsmith's novel and claim them for its own: Tom's grimy New York apartment, Tom's suitcase packing technique, Tom's bathing suit and his wearing shoes on the beach, the descriptions of Dickie’s villa with its original Picassos (plural) and design elements that are a "pleasant mixture of Italian antique and American bohemian." Zaillian spends as much attention on the story's all-important refrigerator as Highsmith does, what it represents to the characters and how often they drop freshly cracked ice cubes into their many, many drinks.

As in Highsmith's novel, the great drama occurs early in the narrative, leaving the rest of the story to Ripley's quest to keep the ruse up, and Zaillian streamlines much of this, most notably eliminating most supporting characters and some European travel, bolstering its intimate theatre feeling. 

Like a multi-act play, Ripley takes its damn time. While the pace might not be everyone's glass of Amaro, it feels akin to Highsmith's own respect for relishing in detail. From Schindler’s List to The Irishman and The Night Of, Zaillian specialises in the long game. And for Ripley, he treats the major moments of Highsmith's novel like theatrical puzzles, fixating on every element and importantly exploring the practicality of each encounter and scheme, with Tom bringing that Catch Me If You Can energy to each forged signature.  

Andrew Scott exquisitely reinvents Tom Ripley amid an understated cast  Better check those headlines, Tom. Credit: Philippe Antonello / Netflix

If you're not here for the sweeping Italian vistas, and you're not here as a Highsmith fan, you're probably here because of All of Us Strangers star and Fleabag's "Hot Priest" Andrew Scott. Taking on one of fiction's most subtly calculating and chameleonic protagonists, Scott exquisitely reinvents Tom Ripley with his signature versatility, burying a tempest beneath Italian tailoring.

Highsmith's Ripley has sharper edges than Matt Damon's preppier, dare I say it more sympathetic rendition, in Minghella's film, whereas Scott brings those hard, sociopathic lines right back. Highsmith describes Tom as deeply “bored” with a penchant for being “maniacally polite”, two traits which Scott elevates into social weapons. Tom’s amused incredulity over the success of his actions is heavily detailed in the novels, constantly encapsulated in minute smirks from Scott. Time and time again, he can't believe he got away with it.

Featured Video For You Andrew Scott on crafting the iconic 'Ripley' in Netflix's new mystery series

Highsmith's Ripley is openly disdainful, often exclaiming in disgust amid his inner monologues. It's a tough job, conveying Ripley's dramatic, venomous thoughts with mere glares and considerations, something the author calls “a crazy emotion of hate, of affection, of impatience and frustration” within him. Scott is tasked with the tricky job of a character who regularly talks to himself, practicing or imagining lines for future encounters — his one-man run of Chekhov's Uncle Vanya in the West End couldn't have hurt for Ripley prep. Scott's pure skill is on full show, slowly revealing cracks in Tom’s crafted, regimented facade as the walls start closing in. His Ripley is a perfect storm of concealed derision and approval-seeking, his softly spoken tones shapeshifting from friendship to threat in a heartbeat. Tom slowly, gleefully tries on Dickie's life like a suit, actively mocking him as he does so, and tolerating his friends only so far.

Many viewers will no doubt have Minghella's film in the back of their minds when watching Ripley. The 1999 critical smash makes a glamorous, flirty "it" couple of Gwyneth Paltrow's affable, credulous Marge and Jude Law's feverish hedonist Dickie, whereas Zaillian's series finds a gentle companionship between Fanning and Flynn's renditions, two beautiful, bored creatives from privilege who've never been told their art sucks. 

The only similarity you'll see to Paltrow and Law's characters is this shot. Credit: Philippe Antonello / Netflix

Flynn opts for an unruffled insouciance as Dickie, a glaring contrast to Law's boisterous magnetism. With a genuine Picasso in his house, Dickie crafts garbage paintings in his chandelier-topped studio, feigning modesty at Tom's forced compliments. However, Flynn's stealth-wealth nonchalance and frankness around sexuality truly works alongside Scott's fiercely repressed politeness, keeping Dickie constantly out of reach for Tom romantically and socially. The pair constantly try each other out, with the knife's edge friendship and the illusion of camaraderie ready to crumble in a pinch. A marked contrast to Paltrow's overwhelmingly amiable Marge, Fanning's interpretation appears always ill at ease with Tom, tolerating him instead of extending any enthusiasm. She aligns more neatly with Highsmith’s Marge, who feigns but a modicum of friendliness, with little time for this casual interloper. 

Eliot Sumner makes an aristocratic sleuth of Freddie Miles. Credit: Philippe Antonello / Netflix

If Philip Seymour Hoffman's impeccable performance as Dickie's obnoxiously wealthy and tactless pal Freddie Miles in Minghella's film feels untouchable, Ripley leaves it be. Instead, the series finds a fresh interpretation through musician Eliot Sumner, who imbues Freddie with a foreboding elegance, an unfortunately razor sharp memory, and an overestimation of their own power and influence — honestly, I could watch Sumner's Freddie swanning through Tom's things and lightly insulting him all day.

Joining halfway through the series, the impeccable Maurizio Lombardi dominates as Inspector Pietro Ravini, who becomes a meticulous and scrupulous thorn in Tom's side. A master of internalised scrutiny, Lombardi matches Scott in multiple rounds of viciously polite interrogations, both looking deeply amused in the other's attempts to manipulate.

Maurizio Lombardi. That's it. Credit: Philippe Antonello / Netflix

Zaillian places absolute faith in this streamlined cast as the show becomes a series of interrogations over wine and cigarettes, between Tom and Marge, Tom and Freddie, Tom and Ravini, each trying to outplay the other. But often, their performances are upstaged by another character: Italy itself.

Ripley becomes a disquieting love letter to Italy I absolutely wrote my review from here. Credit: Philippe Antonello / Netflix

If you weren't thinking of travelling to Italy anytime soon, Ripley acts as one of the most effective and messed up marketing campaigns. As well as bringing the viewer step-by-step through Tom's plots, Ripley romanticizes long Italian afternoons sipping coffee in laneways, languishing in Venetian palazzos and sipping Champagne in train carriages, with Tom wandering about Dickie's Atrani villa with just the sound of an afternoon storm, running his diabolical schemes from various Roman piazzas beside outrageously beautiful church facades.

Instead of Highsmith's fictional town of Mongibello, rendered in Minghella's film as a bustling, glamorous Amalfi playground for the beautiful and tanned, Zaillian sends Tom Ripley into the beautiful but largely unpopulated (and real) town of Atrani. In Ripley, it feels constantly like the off-season. There's often not a soul around beyond Dickie's housekeeper Ermelinda (Francesca Romana Bergamo) and a few others, making Tom, Dickie, and Marge's world feel both intimate and deeply uncomfortable.

Same table, every time. Credit: Philippe Antonello / Netflix

Hollywood veteran and director of photography Robert Elswit deploys gorgeous wide shots with gargantuan depths of field, showing every last detail of David Gropman's production design in high contrast, among sumptuous mid-shots of Scott simply reading the paper with a martini overlooking the Tyrrhenian Sea. And there's a welcome array of close-ups of crisp white shirts, Dickie’s prized possessions, and countless glasses of booze, many of which are tantalising clues that either foreshadow someone's fate or point to something that would give Tom's whole game away: a passport, a photograph, a pair of shoes, a suitcase sitting just out of sight. Every scene is elegantly lit, making a meal of the patterned marble walls, stone facades, and parquet floors.

Amid Jeff Russo's haunting score, Ripley's sound design packs a sharp foley punch, a masterpiece of Florentine leather shoes tapping on Roman cobblestone streets, descending echoing marble staircases, and cautiously sauntering across timber boards. With the director’s black and white palette, it’s here the series finds a Hitchcockian association, one that the great suspense director himself brought to his own Highsmith adaption, 1951's Strangers on a Train.

The centred perspective! The clean lines! The Andrew Scott! Credit: Philippe Antonello / Netflix

Plus, Zaillian places great importance on the works of 16th century painter Caravaggio, not only using the artist's repertoire to expand upon his characters' tastes, but to draw comparisons with the inner workings of his protagonist. It's also no coincidence Caravaggio was a master of chiaroscuro, as Zaillian wields strong contrasts in light and dark throughout the series.

It's this meticulous detail that makes Ripley a deeply satisfying series, at once magnificent and subdued, with performances and production meant for slowly savouring. Like its namesake, Ripley absorbs the elements of Highsmith's lauded novel, streamlines them, and makes its own identity. And it'll have you booking a ticket to Rome immediately.

Ripley is now streaming on Netflix.

If there's anything that undoubtedly unites everyone, it's that we all had terrible sex education in school. Yet, some members of parliament in the United Kingdom are under the impression kids are learning too much. 

In March 2024, Conservative member of parliament Andrea Jenkyns said during a parliamentary discussion that she supported a complete ban on sex education in schools. "As a mother of a primary school age child myself, I do not want him or other children to learn about sex full stop, whether that's straight or gay," she said. "I also don't want to see children at primary school being taught about changing gender – we need to be protecting the innocence of children and their childhood, especially at primary school age." 

SEE ALSO: What teachers and parents wish they could tell kids about porn

On social media, Jenkyns' comments have resulted in a mixture of support, opposition, and general concern, with some agreeing with her that sex education is a danger to innocence, and others believing the opposite. Her comments have not occurred in a vacuum. Rather, it's a small part of a widespread moral panic towards sex education that's been brewing in the political arena for the last few years, and the ongoing "trans debate" in the British media is intrinsically linked, often used as the key reasoning to ban sex education in the first place. 

Many members of the government have shared worries for what's being taught in sex education, expressing that there's too much LGBTQ+ content and sexual content, though there's little evidence pointing to a real issue. 

As concern continues to grow for the sex education's future, Mashable analysed the key comments about sex education from the political arena over the last year and spoke to experts to understand the current state of sex education, which improvements really need to be made, and why a lot of the concern over these lessons is misplaced. 

What's inappropriate about sex education?

Concern over what is being taught in sex education has been expressed by politicians and parents alike. It's hard to pinpoint exactly when and why this all started, but it's important to consider the backdrop on which these conversations are happening. 

In 2018, the bill FOSTA-SESTA was passed in the United States, which was designed to help stop trafficking but regrettably doesn't distinguish consensual sex work from trafficking which causes problems for all sexual content on the internet.. And because the bill focuses on the internet, it has impacted users across the world. Though this bill is designed to stop trafficking on the internet, it affects those who are consenting to sex work too, and that loops in just about everyone who talks about sex on the internet. That includes, of course, online sex education.The result: sex information of all kinds is regularly flagged by social media algorithms as sexual solicitation, and sex education online is getting harder to find. 

What's more, "Don't Say Gay" bills have been passed in multiple states in America from Florida to Louisiana which mirror Section 28, prohibiting LGBTQ+ people from expressing themselves fully, and being able to access the education they need in schools. 

It's possible these moves are influencing conversations in the UK. Here, concerns about sex education are less focused on trafficking, though, and instead appear to boil down to a few sensationalised myths: 

• Children are encouraged to be transgender in their sex education classes.

• Children are being sexualised by sex education.

• Learning about sex causes children to lose their innocence.  

Most of these myths were reinforced in Jenkyn's speech, but she's not the only politician to take a stand against sex education in some way. One of the most prominent voices in this debate is member of parliament Miriam Cates. Back in March 2023, she claimed during a parliamentary debate that, during RSE classes, British schools were teaching "graphic lessons on oral sex", lessons in "how to choke your partner safely" and that there are "72 genders". 

Cates then claimed those classes were "age inappropriate, sexualising and undermining of parents" and called for a review of RSE materials in secondary schools, which prime minister Rishi Sunak committed to delivering by the end of 2023. 

The politician didn't provide any direct sources for these claims, and in response, James Bowen, director of policy for the NAHT, the organisation for school administrators, stated they "have found [no proof that] suggests students [are] being exposed to materials that are inappropriate for their age is a widespread issue – if it were, we would anticipate that it would have been addressed on a case-by-case basis." 

Notably, the report also doesn't detail any specific sources for the claim that "safe choking" is being taught in schools. Rather, it includes content from Cliterally the Best, a blog and popular sex positive Instagram account, which isn't currently being used as education content as part of the British RSE curriculum. 

Andrew Hampton, education expert and author of Working with Boys, Creating Cultures of Mutual Respect in Schools believes that, sadly, some of this moral panic could stem from typical classroom strategies for teaching sex education more openly and non-judgmentally, and that this well-meaning practice is being misinterpreted by some politicians. For instance, Cates alleges that children are being taught how to safely choke each other. But Hampton thinks it’s more likely that children are asking about choking unprompted, especially as the sex act becomes more popular in porn and in bedrooms, and that teachers are simply doing their jobs by explaining what it means.

He tells Mashable: "A common strategy in teaching sex education in schools is to have kids shout out words they've heard relating to sex or anything they want to know more about, and then the teacher will write those words on the board and offer further explanation." 

Hampton explains that because there's been a recent rise documented in choking in pornography, on TikTok, and in popular media, it's likely children are asking about it in their sex education classrooms. "So a teacher might explain it, and explain the risks too, if a child asks about it. But it won't be that choking is actually part of the lessons," he says.

SEE ALSO: KinkTok is rife with misinformation. Here's why that's dangerous.

But, doubling down on this supposed need to change up RSE, the Secretary of State for Education Gillian Keegan said last October that she had written to schools in England ordering them to make the materials used in children's sex education available to be seen by parents. She warned headteachers there can be "no ifs, no buts, no more excuses" about it. 

The report Sunak organised is not yet complete (or, at least, not available to the public), so there is still no evidence available to suggest any of these accusations are true, while evidence of a moral panic piles up. So, where is this idea that kids are learning too much coming from? Are they learning too much?

Sex education is still falling short 

The short answer is no. It's an odd sentiment to suggest kids could be learning too much beyond their years as relationships and sex education (RSE) as a mandatory subject in schools has only been part of UK legislation as recently as September 2020. 

It's especially inaccurate to suggest children could be learning too much about queer topics, as Cates and Jenkyns seem to believe, since it only became legal for teachers to share advice and learnings for homosexual students in 2003, thanks to Section 28.

Sex education is really only just getting started The same year that sex education became mandatory in the United Kingdom, 58 percent of young people reported not learning enough about certain subjects they found to be important, such as information about pornography, and a survey from 2023 proved students want more their sex education at school to include more 'open discussions' and more information about 'real life sexual scenarios.' 

As for the allegations that sex ed leans too far towards LGBTQ+ topics, a  Terrence Higgins Trust survey of young people aged between 16 and 24 further found that one in seven had not received any sex and relationships education (SRE) during their time at secondary school, with almost two thirds given lessons a maximum of only once a year.

SEE ALSO: Top 5 NSFW sites to learn what porn didn't teach you

Data from Safe Lives also says LGBTQ+ students feel significantly less comfortable, less confident about where to go for support about relationship or sexual abuse; and a notably smaller proportion have a strong understanding of toxic and healthy relationships. The majority of LGBTQ+ students (61 percent) disagree that LGBT+ relationships are being threaded throughout RSE, even though it's legally required. 

Despite all the evidence that sex education is paramount and needs development, not reduction, Sunak announced Conservative Party's press conference in October that they would work to allow parents to oversee their children's sex education at school, and be able to pull them out of those lessons if they saw fit. While that might seem fair enough to some people, there are myriad reasons why giving parents this kind of control over their children's sexual knowledge is a very bad idea. 

Why parents shouldn't veto their children's sex ed 

Allowing parents to control their children's sex education comes up a lot in the sex education debate, but it comes with a lot of dangers. 

Research from Planned Parenthood found that over 20 percent of parents are not talking to their children about sex at home, and the ones that do speak about it are likely to skip important conversations like consent. So, if children are to be pulled out of school sex education, they're unlikely to get it anywhere else. 

Missing out on RSE has a significant effect on sexual development. Anabelle Knight, certified sex educator at sex toy company Lovehoney, tells Mashable that a lack of sex education in school has a direct consequence of poor sexual behaviour and understanding in adults, particularly in groups that are underrepresented in the teachings. 

She's right — Harvard Medical School found that comprehensive RSE helps to prevent sexual violence, for instance, while another study from the Council of Europe found it generally forms safer and more inclusive communities for children. If that wasn't enough, one study from The Journal of Adolescent Health examined sex education and its effects on children as they develop into adults for an entire three decades, and linked thorough sex education to a better understanding and appreciation of "sexual diversity, dating and intimate partner violence prevention, development of healthy relationships, prevention of child sex abuse and improved social/emotional learning". The study also notes that for the best chances of these social developments occurring, children need to start learning RSE in elementary school (primary school in the UK) and those lessons need to be LGBTQ+ inclusive. 

For example, she explains the LGBTQ+ community has to look elsewhere for the sex information they should have learned in school. "One of the most common – and easily accessible – places to learn about sex is in pornography, which portrays an unrealistic, often male-centric view of sex and intimacy." In short, not being offered sex education in school has drastic consequences on our relationships, including that with ourselves, in later life." 

Knight explains that consent is one of the most important things that people of any age can learn, and arguably the younger the better. "Not only is it important for children to learn that they have autonomy over their own bodies, but also that they must respect others' boundaries," she explains. 

SEE ALSO: Is Instagram shadowbanning LGBTQ and sex ed accounts?

"Teaching children about consent and sexual relationships before they experience them means that they are much better prepared for when they do. In order for anyone to make an informed decision they must first be… informed," she adds.   

Some parents also don't have their children's best interests in mind. Some parents will prioritise their political beliefs over the safety of their children. Some parents are homophobic, and wouldn't be okay with their children being queer of any kind, and may block their children from sex education to stop them from learning about it due to their own ulterior motives. 

It's a difficult reality to reckon with, but some parents also abuse their children. 37 percent of children who undergo child sex abuse experience this from a family member, or a family friend according to the Office of National Statistics.

With all this in mind, Knight says it's vital for children to learn about sex from a professional, regulated, and safe source. Parents are clearly not the right option for this. 

While panic over sex education contents increases, journalist Sophia Smith Galer found in a VICE report that the UK government has only spent half of the £6 million it promised in 2019 to spend on compulsory sex education in schools. This is demonstrative of a lacking sex education, not an overbearing one. Perhaps, instead of focusing on rumours without evidence, we should instead consider the glaring improvements left to be made, what the science says about supporting young people's safe sexual development, and the misplacement of funds in this space. 

A Shining-style mountain setting is the spooky backdrop for Cuckoo, Tilman Singer's horror about a family relocating to the remote German Alps.

The trailer follows despondent teenager Gretchen (Hunter Schafer), who takes a job working reception at a nearby lodge — only to one day be chased home on her bike by a very creepy figure with glowing eyes.

"Whatever the film's more overt horrors, whether its chilling atmosphere or its attempts at amusing moral and visceral obscenities, they're all bound by Schafer's increasing physical and emotional despondency," wrote Mashable's Siddhant Adlakha in his review. "She doesn't just save the movie. She is the movie, making it all the more remarkable to watch." Dan Stevens and Jessica Henwick and Gemma Chan also star.

How to watch: Cuckoo is in theatres from May 3.

Daily Show host Desi Lydic has form on calling out Fox News hypocrisy, and on Wednesday she turned her attention to channel's recent outrage over Easter happening to fall on Trans Visibility Day.

After rightly pointing out that Trans Visibility Day — which celebrates trans and non-binary people and raises awareness of the discrimination they face and the restriction of their human rights — occurs on March 31 every year whereas Easter weekend changes annually, Lydic made it clear that the main goal here was simply to stir up outrage.

"For what it's worth, there's a false premise at the heart of this entire controversy, which is that there's even a conflict between trans people and Christianity to begin with," says Lydic. "There isn't. In fact the bible doesn't say anything about trans people. It does, however, say to love thy neighbour, and to not judge other people."