Spoilers for The Paper season 2 ending ahead.

Regardless of whether you love or loathe Esmeralda (Sabrina Impacciatore), you can't deny that she's made The Paper season 2 ending incredibly memorable.

While Ned (Domhnall Gleeson) comes to Mare's (Chelsea Frei) rescue at The Cincinnati Chronicle, Esmeralda is on a mission of her own. Distraught by the news that her son has got C on his latest school exam, she undertakes an undercover investigation to get to the bottom of the "injustice."

As Oscar (Oscar Nuñez) tells us, these Esmeralda specials tend to be a regular occurrence. She's donned a fat suit to protest weight restrictions at a local playground, and disguised herself as a balding, older man to work out why those who "aren't attractive" are having problems dating.

This time, Esmeralda's transformation comes in the form of a teenage boy, dressing up in a short brown wig, baggy football jerseys and a backwards cap — much like a member of N*SYNC — to infiltrate Matteo's (Zak Messinger) class, though she's immediately detected.

While Matteo is willing to indulge her ridiculousness (albeit for a short time), the sheer stupidity of it all makes it the best moment in the entire season. But which disguise did Impacciatore find the most uncomfortable?

'I was shocked when I looked in the mirror'

"I had so much fun with that," Impacciatore tells me. "The most uncomfortable was the woman.... but the older man was horrible.

"I felt so shocked looking at myself in the mirror, and that shock remained for a good few days. I didn't recognize myself... just a very shocking experience. It's literally just for a few seconds in the show, but the experience of it lasted."

Personally, I'd enjoy an entire episode dedicated solely to Impacciatore's old man, who tells a group of attractive younger women at a bar that just because he doesn't look like Marlon Brando — already an outdated reference — doesn't mean that he should be ruled out.

While Esmeralda is probably the least predictable character of the bunch, these episode 10 transformations do set her up for future undercover investigations if The Paper season 3 is greenlit.

If her more direct exposé has almost cost Esmeralda her job and status at the Toledo Truth Teller, then why not try alternative methods to do exactly what she wants to? Watch this space, is all I'm saying.

• Marvel has seemingly cast a Gen V alumnus as Angel in its new X-Men movie
• Asa Germann is said to have signed on to play the winged mutant
• For the most part, MCU fans have reacted positively to the news

Marvel has reportedly tapped Asa Germann to play Angel in its new X-Men movie.

The Hollywood Reporter (THR) first broke the news, with the trade publication's sources claiming that the former Gen V star has signed on to play the winged mutant in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU).

Interestingly, THR suggests that Germann was a major contender to portray Scott Summer/Cyclops in the forthcoming flick. However, while Marvel decided to hire Kit Connors to play Cyclops in its X-Men reboot, the comic giant's top brass were so impressed by Germann's audition, they offered him the role of Angel instead.

At 28 years old, Germann is on the older side of the Marvel Phase 7 movie's cast, with many of his fellow stars in the 20 to 25 bracket. Nonetheless, Germann fits the bill as an actor under the age of 30 who, as long as he's signed a multi-picture deal, could feature in numerous X-Men and MCU movies over the next decade.

Real name Warren Worthington III, Angel is a founding member of the X-Men in Marvel Comics. As his mutant alias implies, he's defined by a pair of giant, white feathered wings that protrude from his upper back. Unsurprisingly, these allow him to fly, but Angel also boasts the usual superhuman abilities — super-strength, reflexes, stamina, and durability — that keep him in the fight for longer than ordinary people.

Germann won't be the first actor to embody Angel on the big screen. Indeed, Ben Foster portrayed the Marvel character in 2006's X-Men: The Last Stand, while Ben Hardy played the same individual 10 years later in 2016 movie X-Men: Apocalypse. For more on those films and other mutant-led flicks, find out how to watch the X-Men movies in order.

What have Marvel fans said about Asa Germann's casting as Angel in the MCU's first X-Men film?

In the main, MCU fans have lauded Germann's casting. Indeed, threads on r/MarvelStudios, r/MarvelStudiosSpoilers, and the ResetEra forums are filled with comments from people excited to see what Germann will bring to the table as part of his portrayal.

Funnily enough, as one eagle-eyed fan pointed out, Germann's first name actually means 'wing' in Portuguese, too. It's almost as if this was planned, isn't it!

While the vast majority are pleased with this hiring — shout out to long-time MCU casting director Sarah Halley Finn for yet another great pick, by the way — a couple of fans are giving themselves a well-earned pat on the back for previously suggesting that Germann would be their top choice for Angel. Not exactly the proven leaks we're used to, but I'll allow it.

Anyway, what do you think of Germann's casting? Let me know in the comments, and if you want to read more on the first MCU movie he'll star in, find out everything else we know so far about Marvel's new X-Men movie.

During the recent press rounds for Apple TV's Ryan Reynolds/Kenneth Branagh vehicle "Mayday", writer/director duo Jonathan Goldstein and John Francis Daley talked about their plans for the next "Star Trek" movie. As well as confirming their story will feature an all-new crew, they mentioned that the in-development project will be inspired by a pair of hit films from the '90s and '00s, both of which — coincidentally — feature Denzel Washington operating at very different ends of the moral spectrum.

"Training Day" is a gritty police drama, where Ethan Hawke's rookie finds himself under the ethically dubious wing of the Oscar-winning Washington's corrupt cop Alonzo Harris. "Crimson Tide", meanwhile, is a tense submarine thriller in which Washington's executive officer argues with Gene Hackman's captain about whether to launch some nuclear weapons. The stakes? Only kicking off the Third World War.

The latter feels particularly suited to a Starfleet bridge. The greatest "Star Trek" movie of all, "The Wrath of Khan", also borrowed heavily from submarine movies, with the USS Enterprise given a naval makeover and space battles that played out like games of underwater cat-and-mouse. And while "Crimson Tide" doesn't necessarily fit with Gene Roddenberry's vision of a conflict-free professional environment, it's easy to picture a seasoned starship captain locking horns with an idealistic first officer about the right course of action.

In fact, if Paramount executives are having doubts about the premise, they should check out the latest episode of "Strange New Worlds", which has just given the premise a dry run. Because to all intents and purposes, "Orders of Magnitude" is "'Crimson Tide' in space" — and it's every bit as thrilling as that sounds.

MAJOR SPOILERS AHEAD! ANYONE YET TO WATCH "ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE" SHOULD PROCEED WITH CAUTION TO AVOID VIOLATING TEMPORAL PRIME DIRECTIVES.

The chances of Captain Christopher Pike and first officer Una "Number One" Chin-Riley coming to blows on the bridge are slim, especially as Michael Burnham's mutiny on the USS Shenzhou (in the opening episode of "Star Trek: Discovery") will still be fresh in Starfleet minds. Writer Alan B McElroy instead makes the smart move of marooning Pike and Chin-Riley on an alien planet, forcibly detained by a group of Andorian mercenaries.

So when self-proclaimed "wily old war dog" Admiral Simon Reeger (guest star Joe Morton) comes on board to commandeer the Enterprise for the top-secret pursuit of a cloaked enemy vessel, it's ranking officer James T Kirk — making one of his implausibly frequent visits to his future home — who steps up to become the ship's temporary number one.

Reeger initially seems like the ideal commanding officer, friendly and considerate enough to learn his subordinates' names before he arrives. But — as happened with Captain Ramsey and Lt Commander Hunter in "Crimson Tide" — it quickly becomes clear that this working relationship with Kirk is going to be a fraught one.

He scolds his new first officer for questioning his decision to leave Pike and the away team behind, and not being on the bridge quickly enough when red alert is sounded. This is a man who doesn't appreciate being undermined in public, for whom — as Dr M'Benga, who served under Reeger on the USS Constitution, puts it — the "mission is everything".

The story also hinges on a very "Crimson Tide"-like dilemma. In director Tony Scott's movie, the USS Alabama receives incomplete firing orders — Captain Ramsey believes this means they should launch nuclear weapons at the proposed target, but Hunter advises caution, insisting they should pause until the orders are verified.

In "Orders of Magnitude", meanwhile, Reeger surmises that the ship the Enterprise is pursuing — believed to be responsible for the deaths of five million people in the Vaardan Massacre — is hiding on the surface of Argus II. Concerned the cloaked vessel might escape, he orders the destruction of everything on the planet's surface — but with thousands of innocent lives on the line, it's an order that Kirk cannot, in good conscience, execute.

What follows is right out of the "Crimson Tide" playbook, as chains of command are stretched past breaking point, the "math of command" is questioned, and the bridge crew throw increasingly awkward glances between themselves. Kirk risks putting himself on the fast track to a court-martial, receiving radiation burns to sabotage the phasers, and drugging Reeger so M'Benga can declare him unfit for duty — an act M'Benga ultimately takes the rap for.

It also puts Kirk at odds with La'an (who's resolutely sticking to the admiral's orders), and forces him to ask big, potentially career-ending favors of big brother Sam.

"Orders of Magnitude" also makes things personal in a way "Crimson Tide" never did. Reeger lost his family on Vaardan and is out for revenge, but — perhaps more pivotally — he served with the Kirks' dad, George, on the Constitution.

Reeger became a hero after taking out several Klingon cruisers at the Battle of Zeta Reticuli, but he was actually incapacitated at the time and took the credit for George's heroic actions, stalling Kirk Sr's career in the process.

In the episode's climactic bridge showdown, the tone shifts to another '90s classic, as Jim Kirk goads Reeger into a confession about the Constitution scandal. The admiral's "You're damn right!" is pretty much a direct lift of Jack Nicholson's "You're goddamn right I did!" in the famous final act of timeless legal drama "A Few Good Men". And yes, Kirk can handle the truth — even if he doesn't want to.

It's unclear whether "Strange New Worlds" showrunners had any idea a "Star Trek" movie inspired by "Crimson Tide" was on the cards — or if Goldstein and Daley knew this brilliant episode was on the way. But if their movie does become "Trek"'s first big-screen outing since 2016's "Star Trek Beyond", they could do worse than taking a few notes from "Orders of Magnitude".

New episodes of "Star Trek: Strange New Worlds" debut on Paramount+ on Thursdays.

While I was rewatching season 1 ahead of diving into The Paper season 2, one thing quickly became apparent: the internet was incredibly divided on Esmeralda (Sabrina Impacciatore).

Self-centered, brash and oblivious, she's usually found tearing though the office of the Toledo Truth Teller like a bull in a China shop. She's incredibly hesitant to absorb (or even listen to) other people's ideas, and that comes back to bite her in new episodes.

Without giving anything away, Esmeralda is set up to face more than one brutal reality check across the 10 season 2 episodes, which all land on Peacock on September 9. But perhaps the damage has already been done — some fans think she's too overpowering and narcissistic, although others fully buy into her unique brand of silliness.

Has any of this affected how Esmeralda appears in The Paper season 2? According to Impacciatore herself, she's very much still "a work in progress."

"I don't think so," Impacciatore tells me when I ask her if fan opinion has affected how we see Esmeralda in season 2. "I think Esmeralda, like every other character, is a work in progress. The show itself is so alive. It's something that changes every day. Somehow, we keep exploring new things, and that direction changes day by day.

"We talk a lot with [the show's creators] Greg (Daniels) and Michael (Koman), going to the writer's room. I think we all enjoyed things more this year because we felt more relaxed. But I'm still figuring out how Esmeralda is perceived. I surprise myself when I watch the series... things sound new to me. It's an interesting process."

In my opinion, what will be even more interesting is whether fan opinion of Esmeralda will change following the events of The Paper season 2 — and for now, you'll have to trust me when I say that her upcoming storyline certainly has the power to do just that.

Don't get me wrong, though: in many ways, she's still as annoying as she ever was. If The Paper does get picked up for a third season and beyond, which we're yet to find out, I'm still doubtful that she'll ever fully leave her self-obsessed ways in the past.

Disney's Marvel movies have had their ups and downs, but James Gunn's Guardians of the Galaxy trilogy has never missed. Now, thanks to this deal, you can get 40% off this Lego version of Baby Rocket Raccoon's Ship, as seen in Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3. However, you'll have to hurry as this set has been retired by Lego and is selling fast.

Get the retired set of Lego Marvel Baby Rocket Raccoon's Ship, on sale for $21 at Walmart.

Put together this 330-piece set and you have a blocky replica of the vessel that Rocket Raccoon used to make his escape from—well, that would be getting into spoiler territory. But if you're a fan of this fuzzy little guy, you will want this Lego Marvel Baby Rocket Raccoon's Ship on your shelf. Just remember, this is a retired Lego set so when it's gone it's gone.

• We've got you covered with reviews and rankings of the best telescopes, binoculars, star projectors, cameras, drones, Lego, streaming and more.

Alongside the usual interstellar shenanigans, Marvel's Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 revealed the origin story of Rocket Raccoon. This Lego model, which comes with an utterly adorable model of Baby Rocket, captures one of the most dramatic moments of the film, Rocket's escape from his captor. And if you're fast, you can grab this Lego Marvel Baby Rocket's Ship at a bargain price.

Made up of 330 pieces and for builders aged 8 years and up, this should only take you a couple of hours to build, maybe longer for little fingers. It's a seriously striking ship, and is sure to entertain Guardians of the Galaxy fans of all ages. Aside from Baby Rocket, it also comes with a minifigure of grown-up Rocket Raccoon, both of which can be perched in the opening cockpit.

Pilot's seat aside, there are several other play-friendly features. You can also lower the landing gear and given how light it is, you or younger builders can swoosh this striking ship around the house. Why not make up your own Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 4? Maybe you can catch up with Doctor Doom and prevent Avengers: Doomsday from happening.

You will need to hurry, though, because this set has been retired by Lego and this could be your last chance to get your hands on it, outside of paying double or triple the price on eBay. And for more MCU builds, we have rounded up the best Lego Marvel sets.

Key features: 330 pieces, for builders age 8+, Baby Rocket and Rocket Raccoon minifigures, 9 × 4.5 × 2.6 in. / 23 × 11 × 7 cm size.

Launched: April 2023

Price history: This set has dropped to $25 in the past when other retailers were selling their stock off, but this is the cheapest we've seen it at.

Price comparison: Walmart: $21 | Amazon: $38

Reviews consensus: Over at Walmart, this set's reviews are almost universally positive, praising it as a fun, straightforward build, with some of the praise coming from non-Marvel fans. At this price, you really can't go wrong.

✅ Buy it if: You want an easy-to-build, entertaining set that not only looks great on a shelf, it's fun to play with too.

❌ Don't buy it if: You want a lot of minifigures. Instead, consider some of the best Lego Marvel sets, such as this Lego Endgame Final Battle set.

Check out our other guides to the best telescopes, binoculars, cameras, star projectors, drones, Lego and much more.

• The first trailer for Neon's Sam Altman biopic Artificial has been revealed
• The Andrew Garfield-led movie will be released in late 2026/early 2027
• It covers Altman's controversial rise to prominence as OpenAI's co-founder

The first trailer for Artificial, a movie about controversial OpenAI co-founder Sam Altman, has been revealed.

Unveiled yesterday (September 8), the teaser for the Neon-distributed film strikes an unusually sinister tone for what's being billed as a biographical comedy-drama.

Indeed, from the gun-laden room that lead star Andrew Garfield, who'll portray Altman, visits, to Garfield's unsettling voiceover that plays over Artificial's publicly-released footage, it's certainly foreboding in nature. I get the feeling, then, that it'll be a dark-comedy dramatization of Altman's rise of prominence, the launch of artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot ChatGPT, and his brief and somewhat disputable ousting as OpenAI CEO in late 2023.

Artificial will initially debut in US theaters on December 25, 2026, before receiving a wider international rollout in early 2027. UK viewers, for example, will have to wait until January 22, 2027 to catch one of many new movies that'll arrive in the months ahead.

Artificial cast and crew: who's involved?

Oscar-nominated filmmaker Luca Guadagnino (Challengers, Call Me By Your Name) is on directing duties, while Saturday Night Live writing alumnus Simon Rich has penned its screenplay. Meanwhile, Blur and Gorillaz frontman Damon Albarn has also created original music and songs for Artificial.

Where the movie's cast is concerned, Garfield, who impersonates another Silicon Valley techbro following his portrayal of Eduardo Savarin in The Social Network, aka the 2010 dramatization about Facebook's creation, is arguably its most recognizable star — and based on what little footage we've seen thus far, he appears to have Altman's mannerisms, vernacular, and other unique traits down to a tee.

Here's who else you'll see in Artificial:

• Yura Borisov (Anora) as Ilya Sutskever, OpenAI's chief scientific officer and co-founder
• Monica Barbaro (Crime 101) as Mira Murati, OpenAI's chief technology officer
• Cooper Hoffman (The Long Walk) as Greg Brockman, OpenAI's chairman
• Ike Barinholtz (The Studio) as Elon Musk
• Mark Rylance (Bridge of Spies) as Geoffrey Hinton, the so-called 'Godfather of AI'
• Jason Schwartzman (The Grand Budapest Hotel) as TBC
• Chris O'Dowd (The IT Crowd) as TBC

What is the plot of Artificial?

Here's the official logline for Artifical: "[The movie] chronicles the incredibly consequential days leading up to the sudden firing and reinstatement of Sam Altman, as the fate of who gets to control the technology at the centre of an AI arms race hangs in the balance."

It's unclear how much of Altman's backstory, his various relationships with his OpenAI colleagues, and ChatGPT's launch and subsequent sociopolitical impact will be covered as part of Artificial's story. One thing is for sure, though: given that it dramatizes events concerning Altman and OpenAI, the discourse that will surround Artificial's release will be impossible to ignore.

September 8th, 1966 was a Thursday. Not a fresh-start-Monday or an exciting Saturday. A regular old Thursday; except that this one catalysed a cultural phenomenon. This was the Thursday that "Star Trek" was first broadcast, drawing viewers across the United States into a space-age world that revolutionised television.

The thing is, in 1966 no exoplanets (planets beyond our Solar System) had actually been discovered. Yet the franchise gave audiences a galaxy brimming with desert planets, ocean worlds, binary sunsets, and countless versions of Earth. Sixty years later, astronomers have confirmed more than 6,000 planets beyond the Solar System, known as exoplanets.

But how well do "Star Trek"’s fictional worlds compare with those astronomers have actually discovered?

When many of us think "Star Trek", the first planet that comes to mind is the dry, hot, and rocky Vulcan. Canonically, it orbits 40 Eridani A, a real star around 16 light-years from Earth. Real stars invite real observations, which led to astronomers announcing a possible planet in orbit in 2018. Of course, this was nicknamed Vulcan. However, later work has shown that this apparent signal was likely caused by stellar activity, rather than a planet in orbit.

This is, unfortunately, a common issue. Stellar activity, such as starspots, convection, and other magnetic activity, is very good at producing signals that look incredibly planetary.

Although the candidate planet was ultimately discredited, genuine hot, rocky planets do exist around other stars. Many of them orbit extremely close, completing an orbit in less than an Earth day. Some may have molten surfaces, atmospheres poisoned with vapourised rock, or even permanent day and night sides. While Vulcan itself may not be real, nature has produced rocky worlds considerably more hostile than Spock’s birthplace.

In contrast to Vulcan, "Star Trek" also gave us planets almost entirely covered with water. One particularly intriguing case is The Waters, from Voyager’s Thirty Days episode. The Waters is a sphere of water, with no solid core, kept together by a containment field. This is a little different to what an astronomer would refer to as a water world, but a planet-sized mass of water could theoretically be held together by its own gravity, without the need for a containment field.

However, the immense pressure deep inside this would transform much of the water into high-pressure ice rather than leaving it as one enormous liquid ocean. While no exoplanet has been definitively proven to have a global ocean, there are candidates like TOI-1452 b — a super-Earth orbiting a red dwarf star — that could contain a much larger proportion of water than Earth. It’s important to keep in mind, however, that a water-rich planet doesn’t necessarily make a good home. Water could exist beneath a chokingly thick atmosphere, as high-pressure ice, or sitting above an inhospitable interior.

Something "Star Trek" got very right is planets with two or more suns, such as Risa under its twin stars. The first confirmed planet orbiting two stars — known as a circumbinary planet — was Kepler-16 b. As it orbits a binary star system, it would experience a double sunset from the surface…if a surface existed.

Unlike many of the fictional planets in "Star Trek", Kepler-16b is a cold, gas giant; not somewhere we could sit and admire the view. In 1966, not only had exoplanets not yet been discovered, but astronomers had no observational evidence that planets could form and remain stable in dynamically complicated multiple star systems.

There are, however, many circumstances where reality goes far beyond what was imagined in "Star Trek".

Take WASP-76 b, an ultra-hot gas giant around 640 light-years away. The planet has a dayside so hot that iron vaporises, and it could be re-condensing into iron-rain on the cooler nightside. KELT-9 b is similarly hot, with molecules torn apart by the heat and metals existing in the atmosphere. 55 Cancri e is a super-Earth that orbits its host star every 18 hours, and could be covered by a magma ocean. There are also rogue planets, wandering through space with no host star.

"Star Trek" frequently invented strange planets by changing one familiar feature, but nature stared at the rulebook and ripped it to shreds. We’ve observed planets that have combinations of temperature, gravity, chemistry, and orbital architecture that writers in 1966 never could have anticipated.

The greatest scientific accuracy in "Star Trek" wasn’t the description of any given planet. Instead, it beautifully predicted that we live in a galaxy in which planets are abundant, gorgeously varied, found around a huge range of stars, and worth investigating even when they are nothing like Earth.

The necessity of a large population of conveniently habitable, human-safe worlds for "Star Trek"’s storytelling definitely set a limitation on the types of planets explored throughout the franchise. Our discoveries so far show that finding planets with Earth-like conditions is incredibly difficult, but not that they aren’t out there, somewhere.

"Star Trek" gave us a galaxy teeming with strange new worlds. Sixty years later, the surprise isn’t that these worlds exist, but that the real ones are even stranger than writers dared to imagine.