No One Will Save You is a gripping sci-fi/horror thriller that delivers a unique and intense viewing experience. Director Brian Duffield masterfully creates tension and terror by crafting a story that unfolds without any dialogue, a bold and refreshing approach in the genre.
From the moment the film begins, it captivates the audience with its relentless pace. There is no slow build-up here; instead, we are immediately thrust into the heart of the action when an alien infiltrates the protagonist’s home. The absence of dialogue only enhances the suspense, as we are left to interpret the character’s emotions and motivations through her actions and expressions.
The film’s twist ending is a standout, subverting expectations and leaving a lasting impact. It takes the familiar concept of an alien invasion and adds layers of complexity, making it so much more than a typical genre film. Duffield’s direction keeps viewers fully engaged, eagerly leaning in as the story unfolds with its unexpected twists and turns.
One of the standout moments in the film is a chilling scene set in the bedroom, where the protagonist hides from a relentless alien creature. The tension is palpable, going beyond the typical fear of being alone in the dark, and truly immersing the audience in a claustrophobic and terrifying experience.
No One Will Save You | Official Clip
With a budget of $22.8 million, the production values are top-notch, creating a visually stunning and atmospheric world. The performances, particularly by the lead actress, convey the character’s anxiety and determination with remarkable skill.
No One Will Save You is an engaging and thrilling ride that will keep you on the edge of your seat. While it may have bypassed theaters and landed on Hulu, its impact is not diminished. It stands as a testament to the power of storytelling and showcases Duffield’s talent as a director. If you’re a fan of sci-fi, or horror, or simply crave a unique cinematic experience, this film is definitely worth streaming on Hulu. Watch No One Will Save You
Rod: A creative force, blending words, images, and flavors. Blogger, writer, filmmaker, and photographer. Cooking enthusiast with a sci-fi vision. Passionate about his upcoming series and dedicated to TNC Network. Partnered with Rebecca Washington for a shared journey of love and art. View all posts
Rod: A creative force, blending words, images, and flavors. Blogger, writer, filmmaker, and photographer. Cooking enthusiast with a sci-fi vision. Passionate about his upcoming series and dedicated to TNC Network. Partnered with Rebecca Washington for a shared journey of love and art.
The rise of the autistic detective – why neurodivergent minds are at the heart of modern mysteries
Soohyun Cho, Michigan State University There never seems to be a shortage of good crime shows on TV, and network television is teeming with detectives who think – and act – differently. This fall, new seasons of “Elsbeth,” “High Potential,” “Patience” and “Watson” have aired, and they all feature leads who share similar characteristics: They’re outsiders, they’re socially awkward, they can be emotionally distant, and their minds operate in unconventional ways. In fact, they all possess traits that align with what many people now associate with neurodivergence – what scholar Nick Walker defines as “a mind that functions in ways that diverge significantly from the dominant societal standards of ‘normal.’” As a scholar of popular culture, I’ve long been fascinated by this recurring character type – detectives who might, today, be diagnosed as having autism spectrum disorder. While researching my forthcoming book, “The Autistic Detective,” I’ve come to realize that most detectives in popular culture – yes, even Sherlock Holmes – exhibited neurodivergent characteristics, long before the term existed.
The thin line between genius and madness
In the late 19th century, when Sherlock Holmes was created, there was widespread scientific interest in the workings of the mind, particularly the thin line between genius and madness. British psychologist James Sullydescribed “men of genius” as exhibiting “intellectual or moral peculiarities which are distinctly symptomatic of mental disease,” naming Edgar Allan Poe as an example of the “tragic fatefulness of geniuses.” Italian criminologist Cesare Lombroso, meanwhile, proposed that madness, genius and criminality were all closely intertwined. Such a fascination with exceptional minds – and the idea that madness and genius are two sides of the same coin – fed into the heart of detective fiction. And although later scholars have criticized the linking of neurodivergence to pathology, violence or genius, the trope remains common in popular culture, where it’s often used to signal the exceptional mind of a detective figure. Now, however, many fans are able to connect these characteristics to specific diagnostic labels. According to CDC data from April 2025, autism diagnoses in U.S. children have risen sharply over the past two decades – from about 1 in 150 in 1998 to roughly 1 in 31 today. This reflects not only a broadened definition of the autism spectrum but also signals greater public awareness and acceptance of neurodivergence. That growing understanding has led to renewed interest in Holmes. From online fan forums to The New York Times, people have debated whether Holmes might be autistic, wondered whether another label would be more appropriate, or highlighted the futility of trying to diagnose a fictional character.
Super intelligence and social dysfunction
That said, it’s hard not to see some neurodivergent traits in Sherlock Holmes and other fictional detectives. Tunnel vision, pattern recognition and attention to detail are all traits that could be exhibited by autistic people. Holmes was fixated on minute details: One story highlighted how he authored a study on the ashes of 140 different varieties of pipe, cigar and cigarette tobacco. He had an unmatched talent for noticing overlooked details and piecing together disparate clues. And he was obsessed with forensic science. He could also come off as cold. As Holmes declared in “The Sign of the Four,” “Emotional qualities are antagonistic to clear reasoning.” In Edgar Allan Poe’s 1841 short story “The Murders in the Rue Morgue,” which is widely considered the first detective fiction story, the protagonist, C. Auguste Dupin, also hyperfocuses on small details, reasons through “pure logic” and is socially reclusive – all qualities displayed by Holmes. Even Dr. Watson, Holmes’ sidekick, noticed the resemblance. “You remind me of Edgar Allen Poe’s Dupin,” he tells Holmes in “A Study in Scarlet.” “I had no idea that such individuals did exist outside of stories.” When Sherlock Holmes creator Arthur Conan Doyle famously killed off the detective at Reichenbach Falls in his 1893 story “The Final Problem,” there was so much public outrage that the author was eventually forced to bring him back from the dead. These 19th-century Sherlock enthusiasts were predecessors to today’s media fandoms. Their level of devotion, unlike anything previously seen for a fictional character, was a testament to the power of Doyle’s formula: an extraordinary investigator with savantlike cognitive abilities who upholds logic over emotion, thrives in solitude and yet still depends on his companion – in Holmes’ case, Dr. Watson, who serves as an emotional counterbalance. In the 21st century, that formula has been revived in wildly popular TV shows such as “Bones,” “Criminal Minds” and “Sherlock.” In 2016, “Sherlock” co-creator Steven Moffat told the BBC, “Doyle began the idea that super-intelligence comes at the price of some kind of social dysfunction, something that we’ve grasped as a narrative possibility ever since.” In other words, the more eccentric – or socially dysfunctional – a detective is, the more ingenious the hero seems.
A new era for the detective
Detective fiction might have started as a way to explore the deviant, non-normative minds of detectives and the criminals they pursued. But it has since become a space for neurodivergent self-representation. Today, scholars, fans, reviewers and scientists openly discuss diagnostic labels for fictional characters. This surge in interest coincides with a rise in research on portrayals of autism in the media and a growing number of autistic voices examining how those portrayals shape public understanding. Disability scholars have long warned of disabled characters being used as mere plot devices and have criticized the lack of diversity in representations of detectives who appear to be autistic on screen. Yet many of the new shows push back against some of the stereotypes of autistic people as cold, lonely and incapable of affection. Instead, they have friends. They have romantic partners. They’re empathetic. The series “Elsbeth” and “High Potential” center on quirky, intelligent female investigative leads who appear to be on the autism spectrum. In HBO’s 2020 miniseries “The Outsider,” detective Holly Gibney appears as one of the first Black, autistic female detectives on television. While most of these characters aren’t explicitly identified as autistic in their shows, “Extraordinary Attorney Woo” features a female attorney whose diagnosis is openly discussed by the show’s characters.‘Extraordinary Attorney Woo’ is a Korean series centered on an autistic, early-career attorney. The British-Belgian series “Patience,” meanwhile, is the first detective show to feature an explicitly autistic character played by a neurodivergent actress, Ella Maisy Purvis. “It was really important to me that she wasn’t this kind of robotic, asexual drone,” Purvis told the Big Issue in 2025. “Patience is highly empathetic. She cares so much about her job and the people around her. It’s just expressed in a different way.” These varied portrayals coincide with the rise of online fan communities where neurodivergent fans share what these stories mean to them. If the archetypal detective once tried to “make sense” of neurodivergent minds, today’s neurodivergent fans and creators are now having a hand in shaping them. Perhaps most importantly, they no longer have to wonder whether they’re being represented on screen. Soohyun Cho, Assistant Professor at the Center for Integrative Studies in the Arts & Humanities, Michigan State University This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Dive into “The Knowledge,” where curiosity meets clarity. This playlist, in collaboration with STMDailyNews.com, is designed for viewers who value historical accuracy and insightful learning. Our short videos, ranging from 30 seconds to a minute and a half, make complex subjects easy to grasp in no time. Covering everything from historical events to contemporary processes and entertainment, “The Knowledge” bridges the past with the present. In a world where information is abundant yet often misused, our series aims to guide you through the noise, preserving vital knowledge and truths that shape our lives today. Perfect for curious minds eager to discover the ‘why’ and ‘how’ of everything around us. Subscribe and join in as we explore the facts that matter. https://stmdailynews.com/the-knowledge/
A Palestinian-Israeli film just won an Oscar − so why is it so hard to see?
The Palestinian-Israeli film “No Other Land” won the 2025 Academy Award for best documentary but struggles to find a U.S. distributor due to its controversial subject matter around the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Despite critical acclaim, it faces unique barriers compared to other independent films.
Last Updated on November 3, 2025 by Daily News StaffLeft to right: Basel Adra, Rachel Szor, Hamdan Ballal and Yuval Abraham pose with their Oscars for ‘No Other Land’ at the 2025 Academy Awards. Maya Dehlin Spach/Getty Images
For many low-budget, independent films, an Oscar win is a golden ticket.
The publicity can translate into theatrical releases or rereleases, along with more on-demand rentals and sales.
However, for “No Other Land,” a Palestinian-Israeli film that just won best documentary feature at the 2025 Academy Awards, this exposure may not translate into commercial success in the U.S. That’s because the film has been unable to find a company to distribute it in America.
“No Other Land” chronicles the efforts of Palestinian townspeople to combat an Israeli plan to demolish their villages in the West Bank and use the area as a military training ground. It was directed by four Palestinian and Israeli activists and journalists: Basel Adra, who is a resident of the area facing demolition, Yuval Abraham, Hamdan Ballal and Rachel Szor. While the filmmakers have organized screenings in a number of U.S. cities, the lack of a national distributor makes a broader release unlikely.
Film distributors are a crucial but often unseen link in the chain that allows a film to reach cinemas and people’s living rooms. In recent years it has become more common for controversial award-winning films to run into issues finding a distributor. Palestinian films have encountered additional barriers.
As a scholar of Arabic who has written about Palestinian cinema, I’m disheartened by the difficulties “No Other Land” has faced. But I’m not surprised.
The role of film distributors
Distributors are often invisible to moviegoers. But without one, it can be difficult for a film to find an audience.
Distributors typically acquire rights to a film for a specific country or set of countries. They then market films to movie theaters, cinema chains and streaming platforms. As compensation, distributors receive a percentage of the revenue generated by theatrical and home releases.
The film “Soundtrack to a Coup D’Etat,” another finalist for best documentary, shows how this process typically works. It premiered at the Sundance Film Festival in January 2024 and was acquired for distribution just a few months later by Kino Lorber, a major U.S.-based distributor of independent films.
Advertisement
The inability to find a distributor is not itself noteworthy. No film is entitled to distribution, and most films by newer or unknown directors face long odds.
So why can’t “No Other Land” find a distributor in the U.S.?
There are a couple of factors at play.
Shying away from controversy
In recent years, film critics have noticed a trend: Documentaries on controversial topics have faced distribution difficulties. These include a film about a campaign by Amazon workers to unionize and a documentary about Adam Kinzinger, one of the few Republican congresspeople to vote to impeach Donald Trump in 2021.
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict, of course, has long stirred controversy. But the release of “No Other Land” comes at a time when the issue is particularly salient. The Hamas attacks of Oct. 7, 2023, and the ensuing Israeli bombardment and invasion of the Gaza Strip have become a polarizing issue in U.S. domestic politics, reflected in the campus protests and crackdowns in 2024. The filmmakers’ critical comments about the Israeli occupation of Palestine have also garnered backlash in Germany.Locals attend a screening of ‘No Other Land’ in the village of A-Tuwani in the West Bank on March 14, 2024. Yahel Gazit/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty Images
Yet the fact that this conflict has been in the news since October 2023 should also heighten audience interest in a film such as “No Other Land” – and, therefore, lead to increased sales, the metric that distributors care about the most.
Indeed, an earlier film that also documents Palestinian protests against Israeli land expropriation, “5 Broken Cameras,” was a finalist for best documentary at the 2013 Academy Awards. It was able to find a U.S. distributor. However, it had the support of a major European Union documentary development program called Greenhouse. The support of an organization like Greenhouse, which had ties to numerous production and distribution companies in Europe and the U.S., can facilitate the process of finding a distributor.
By contrast, “No Other Land,” although it has a Norwegian co-producer and received some funding from organizations in Europe and the U.S., was made primarily by a grassroots filmmaking collective.
Stages for protest
While distribution challenges may be recent, controversies surrounding Palestinian films are nothing new.
Many of them stem from the fact that the system of film festivals, awards and distribution is primarily based on a movie’s nation of origin. Since there is no sovereign Palestinian state – and many countries and organizations have not recognized the state of Palestine – the question of how to categorize Palestinian films has been hard to resolve.
Advertisement
In 2002, The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences rejected the first ever Palestinian film submitted to the best foreign language film category – Elia Suleiman’s “Divine Intervention” – because Palestine was not recognized as a country by the United Nations. The rules were changed for the following year’s awards ceremony.
In 2021, the cast of the film “Let It Be Morning,” which had an Israeli director but primarily Palestinian actors, boycotted the Cannes Film Festival in protest of the film’s categorization as an Israeli film rather than a Palestinian one.
Film festivals and other cultural venues have also become places to make statements about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and engage in protest. For example, at the Cannes Film Festival in 2017, the right-wing Israeli culture minister wore a controversial – and meme-worthy – dress that featured the Jerusalem skyline in support of Israeli claims of sovereignty over the holy city, despite the unresolved status of Jerusalem under international law.Israeli Culture Minister Miri Regev wears a dress featuring the old city of Jerusalem during the Cannes Film Festival in 2017. Antonin Thuillier/AFP via Getty Images
At the 2024 Academy Awards, a number of attendees, including Billie Eilish, Mark Ruffalo and Mahershala Ali, wore red pins in support of a ceasefire in Gaza, and pro-Palestine protesters delayed the start of the ceremonies.
As he accepted his award, “No Other Land” director Yuval Abraham called out “the foreign policy” of the U.S. for “helping to block” a path to peace.
Even though a film like “No Other Land” addresses a topic of clear interest to many Americans, I wonder if the quest to find a U.S. distributor just got even harder.
This article has been updated to clarify that the film was a collaborative effort between Palestinian and Israeli filmmakers. It has also been updated to reflect the film’s win at the 2025 Academy Awards.
4 films that show how humans can fortify – or botch – their relationship with AI
Our relationship with AI: The article explores how movies portray human-AI relationships, highlighting lessons from “Blade Runner,” “Moon,” “Resident Evil,” and “Free Guy.” It emphasizes the importance of trust, accountability, and oversight in shaping successful interactions with AI, especially amid evolving technologies.
Artificial intelligence isn’t just a technical challenge. It’s a relationship challenge.
Every time you give a task to AI, whether it’s approving a loan or driving a car, you’re shaping the relationship between humans and AI. These relationships aren’t always static. AI that begins as a simple tool can morph into something far more complicated: a challenger, a companion, a leader, a teammate or some combination thereof.
Movies have long been a testing ground for imagining how these relationships might evolve. From 1980s sci-fi films to today’s blockbusters, filmmakers have wrestled with questions about what happens when humans rely on intelligent machines. These movies aren’t just entertainment; they’re thought experiments that help viewers anticipate challenges that will arise as AI becomes more integrated in daily life.
Drawing on our research into films that depict AI in the workplace, we highlight four portrayals of human–AI relationships – and the lessons they hold for building safer, healthier ones.
1. ‘Blade Runner’ (1982)
In “Blade Runner,” humanlike androids called “replicants” are supposed to be perfect workers: strong, efficient and obedient. They were designed with a built-in, four-year lifespan, a safeguard intended to prevent them from developing emotions or independence.
The Tyrell Corporation, a powerful company that created the replicants and profits from sending them to work on distant colonies, sees them as nothing more than obedient workers.
But then they start to think for themselves. They feel, they form bonds with one another and sometimes with humans, and they start to wonder why their lives should end after only four years. What begins as a story of humans firmly in control turns into a struggle over power, trust and survival. By the end of the movie, the line between human and machine is blurred, leaving viewers with a difficult question: If androids can love, suffer and fear, should humans see and treat them more like humans and less like machines?
“Blade Runner” is a reminder that AI can’t simply be considered through a lens of efficiency or productivity. Fairness matters, too.
In the film, replicants respond to attacks on their perceived humanity with violence. In real life, there’s backlash when AI butts up against values important to humans, such as the ability to earn a living, transparency and justice. You can see this in the way AI threatens to replace jobs, make biased hiring decisions or misidentify people via facial recognition technology.
2. ‘Moon’ (2009)
“Moon” offers a quieter, more intimate portrayal of human–AI relationships. The movie follows Sam Bell, a worker nearing the end of a three-year contract on a lunar mining base, whose only companion is GERTY, the station’s AI assistant.
Advertisement
At first, GERTY appears to be just another corporate machine. But over the course of the film, it gradually shows empathy and loyalty, especially after Sam learns he is one of many clones, each made to think they are working alone for three years on the lunar base. Unlike the cold exploitation of AI that takes place in “Blade Runner,” the AI in “Moon” functions as a friend who cultivates trust and affection.In ‘Moon,’ GERTY, the lunar base’s AI assistant, is the only companion for protagonist Sam Bell. Sony Pictures Classics
The lesson is striking. Trust between humans and AI doesn’t just happen on its own. It comes from careful design and continual training. You can already see hints of this in therapy bots that listen to users without judgment.
That trust needs to involve more than, say, a chatbot’s surface-level nods toward acceptance and care. The real challenge is making sure these systems are truly designed to help people and not just smile as they track users and harvest their data. If that’s the end goal, any trust and goodwill will likely vanish.
In the film, GERTY earns Sam’s trust by choosing to care about his well-being over following company orders. Because of this, GERTY becomes a trusted ally instead of just another corporate surveillance tool.
3. ‘Resident Evil’ (2002)
If “Moon” is a story of trust, the story in “Resident Evil” is the opposite. The Red Queen is an AI system that controls the underground lab of the nefarious Umbrella Corporation. When a viral outbreak threatens to spread, the Red Queen seals the facility and sacrifices human lives to preserve the conglomerate’s interests.
This portrayal is a cautionary tale about allowing AI to have unchecked authority. The Red Queen is efficient and logical, but also indifferent to human life. Relationships between humans and AI collapse when guardrails are absent. Whether AI is being used in health care or policing, life-and-death stakes demand accountability.
Without strong oversight, AI can lead in self-centered and self-serving ways, just as people can.
4. ‘Free Guy’ (2021)
“Free Guy” paints a more hopeful picture of human-AI relationships.
Guy is a character in a video game. He suddenly becomes self-aware and starts acting outside his usual programming. The film’s human characters include the game’s developers, who created the virtual world, along with the players, who interact with it. Some of them try to stop Guy. Others support his growth.‘Free Guy’ tells the story of a nonplayable character in a video game who suddenly breaks free from his preprogrammed role. 20th Century Studios
This movie highlights the idea that AI won’t stay static. How will society respond to AI’s evolution? Will business leaders, politicians and everyday users prioritize long-term well-being? Or will they be seduced by the trappings of short-term gains?
In the film, the conflict is clear. The CEO is set on wiping out Guy. He wants to protect his short-term profits. But the developers backing Guy look at it another way. They think Guy’s growth can lead to more meaningful worlds.
That brings up the same kind of issue AI raises today. Should users and policymakers go for the quick wins? Or should they use and regulate this technology in ways that build trust and truly benefit people in the long run?
Advertisement
From the silver screen to policy
Step back from these stories and a bigger picture comes into focus. Across the movies, the same lessons repeat themselves: AI often surprises its creators, trust depends on transparency, corporate greed fuels mistrust, and the stakes are always global. These themes aren’t just cinematic – they mirror the real governance challenges facing countries around the world.
That’s why, in our view, the current U.S. push to lightly regulate the technology is so risky.
In July 2025, President Donald Trump announced his administration’s “AI Action Plan.” It prioritizes speedy development, discourages state laws that seek to regulate AI, and ties federal funding to compliance with the administration’s “light touch” regulatory framework.
Supporters call it efficient – even a “super-stimulant” for the AI industry. But this approach assumes AI will remain a simple tool under human control. Recent history and fiction suggest that’s not how this relationship will evolve.President Donald Trump displays the executive order he signed at the ‘Winning the AI Race’ summit on July 23, 2025, in Washington, D.C. Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
These weren’t “bugs.” They were breakdowns in accountability and oversight, the same breakdowns these movies dramatize.
Human-AI relationships are evolving. And when they shift without safeguards, accountability, public oversight or ethical foresight, the consequences are not just science fiction. They can be very real – and very scary.
Looking for an entertainment experience that transcends the ordinary? Look no further than STM Daily News Blog’s vibrant Entertainment section. Immerse yourself in the captivating world of indie films, streaming and podcasts, movie reviews, music, expos, venues, and theme and amusement parks. Discover hidden cinematic gems, binge-worthy series and addictive podcasts, gain insights into the latest releases with our movie reviews, explore the latest trends in music, dive into the vibrant atmosphere of expos, and embark on thrilling adventures in breathtaking venues and theme parks. Join us at STM Entertainment and let your entertainment journey begin! https://stmdailynews.com/category/entertainment/
