TheChek News Flow

DÉCRYPTAGE - Parmi les frondeurs de la tribune, nombreux sont ceux qui ne travaillent pas pour le cinéma. Par ailleurs, certains s’estiment floués par un appel au boycott d’UGC ajouté sans prévenir. Nous avons analysé la pétition nom par nom. Elle réserve beaucoup de surprises.

En bons communicants, les auteurs de la « tribune anti-Bolloré » mettent régulièrement en avant le nombre de signatures recueillies. Au dernier décompte, il y en avait plus de 2 400, alors qu’au début de la semaine, on en recensait 600. Mardi 19 mai, cette onde de choc a poussé la ministre de la Culture, Catherine Pégard, à s’exprimer sur le sujet. Au-delà des acteurs connus du grand public, tels Blanche Gardin, Adèle Haenel, Juliette Binoche, Anna Mouglalis, Swann Arlaud, Charles Berling, Agathe Bonitzer ou Jean-Pascal Zadi, le texte présente tous les signataires comme des professionnels du cinéma.

Cette affirmation a étonné plusieurs grands producteurs contactés par Le Figaro. En épluchant en diagonale la liste des frondeurs, ils ont seulement reconnu une poignée de noms. Dans ces personnalités figurent Laetitia Gonzalez, productrice importante du cinéma d’auteur contemporain à la tête des Films du Poisson (on lui doit aussi la nouvelle série Etty , de Hagai Levi, sur Arte), la scénariste Delphine Agut, nominée aux César pour L’Histoire de Souleymane ou Amélie Bonnin, réalisatrice du merveilleux Partir un jour avec Bastien Bouillon et Juliette Armanet.

Des signataires à regrouper en plusieurs catégories

Alors qui sont réellement ces 2 400 signataires ? Pour comprendre, nous avons passé vingt heures entre le 19 et le 20 mai à éplucher la liste, nom par nom. Pour ceux qui se présentent comme scénaristes, réalisateurs, acteurs, chefs décorateur, producteurs, premiers ou seconds assistants, il faut vérifier sur la plateforme Imdb, la bible du cinéma mondial. Pour les autres, les responsables de festivals, les patrons de salles de cinéma et tous ceux qui se présentent succinctement comme « administrateur », « recherchiste », « coordonnatrice de projet » ou « délégué général », il faut chercher sur internet. D’emblée, on sursaute. Dans les noms commençant par « A », on découvre Romy Alizée qui s’affiche comme photographe et travailleuse du sexe. Ça commence bien. Plus sérieusement, on peut regrouper les signataires en plusieurs catégories.

La première n’a aucune accointance avec le cinéma. Ses signataires travaillent pour des émissions télévisées, dans le milieu universitaire, pour des concerts, des clips, de l’art contemporain, des spectacles pour enfants, du théâtre et même au ministère de la Culture. Dans ce premier groupe, on trouve des producteurs de télévision qui ont, par exemple, travaillé sur Rendez-vous en terre inconnue, la plasticienne Anouck Everaere, un directeur artistique du Centre Pompidou, Mathilde Girard, qui signe la photo des clips du trio LEJ, ou l’habilleuse Ambre Amagat, qui a collaboré avec Theodora et le rappeur marseillais Jul. Dans les signatures les plus récentes, on note le danseur Yann Nathan. Sur Imdb, il est uniquement cité pour le clip d’Angèle What You Want. On remarque aussi des historiens de l’art et une vidéaste de films institutionnels. Un second groupe rassemble les « fantômes », ceux dont le nom est introuvable sur internet. Heureusement, ils sont peu nombreux.

Un appel au boycott des cartes UGC ajouté sans prévenir

À l’inverse, les milieux du court-métrage et du documentaire sont massivement représentés. Comme la scénariste et réalisatrice Cécile Allegra, prix Albert Londres en 2015, ils forment plus du tiers de la pétition. Les gens qui travaillent dans les festivals sont également nombreux. Les membres du collectif de travailleurs précaires Sous les écrans ont signé, ainsi que d’autres qui travaillent pour le Festival de Cannes, le festival des Trois Continents, le festival du Cinéma du réel, le festival des films à Belfort.

Chez les exploitants, on remarque le nom de Sylvie Buscail, qui représente Ciné32, l’association de quinze cinémas dans le Gers. Au premier abord, la position de ces patrons de salles semble un peu schizophrène. Sur le site Désarmer Bolloré qui poste la pétition, la fin du texte appelle le « public, cinéphiles, professionnel-les, ou simplement citoyen, contre le rachat d’UGC et contre l’emprise grandissante de l’extrême-droite. Pour ce faire : Résiliez vos cartes UGC. » Or, ces cartes illimitées sont très utilisées dans les salles art et essai, qui diffusent des films de la diversité. « Quand j’ai signé la pétition avant Cannes , il n’y avait pas cette phrase et ce n’est pas du tout l’esprit initial. Je le découvre et je désapprouve. Il faut que les gens aillent au cinéma et dans celui de leur choix, nous dit François Aymé, patron du cinéma Jean Eustache à Pessac, en Gironde. Lui a signé car il s’inquiète pour UGC : « Ce circuit défend plus que d’autres, le cinéma d’auteur. Si sa programmation change à cause de son nouvel actionnaire, ce ne sera pas anodin. » Comme d’autres, il n’a pas été prévenu de cet ajout qui risque d’avoir des conséquences catastrophiques sur les entrées des salles en France. Contactés par Le Figaro, les responsables du site comme les organisateurs de la pétition n’ont pas donné suite.

Dans les signataires de cette pétition hébergée par le quotidien Libération, on trouve aussi une poignée de journalistes. Outre un reporter qui dit travailler chez Canal+, la plupart signent dans des médias spécialisés : Les Inrocks, le magazine Trois Couleurs de MK2, Deuxième page, média féministe intersectionnel, Sorociné, média cinéma féministe, la revue Positif et Les Cahiers du cinéma.

In fine, on déniche des personnes dont le nom figure aux génériques de films sortis en salle. En dehors des retraités, dont la grande époque remonte aux années 1980 et 1990 avec des longs-métrages comme La Cité des enfants perdus, de Jean-Pierre Jeunet (1995), l’immense majorité a travaillé sur très peu de films. Sur Imdb, on compte un, deux, trois projets avec de longues pauses entre chaque. Beaucoup n’ont plus travaillé au cinéma depuis le Covid. C’est le cas de cet ingénieur son au générique de Taxi 4 (2007), Taken (2008) et de Frantz, de François Ozon (2016). De cette technicienne dont le dernier film est Raid Dingue de Dany Boon (2016). Ou de cet acteur qui, de toute sa carrière, n’a joué que dans deux films au cinéma, Guillaume et les enfants à table, en 2013, et Les Crevettes pailletées, en 2019.

Au bout de ces heures de recherche, on comprend la difficulté de percer puis de durer dans cette industrie. Au final, la grande majorité des frondeurs a pris zéro risque car ils ne sont pas au cœur de la production cinématographique. Les 260 000 personnes qui travaillent eux réellement dans la filière, et dont les postes sont aujourd’hui mis en danger par cette pétition, apprécieront. Cela attire encore plus la lumière sur les rares signataires qui enchaînent les succès au box-office. Ce sont eux qui risquent les foudres de Maxime Saada, président du directoire de Canal+. Leur position est difficilement tenable car pour travailler sur des films comme L’Amour ouf, Le Règne animal, La Venue de l’avenir ou L’Histoire de Souleymane, ils ont bénéficié de l’aide financière de Studio Canal. Selon nos informations, un célèbre acteur et réalisateur aurait déjà téléphoné à Canal+ pour faire amende honorable. « J’avais mal lu le texte », aurait-il dit. Contacté par Le Figaro, il n’a pas donné suite. Pour l’heure, son nom figure toujours dans la liste. « Quand le feu est mis à la prairie, ça atteint tout le monde », commente froidement un grand patron du 7e art.

DÉCRYPTAGE - En annonçant boycotter les 600 signataires de la tribune, le président du directoire de Canal+, Maxime Saada, s’est attiré le soutien du monde du cinéma sur la Croisette.

À l’ouverture du Festival de Cannes, la pétition « Zapper Bolloré » a d’abord fait pschitt. Publiée dans Libération, elle est signée par plus de 600 personnes présentées comme des professionnels du cinéma. Les signataires y dénoncent ce qu’ils considèrent comme la mainmise de l’homme d’affaires breton sur le septième art. De toute évidence, ils maîtrisent mal le financement du cinéma et celui des salles de cinéma. À l’exception d’Adèle Haenel, qui ne tourne plus de films depuis six ans, de Juliette Binoche, d’Anna Mouglalis et de Swann Arlaud, l’immense majorité des signataires sont peu connus. Y compris dans le métier.

Les premiers jours sur la Croisette, les producteurs et les patrons des salles de cinéma ne se sont pas inquiétés. Ils ont jugé cette fronde plus politique que professionnelle. Personne n’a en effet constaté « d’uniformisation des films et de prise de contrôle fasciste sur l’imaginaire collectif » chez Canal+. Même des organismes ancrés à gauche, comme la Société des réalisateurs français, n’ont pas signé le texte. « Un jour, peut-être, il faudra s’inquiéter de l’emprise de Vincent Bolloré sur le cinéma mais on n’en est absolument pas là », déclarent plusieurs producteurs.

Au fil des projections, les mêmes ont commencé à s’inquiéter. Les frondeurs se sont mis à huer et à siffler les génériques où figure le logo de Canal+. Ils s’en sont notamment pris à La Vénus électrique, de Pierre Salvadori, à Full Phil, de Quentin Dupieux, et à Garance, de Jeanne Herry. Peu importe que les histoires à l’écran n’aient rien en commun avec l’idéologie de l’extrême droite. « C’est un carnage et ça va crescendo », déplore un distributeur. Traités de collabos ou de planqués, les producteurs et patrons de cinémas se mettent à dénoncer un « mauvais procès ».

À les écouter, si la liberté d’expression existe quelque part, c’est bien chez Canal+. Les salles UGC n’ont pas été rachetées par Vincent Bolloré pour des raisons idéologiques mais par Maxime Saada, président du directoire de Canal+ pour des raisons industrielles. Canal+ n’a pas réduit son investissement dans le cinéma pour des raisons idéologiques. Les autres chaînes ont fait de même. Sur les centaines de films financés par la chaîne, seul Grâce à Dieu de François Ozon, qui dénonce la pédophilie dans l’Église, n’a pas été retenu. Le cinéaste n’a en rien été mis à l’index, puisque Canal+ a financé L’Étranger, son film suivant.

Du biopic sur Badinter et la peine de mort aux amours lesbiennes dans La Vie d’une femme, aux policiers dans Dossier 137 et aux migrants dans L’Histoire de Souleymane, Canal+ finance tous les jours des sujets qui hérissent l’extrême droite. Sur la Croisette, les regards se tournent vers Anna Mouglalis, figure de proue de la fronde et jurée de la Queer Palm 2026. En compétition pour cette palme, Garance, de Jeanne Herry, est distribuée par Canal+. Anna Mouglalis va-t-elle boycotter ce film à cause de son financement par Studio Canal ? Refusera-t-elle désormais de pousser la porte des salles UGC ? C’est ignorer que la régie publicitaire de ces salles est gérée depuis des années par Canal+. Les frondeurs sont passés à côté d’une évidence : si la programmation de la chaîne cryptée et d’UGC était dans la ligne de Jordan Bardella, les cinémas perdraient depuis longtemps des spectateurs et Canal+ des abonnés.

Si l’actionnaire avait voulu insuffler son idéologie, il aurait utilisé le même procédé que dans les médias et l’édition. On aurait assisté à des licenciements massifs avec des récits fournis sur LesJours.fr, le média en pointe sur les dessous de l’empire Bolloré. Mais voilà, les équipes de Canal+ et d’UGC n’ont pas été modifiées. Dans ces deux sociétés, les chefs qui décident du « line-up » des films n’ont pas modifié d’un iota leur ligne éditoriale. « Si jamais des gens avec qui nous travaillons depuis toujours en venaient à être remplacés par des personnes venues pour défendre une idéologie, vous nous verrez tous monter au créneau », assure une productrice. Comme ses pairs, elle estime que la pétition se trompe de combat. « Ses signataires passent à côté des vrais problèmes : l’IA, qui va décimer des centaines de postes, et la baisse de fréquentation dans les salles », regrette-t-elle.

En cherchant à faire croire que les équipes de Canal+ et celles des salles UGC sont d’extrême droite, les signataires sont allés loin. Cette première semaine du Festival de Cannes a été dure pour les salariés de Canal+ comme pour ceux d’UGC. Tous ont souffert des huées dans les salles de projection. L’information est remontée à Maxime Saada. Il serre les dents. Au sein de Canal+, il est connu pour être attentionné avec ses équipes. Notamment en cas de maladie grave. Dimanche, lors d’un déjeuner professionnel, il a voulu agir en chef de troupe. Après avoir rappelé à quel point il était attaché au CNC, au service public, à la diversité et aux premiers films, il a eu ces mots, perçus comme maladroits : « Je ne souhaite plus que Canal travaille avec les gens qui ont signé cette pétition. »

Le piège s’est refermé sur lui. La tribune est devenue une liste noire. Les frondeurs ont remporté la bataille. Depuis, ils se déchaînent. La stratégie de la terre brûlée s’accélère. « Pouvons-nous encore croire à l’indépendance de Canal+ vis-à-vis du milliardaire d’extrême droite, contre lequel il est désormais officiellement impossible de s’exprimer ? », déclare le collectif Zappons Bolloré. Sans prendre de distance, une rédactrice en chef ajointe de Libération se sert du vent glacial qui souffle désormais sur la Croisette. « Ce festival est peut-être le dernier avant l’arrivée au pouvoir de l’extrême droite, écrit-elle en gras aux abonnés de la newsletter du quotidien (…) Notre rôle est d’être le porte-voix de celles et ceux qui défendent l’indépendance, la création et la démocratie face à l’extrême droite. » C’est le prétexte pour mettre en avant un abonnement « spécial Cannes » de deux mois pour 1 euro. Ceux qui ont travaillé dans ce journal à la grande époque de Serge July sont consternés.

David Lisnard, maire de Cannes, est tout aussi choqué : « Les signataires de cette tribune auraient dû se taire. » Leur manque de clairvoyance et de connaissances sur le financement du cinéma est pointé du doigt. « En réalité, l’annonce du rachat d’UGC par Canal+ en juillet a été pour nous tous une bonne nouvelle, souligne un producteur. Par ce geste, Maxime Saada et Canal+ ont affiché leur intérêt à défendre la survie des salles de cinéma. » Un distributeur présent au fameux déjeuner dit l’avoir « senti très ému. L’essentiel de son discours a été un éloge de l’écosystème du cinéma français, du CNC ».

« Liste noire » et « menace »

Mais le mal est fait. Les producteurs et les patrons de cinémas sont effondrés. L’idée même d’une liste noire est largement dénoncée par les professionnels. Pour Philippe Martin, producteur de La Vénus électrique, présenté en ouverture du festival et déjà en salle, « il faudrait faire de la pédagogie sur le financement du cinéma. Je sens beaucoup d’émotion de part et d’autre. D’un côté, les signataires de la tribune expriment leur inquiétude vis-à-vis d’une idéologie qui se répand. De l’autre, Maxime Saada paraît atteint, alors que Canal+ défend le cinéma avec la même conviction. Quand Saada parle d’injustice, il a raison. L’essentiel de ce qu’il a dit dimanche était juste, mais je regrette sa décision. J’espère que la menace ne sera pas mise à exécution. »

Dans les conférences de presse, les équipes des films français parlent désormais moins de cinéma que de Canal+. « Quand derrière on entend “liste noire”, “menace”, ça entretient de l’anxiété, explique Jeanne Herry. Je peux parler comme réalisatrice. Le groupe Canal est très important dans ma vie professionnelle. Depuis mes débuts, à chacun de mes films (Garance, À chacun de vos visages, Pupilles, Je l’adore, NDLR), j’ai toujours été soutenue par Canal+, et distribuée par Studio Canal. »

Maxime Saada a eu des mots très forts pour défendre le CNC, mais ce point a peu été relevé. C’est bien dommage, car la défense claire et nette du CNC par le patron de Canal+ devrait justement intéresser ceux qui s’inquiètent du positionnement de Canal dans le contexte politique actuel.

Gaëtan Brunel

À la question de travailler avec les futurs blacklistés, Jeanne Herry répond par l’affirmative. Philippe Martin espère que la menace de Maxime Saada ne sera pas mise à exécution. Elle lui paraît de toute façon difficilement applicable, ou à la marge. « Je ne vois pas un film avec Juliette Binoche ou Swann Arlaud ne pas se monter pour cette raison. » Swann Arlaud, attendu mercredi 20 mai pour son rôle de fonctionnaire pétainiste dans Notre salut, d’Emmanuel Marre, ne coupera pas à la question lors des interviews.

Finalement, entre les attaques contre le CNC, celles contre France Télévisions et cette tribune contre Canal+, l’extrême gauche et l’extrême droite utilisent le cinéma à des fins de polarisation politique en vue des élections de mai 2027. Ces pompiers pyromanes jouent avec l’emploi, la création et le rayonnement de la France dans le monde. Moins de films, moins de salles, les amoureux du cinéma assistent à un champ de ruines annoncé. « Maxime Saada a eu des mots très forts pour défendre le CNC, mais ce point a peu été relevé. C’est bien dommage, car la défense claire et nette du CNC par le patron de Canal+ devrait justement intéresser ceux qui s’inquiètent du positionnement de Canal dans le contexte politique actuel », conclut Gaëtan Bruel, à la tête du CNC.

Ils lancent un consortium pour candidater à l’appel à projet « AI Gigafactories » portées par Bruxelles et dont les lauréats seront annoncés à l’automne. La bataille s’annonce rude au niveau européen pour décrocher l’un de ces projets à 10 milliards d’euros l’unité.

La France entre officiellement dans la bataille pour les méga-centres de données portés par Bruxelles. La Commission fait monter depuis un an la pression autour de « AI Gigafactory », cet appel à projets pour la création d’infrastructures à 10 milliards d’euros l’unité et visant à répondre à l’essor de l’intelligence artificielle. Alors que les lauréats sont attendus à l’automne, des poids lourds français du numérique et de l’énergie se réunissent. Les opérateurs télécoms Iliad et Orange, le fournisseur de cloud Scaleway, le fonds d’infrastructure Ardian, les sociétés de services Capgemini et Artefact, le fabricant de supercalculateurs Bull ou encore l’énergéticien EDF ont décidé d’unir leurs forces pour déposer un dossier commun dans cet appel à candidature.

« Dans les prochaines années, la compétitivité des économies européennes dépendra directement de leur capacité à accéder à une puissance de calcul massive, disponible, compétitive et souveraine », expliquent ces différents groupes dans un communiqué commun. Bruxelles débloquera 20 milliards d’euros pour soutenir ces méga-usines devant compter chacune au moins l’équivalent de 100 000 puces IA de dernière génération et qui serviront pour l’entraînement comme le fonctionnement des modèles d’IA.

Autant dire que la concurrence va faire rage pour décrocher ces aides, sachant qu’une demi-douzaine de projets, tout au plus, devraient être soutenus. Or l’appel a manifestation d’intérêt lancé par Bruxelles a suscité 80 réponses (d’entreprises seules ou en consortium) dans 16 pays de l’UE. La France comptait il y a encore quelques semaines une dizaine d’acteurs intéressés. Conscients que la dispersion n’était pas dans l’intérêt de l’Hexagone, d’autant que la Commission ne devrait retenir qu’un seul projet par pays, une bonne partie d’entre eux ont décidé de se réunir sous la bannière du consortium AION. Ce dernier a été lancé en juin 2025 à l’initiative de Scaleway, filiale du groupe Iliad. L’an passé, ce fournisseur de cloud indiquait sa volonté de créer une infrastructure équivalente à 200MW de capacité de calcul informatique.

Un écosystème vaste de partenaires

Au-delà des membres les plus éminents, le consortium assure s’appuyer sur un écosystème plus large de partenaires, académiques et industriels ainsi que des utilisateurs. On y trouve le Crédit agricole, Equans, Future4Care, GENCI, Hugging Face, INRIA, Kyutai, LightOn, Multiverse Computing, Nokia, Opcore, Quandela, PariSanté Campus, Schneider Electric, SiPearl, Sopra Steria, Verne, VSORA et ZML. « C’est un moment fondateur, assure Thomas Reynaud, patron de l’opérateur Iliad qui se trouve être également la maison mère de Scaleway. AION constitue une force de frappe technologique sans précédent, un concentré du savoir-faire numérique, industriel et énergétique français et européen ».

Les acteurs estiment que la France a des atouts pour obtenir le précieux sésame à Bruxelles. Ils rappellent que la France dispose d’une électricité bas carbone et compétitive grâce au nucléaire, mais également d’un écosystème d’IA parmi les plus dynamiques à l’échelle européenne. « En accueillant une AI Gigafactory sur son territoire, la France réunit toutes les conditions pour renforcer la souveraineté technologique européenne », insistent les membres du consortium dans leur communiqué. Charge désormais à la « dream team » française de monter un dossier robuste.

‘Hell Grind,’ a 95-minute fully AI-generated film, premieres this week at Cannes, where questions around the technology’s encroachment remain center-stage

Four street thieves are on the road to hell, literally, in an action-adventure movie debuting at the Cannes Film Festival Thursday. But what’s compelling about “Hell Grind” isn’t the campy plot: It’s that every character, setting and prop in the 95-minute movie was generated by AI.

Startup Higgsfield AI took just two weeks to make the film, and spent $500,000—80% of which went to compute costs.

For the three-year-old San Francisco-based startup, the finished film is essentially a showcase, designed to sell Hollywood studios on the quality of its AI products.

And it debuts as the debate around AI and filmmaking is changing—at least at Cannes.

For years now, AI has dominated the conversation at cinema’s yearly conclave on the French Riviera, with industry players and technologists questioning how much of the moviemaking process—from writing to acting, directing, editing and visual effects—can or should be outsourced to the tech and what it means for jobs and human creativity.

But overall, attendees say the vibe is shifting this year from one of existential fear to cautious acceptance.

During a press conference at the festival last week, actress Demi Moore said actors should find ways to work with the technology. “AI is here. And so to fight it is to fight something that is a battle that we will lose,” she said.

For many in the industry, the question comes down to how it’s used.

“The main aim as a filmmaker is I just wanted to tell stories. This is the case where AI can give you the tool to show the world your story,” said Adilet Abish, an in-house director and creative producer at Higgsfield, who worked on “Hell Grind.”

What might surprise viewers is how much technical film know-how was needed to create the movie, said Adil Alimzhanov, a content lead at Higgsfield who also worked on it.

“You have to understand camera composition, which shots are changed. Like you can’t have two close-ups back to back, you have to start with an establishing shot,” he said. “You still need those filmmaking skills.”

Higgsfield, which was valued at $1.3 billion in its latest funding round earlier this year, crossed $400 million in annual revenue run rate in May. It doesn’t make the actual video-generation models, relying instead on existing tools like Google’s Veo 3. But it does provide the tooling on top to make sure that the visuals are consistent across all the incoming generations.

Lights! … Camera! … Prompt!

With Hypershell’s X Ultra S and similar personal exoskeletons, AI takes on the great outdoors

AI is entering the physical realm in a big way. Case in point: I spent Mother’s Day e-hiking with bionic leg boosters.

I strapped my two-year-old in a hiking carrier, and went for a walk up a winding dirt trail. The robotic hip motors whirred and a mechanical force tugged at my quads.

As the incline got steeper, I opened the companion app on my phone and pressed “Boost.”

My stride quickened. The whirring got louder. As the AI marched me toward the summit, I enjoyed the view. Thirty seconds later, the surge of power was over, and the legs returned to the gentler Eco mode.

These motorized supports were once reserved for military, heavy industry and mobility rehabilitation. Now, they are light and affordable enough for regular folks—regular folks who want to feel superhuman, that is. These hip-based systems start at $900, and I tried the latest, Hypershell’s $1,999 X Ultra S.

Two weeks of testing didn’t transform me into Iron Man. But the rig did make me want to sprint everywhere—and I hate running.

A bionic puppet master

Like its competitors, Hypershell’s exoskeleton consists of a waist band and a pair of hinged thigh braces. Twin hip motors draw up to 1,000 watts to power the carbon-fiber arms that apply force to your leg. Theoretically, at its top supported speed, the X Ultra S could help you run an elite four-minute mile.

Long nature walks are more my speed, so I took the bionic legs on San Francisco’s hilliest trails. Passersby stared at the unsubtle contraption. If I looked like a dork, at least I could zoom quickly past the judgment.

The first time I wore them, the contraption felt like a puppeteer controlling my legs. The motors can jerk you around, especially if you start, stop or change direction suddenly. Once you get into a constant, repetitive motion, the push-and-pull sensation fades.

I used the mobile app to calibrate the power—25% on Eco mode was just right to start.

AI software the company calls Hyperintuition interprets your movements to deliver the right force. Going uphill, with the torque notched up, I really felt the exoskeleton at work. Climbing up stairs was like walking up an escalator. The e-assistance really shines on sand, where you normally feel your energy sapped away.

Advertisement

But as I crossed a rocky section with some loose boulders, I worried one wrong jerk could send me tumbling, so I dialed down the power. A Hypershell spokesman said that a snug, proper fit and a lower level of assistance can help on unstable terrain.

I was disappointed with my downhill experience. Descents can be exhausting but the AI isn’t smart enough to detect them. You have to dig into the app, and activate Downhill mode yourself.

A couple of power-walking hours later, I removed the legs. My body felt slow and heavy. I was like an astronaut returning to Earth, getting reacquainted with my own muscles.

The cyborg cyclist

On a bike ride, the puppet effect was even more dramatic. At one point I was barely moving my legs myself. On certain climbs, I topped out panting and exhausted, then realized my bike was in its hardest gear.

The Spandex-clad cyclists who tackle San Francisco’s iconic Hawk Hill have a saying: “The climb doesn’t get easier, you just get faster.”

That’s also true of riding with battery-boosted legs. I was out of breath because I was pedaling at my regular cadence, but each stroke had a lot more power.

The device is mostly intuitive but comes with some dangers. After my ride, I unstrapped the unit thinking it was off, but an active arm snapped back with full force. I wasn’t hurt, but it was a stark reminder of the risks of robotics in our everyday lives. Hypershell’s app includes reminders for responsible use, including the proper way to disengage.

Minutes after I returned home, the battery died. I was relieved I wasn’t stranded on a mountain, hauling 5 pounds of dead robot weight. I think in my testing I overtaxed the battery by relying on the Boost too much. The company says you can generally walk 18 miles in the X Ultra S, twice that with the included extra battery pack.

Who needs magic legs?

I’m not sure exoskeletons are ready for prime time, though early-adopter gearhead types with a couple thousand dollars to burn will have fun with them. I do look forward to taking them backcountry skiing come winter. Those long uphill climbs (not to mention keeping up with my much fitter husband) can be grueling.

Many of us could explore motorized legs as they become lighter, cheaper and more discreet: especially people who are just getting active, or older folks who want support while hiking. And there’s a case for serious athletes, who could use the Fitness setting to actually add resistance during workouts.

One side effect: My calves were sore for days. The exoskeleton made me feel like I had infinite endurance so I kept going, and my other muscles paid the price. Fortunately, another company makes a bionic system for the lower leg. Maybe I’ll wear them together for my next review—and let the bots do all the work.

Former star of ‘The Hills’ is running a biting, social-media-savvy campaign to be the next mayor of Los Angeles

Reality TV personality Spencer Pratt is running for Los Angeles mayor after his house burned down in the 2025 Palisades fire.

Pratt trails Mayor Karen Bass in recent polling ahead of the June 2 primary election.

Pratt’s campaign uses Trump-style rhetoric and social-media savvy, amplifying viral, AI-generated videos.

LOS ANGELES—Spencer Pratt knows he doesn’t need to be universally liked.

At an annual tennis invitational and white party at a billionaire’s Beverly Hills mansion last weekend, the reality TV villain and mayoral hopeful marveled at his potential path to victory.

“It’s pretty incredible you can become the mayor with only 51% of people liking you. I’m like, ‘I can do that,’” Pratt told the crowd.

Pratt, 42, rose to millennial fame as the dark prince of “The Hills,” playing the love interest of his now-wife, Heidi Montag. He provoked conflict with fellow cast members and was seen by fans as fraying Montag’s relationship with her best friend.

The couple settled into Pacific Palisades with their two sons, and Pratt opened a healing crystals business called Pratt Daddy. He trained hummingbirds to eat nectar out of his hand and posted the videos on Instagram.

Then, in early 2025, their house burned down. As the ash settled on the Palisades fire, Pratt channeled the grief and fury of thousands of displaced people, sharing with his vast following on TikTok, Instagram and X what it felt like to lose his home, his parents’ home and his childhood neighborhood.

He began demanding accountability from city and state officials, and he and Montag are now the lead plaintiffs in a continuing lawsuit blaming government agencies and utility companies for property damage. The city-run utility has said it isn’t responsible for starting the fire or for the losses that followed.

Pratt, who has said he was registered as a Republican and voted for President Trump in 2024, launched his campaign for mayor in January outside the burned shell of a Spanish-style commercial building in Pacific Palisades. He told the crowd that Los Angeles is “being managed into the ground by people who don’t have the courage to actually lead.”

He soon began to hit Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass on some of the city’s most intractable problems, including street homelessness and the stagnating entertainment industry. His campaign has captivated residents who are frustrated with the slow pace of fire recovery and with Bass, who was out of the country when the fires started and whose approval ratings plunged afterward.

Pratt stole the show early in a recent debate. He called Bass an “incredible liar” and said homeless people were using “super meth.”

The latest independent polling shows Bass leading four challengers, with Pratt and Nithya Raman, a City Council member, within striking distance of each other for second place. The top two finishers from the June 2 nonpartisan primary will advance to the November election if no candidate wins a majority of votes.

Pratt earned his political science degree at the University of Southern California but hasn’t held public office. After “The Hills,” he continued to dabble in reality TV with roles on “Celebrity Big Brother” and “Marriage Boot Camp” and earlier this year published a memoir, “The Guy You Loved to Hate: Confessions from a Reality TV Villain.”

Supporters see Pratt as a fresh face who talks openly about the city’s dysfunction. His lack of experience with government might even be an upside, they say, since the system seems so broken.

“The urban blight has become so bad,” said Andy Heyward, chief executive of the animation company Kartoon Studios. Pratt “could be a turning point, a tipping point character,” he said.

Heyward co-hosted a fundraiser with his wife last week at which Pratt was smudged with sage before standing in front of a giant amethyst geode to address about 125 people.

Recent donors to Pratt’s campaign include Lucian Grainge and his son Elliot Grainge, the respective chief executives of Universal and Atlantic music groups, and the entertainment investor and major Democratic Party donor Haim Saban, city records show.

David Solomon, 46, who works in real estate, said he became invested in the mayoral race after break-in attempts at his home in Santa Monica Canyon.

“L.A. is like the most liberal place on the planet,” Solomon said. “Everybody I know that’s a Democrat is voting for Spencer.”

At a Brentwood fundraiser last week, the record producer David Foster and his wife, the singer Katharine McPhee, serenaded Pratt with a cover of the ’80s anthem “The Best.” “You’re simply the best, better than all the rest,” McPhee sang as she name-checked some of his opponents, according to a video shared to Instagram.

Critics said Pratt is untested and has little understanding of major issues including housing, affordability and the job market. He has advocated for removing homeless people from the streets, including with involuntary, temporary psychiatric holds, and said the city should “not perpetuate and indulge their addiction.” Experts said some of his proposals could face legal and logistical challenges. “The ‘homeless’ problem is a drug abuse problem, and you can’t fix drug addiction with housing,” Pratt said in a statement to The Wall Street Journal.

Going viral

Pratt is running a flood-the-zone, attention-grabbing campaign, heavy on podcast appearances—including “The Joe Rogan Experience,” “The Adam Carolla Show” and “All-In”—and lighter on interviews with traditional news outlets. (His campaign declined to make Pratt available for an interview.) He mixes Trumpian rhetoric with social-video savvy reminiscent of other millennial politicians, including New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani.

Pratt has brought national attention to his campaign by amplifying a torrent of viral, AI-generated content. One Batmanesque video, which his campaign said neither he nor formal surrogates made, showed Bass as the Joker, being pelted in the face with tomatoes.

Bass told CNN that she is worried by the “violent turn” of the videos, including one that showed her and California Gov. Gavin Newsom being drowned.

Bass campaign spokesman Alex Stack said Pratt is running a campaign “based on AI slop and no plans,” while Bass is focused on delivering results.

Raman, the City Council member, said in a statement that Pratt won’t be able to deliver the change he has promised and that “anger alone will not fix Los Angeles.”

In one ad, Pratt showed the city-owned mayoral mansion in leafy Windsor Square before cutting to a silver Airstream trailer on an empty lot. “This is where I live,” he said.

After TMZ reported that Pratt was staying at the Hotel Bel-Air, where the cheapest room starts at $999 a night before taxes, he said his security team, concerned about death threats, wouldn’t let him stay in the Airstream “even if I wanted to.”

Pratt’s handling of criticism reflects his years of practice as a reality TV villain: deflect and redirect without breaking a sweat.

In a recent campaign ad, Pratt rapped to his own version of “The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air” theme song, “This is a story all about how my life got flipped, turned upside down and I had to take a minute to run for mayor,” he said.

Some of Bass’s backers have started running digital ads calling Pratt “too Republican for Los Angeles.”

Less than 15% of Los Angeles city voters are registered Republicans, and the electorate last chose a GOP mayor in 1997. Four years ago, the billionaire developer Rick Caruso, a Democrat who was previously registered as a Republican, spent more than $100 million running against Bass and lost by nearly 10 percentage points.

Pratt said on the “We Need to Talk” podcast that his voter registration and past political preferences wouldn’t affect his campaign. “You can’t box me up with other peoples’ politics,” he said.

On Wednesday, Pratt mingled with voters in South Los Angeles, including Stevie Hodge, a retired mover who stopped by to get some free barbecue.

Hodge walked away conflicted. He liked that Pratt came to the neighborhood but said he didn’t know enough about his policies. Bass has done some work to help the homeless, Hodge said, but he doesn’t want to vote for her again.

“I think I’ll wait and vote in November,” he said.

Reporting breakdown and weak health systems in conflict-hit country allowed virus to go undetected for weeks

In the disease ‘hot zone’ in the north east of the Democratic Republic of Congo where Ebola has been spreading undetected for weeks, residents are gripped with fear.

It has taken a long time for the mystery deaths in the community to be identified, said Mwanza Myrah Noella, a student from Bunia, the regional capital of Ituri province on the Ugandan border.

“Everything is being done urgently, measures are being put in place in the hospitals. But that doesn’t mean you stop fearing you could be next,” she said.

The latest Ebola outbreak in DR Congo is testing both the impact of western funding cuts on pandemic preparedness and the resilience of health systems in a country that has battled the disease for decades.

“DR Congo has been the country most affected by Ebola and possesses an unrivalled expertise in managing Ebola epidemics,” said Jean-Jacques Muyembe, director of Congo’s National ​Institute for Biomedical Research.

Despite that experience, “rapid detection and management of an epidemic in conflict zones like Ituri requires huge financial and material resources”, he said. DR Congo alone does not possess these.

The country has had 18 Ebola outbreaks since 1976, when Muyembe provided biopsy and blood samples in the north of what was then Zaire that helped lead to the discovery of the disease. That includes the current one, which is centred in a region riddled with armed groups.

What is alarming public health officials about the latest outbreak, which has already claimed at least 139 lives and which the World Health Organization on Sunday labelled a “public health emergency of international concern”, is the breakdown that appears to have taken place in reporting procedures.

This meant the disease went undetected, allowing it to spread across several health zones to the eastern city of Goma, the capital Kinshasa in the west and in two cases across the border into Uganda.

The latest figures from international and local aid agencies in DR Congo count 536 suspected cases overall.

Only in the past week have international and local officials rushed to put in place containment procedures with a proven record in limiting the spread of the disease. Even now, the WHO is unsure of the extent of the outbreak.

“It should not have got to this stage weeks in where you have hundreds of active contacts, multiple deaths and no one had been alerted,” said a former WHO official with years of experience in complex emergencies, including the Ebola crisis in west Africa in 2014.

The first cases had been flagged at community level at least five weeks ago but there had been a “breakdown in the chain of reporting”, the person said.

The first known transmission of the disease occurred in Mongbwalu, a bustling artisanal gold mining town in north-eastern Ituri, where residents said they felt trapped.

“I have already lost two of my neighbours,” said a Mongbwalu shop owner contacted by the FT. “People are frightened, but they can’t leave because this is where they earn their money.”

Blood samples were sent last month from Mongbwalu to Bunia, where there have also been 16 suspected cases. But the laboratory there failed to detect the rare Bundibugyo strain of the disease. This is the third time this strain has taken root.

“The Bunia laboratory was unable to confirm the outbreak because it only had GeneXpert cartridges specific to the Ebola Zaire virus, which do not detect other Ebola viruses,” Muyembe said.

Samples should have been sent much earlier to Kinshasa, where they have molecular diagnostic platforms to detect the Bundibugyo strain, and those samples that did arrive had not been properly refrigerated, he added.

The former WHO official said international donors and agencies needed to address the question of why — despite huge investments in tackling Ebola over the years — seemingly insufficient funds had been dedicated towards financing the basics of prevention and containment in DR Congo. These included outreach on how to prevent contagion, diagnostics and acting early in non-affected areas.

“The Congolese out of everybody have so much experience with this, but they didn’t even have tests that work. That should be the priority, along with community outreach,” the person said, adding that whole families had been wiped out in clusters long before the disease was flagged. “The reality is you stop it and save lives with the basics.”

Relief agency officials are concerned the response gathering pace now will be greatly complicated by the conflict in eastern Congo, parts of which are in rebel hands.

Ebola has been a recurring killer in various parts of Africa and has played a formative role in global health policies to combat infectious conditions with epidemic and pandemic potential.

The current crisis is set against a backdrop of wider turmoil in the financing of global and developing world health initiatives and has revealed gaps in international efforts to target lethal infectious conditions that could become epidemics or pandemics.

The US under Donald Trump has drastically cut its aid budget and other rich countries have also slashed global health funding since Covid-19.

“I don’t think that there’s any doubt that a lot of countries have pulled back from pandemic preparedness,” said Nicole Lurie, executive director for preparedness and response at the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations.

The way the Ebola outbreak in DR Congo “got so out of control before it was detected” was “particularly disappointing”, she said. “That I think speaks to the need for better diagnostic tests and better surveillance.”

Lurie said the “bright spot” was the number of partners now prepared to contribute to an urgent hunt to find a vaccine for the Bundibugyo virus strain.

“I’m gratified about the way the world comes together when there’s a crisis like this [but] it’s very disappointing to see how quickly that sense of solidarity falls apart when a crisis abates,” she said.

Oil drops nearly 6% as two China-bound supertankers cross Strait of Hormuz

Brent crude falls to about $105 a barrel as Asia-bound vessels raise hopes of resumption of energy flows

Two supertankers carrying Iraqi oil to China passed through the Strait of Hormuz on Wednesday, raising hopes of a partial opening of the vital chokepoint for Middle Eastern energy and sending crude prices tumbling.

Shipping data showed the two ships traversing the strategic waterway. A third supertanker transporting Kuwaiti oil to South Korea was also shown to be in the strait before its transponder was switched off.

Collectively, the three ships are carrying 6mn barrels of oil, potentially the largest volume to exit the Gulf in a single day since the US and Israel started the conflict with Iran at the end of February.

The supertankers steered through the northern side of the strait, following a route designated by Iran. “It is most likely that there was a deal done with Iran,” said Matthew Wright, lead shipping analyst at data company Kpler.

Analysts at shipping data company Windward said the passage of the ships, two days after Iran launched a new agency to administer permits and charge tolls, suggested the strait “is no longer a closed corridor but a contested and tiered-access environment”, shaped by US and Iranian enforcement.

To boost the credibility of its new agency, Tehran also on Wednesday said 26 vessels had passed through the strait over the previous 24 hours, although it was not possible to verify the claim using ship-tracking data.

Brent crude settled 5.6 per cent lower at $105.02 a barrel as traders reacted to the optimism over the crossings, the prospect of further negotiations between the US and Iran, and the latest US data showing better than expected stocks of petrol and diesel.

The fall in oil prices sparked a rally in global bond markets, which had sold off sharply over the past week on fears that the prolonged closure of the strait was fuelling a surge in inflation. The 10-year Treasury yield fell 0.1 percentage points to 4.57 per cent.

On Monday, Tehran announced the creation of the Gulf Strait Authority (PGSA), describing it as the “legal entity and representative authority for managing the passage and transit through the Strait of Hormuz”.

Wright said the new body was “a formalisation” of Iran’s previous requests for vessels to seek permission and pay fees for passage.

The supertankers’ transit came after US President Donald Trump said he was holding off on renewing attacks on Iran, while claiming “serious negotiations” with Tehran were taking place.

He added Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates had asked him to suspend the military assault. Riyadh and Doha are supporting mediation efforts to build on a fragile ceasefire and secure an agreement to end the war.

Trump on Wednesday repeated his warnings that the US could hit Iran “even harder” if Tehran does not agree to a deal.

Saudi Arabia’s foreign minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan earlier on Wednesday said the kingdom “highly appreciates” Trump’s decision to “give diplomacy a chance”.

“Saudi Arabia looks forward to Iran seizing the opportunity to avoid the dangerous implications of escalation, and urgently responding to the efforts to advance the negotiations leading up to a comprehensive agreement to achieve lasting peace in the region and the world,” Prince Faisal said on X.

However, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Iran’s parliament speaker and influential wartime leader, said in an audio message on Wednesday that the US had not abandoned its military objectives and was seeking a “new round of adventurism and war”.

Iran brought the strait to a standstill in the early days of the conflict by threatening to fire on any vessels, while the US imposed its own naval blockade in mid-April to prevent ships entering or leaving Iranian ports.

Meanwhile, the shipping industry issued new guidance on how to safely transit the strait on Wednesday. In a 22-page document for shipowners and crews, a group of industry bodies outlined when to consider a crossing, when not to and how to proceed.

It warned all routes through the strait carried elevated risk, that ships should take into account reports of mined areas and that there had been incidents on the northern and southern routes. 

Shipping traffic through Hormuz has been sharply curtailed since the conflict began, although crossings have not stopped altogether. A small number of vessels have passed through the strait each day.

According to Kpler, six other supertankers have transited Hormuz this month bound for Asia, and a total of almost 17mn barrels of crude have passed through the strait. Gulf exporters shipped almost 28mn barrels through it during April.

Wright cautioned against interpreting Wednesday’s movements as evidence of a broader reopening of Gulf oil flows.

“What we have seen is a handful of negotiated transits. Fundamentally, nothing has changed,” he said. “The real test will be whether we see more Chinese or Korean-bound vessels going forward.”

Elon Musk’s rocket-to-AI conglomerate lays out its planetary ambitions

Elon Musk’s SpaceX has unveiled the details of one of the most audacious IPOs in history.

Its 200,000-word prospectus, released on Wednesday, lays out a vision of asteroid mining and “passenger transport to the Moon and Mars” resting on a business that is still lossmaking and an unprecedented governance structure that gives the mercurial billionaire near total control.

Musk’s ambition to extend “the light of consciousness to the stars” and harness the sun “to power a truth-seeking artificial intelligence” will be tested next month in the largest flotation of all time.

Here’s what we learned from the SpaceX IPO filing.

AI-driven cash burn

The vast prospectus highlights the extent to which Musk’s 24-year-old rockets-to-chatbot conglomerate has become a bet on AI.

The world’s richest man has identified the technology as by far the largest market for SpaceX to address, with a potential value of $26.5tn, dwarfing the $2tn or so from the group’s Starlink internet service and space operations.

He is investing intensively in an area where SpaceX trails market leaders OpenAI, Anthropic and Google. The company spent close to $13bn on AI hardware last year, recording an operating loss of $6.4bn for that business segment. That dragged it to a net loss despite Starlink generating $4.4bn in operating income.

However, Musk has recently been able to monetise the surplus computing resources he has managed to build. The filing revealed Anthropic will pay $15bn a year to lease space in both of SpaceX’s flagship Colossus data centres.

The deal could be worth $45bn in revenue to SpaceX between now and May 2029, which would more than offset the outlay on hardware. But the decision to lease to a direct competitor highlights the limited uptake of Musk’s own Grok chatbot.

Extraterrestrial data centres

SpaceX wants to leverage this “terrestrial experience” in computing infrastructure to launch a vast constellation of orbital data centres powered by the sun and cooled by the vacuum of space.

Moving the burden of AI computing into orbit is the first step, on the path to the wider opportunities, including the “emergence of new trillion-dollar markets on the Moon, Mars, and beyond”.

In the near term, these ambitions rely on the success of SpaceX’s latest Starship rocket — a reusable spacecraft taller than a 35-storey building. The company’s ability to cheaply launch satellites has helped it corner the launch market, ferrying 80 per cent of all the mass lifted into orbit each year since 2023.

“Over time, especially with orbital data centres, we expect to serve AI at extremely high scale,” Musk wrote on X on Wednesday afternoon.

One investor said that even if xAI’s models flop, the “orbital data centres work with or without Grok”. If Musk’s chatbot does not need the new capacity, he said, the SpaceX chief still had “CoreWeave in the sky”, referring to the fast-growing cloud computing company.

Billion-dollar rewards for Musk loyalists

The blockbuster listing will unlock vast new wealth for SpaceX executives and investors if the company reaches a $1.75tn valuation. Shares held by president Gwynne Shotwell and chief financial officer Bret Johnsen will be worth more than $1bn apiece.

Longtime Musk backer and SpaceX director Antonio Gracias, head of Valor Equity Partners, holds 503mn shares across several funds, which could be worth $70bn or more. Luke Nosek, who co-founded both PayPal and Founders Fund alongside Peter Thiel and joined SpaceX’s board in 2008, holds a stake worth about $5bn.

But all of the holdings pale in comparison to the riches that Musk will unlock. He holds 5.1bn vested shares, or about 41 per cent of the total, which could be worth about $700bn. A successful listing could see him become the world’s first trillionaire.

An unfireable CEO

SpaceX’s board has gone to unusual lengths to cement Musk’s control. It recently granted him two large batches of super-voting class B shares, 1.3bn in total, which carry 10 votes per share.

These shares vest in tranches as SpaceX reaches market capitalisation milestones and either builds powerful orbital AI data centres or establishes a permanent human colony on Mars with at least 1mn inhabitants.

But because the shares were issued to Musk as restricted stock, rather than options or RSUs, the filing shows that he can wield the voting power of these shares immediately, and for as long as he remains employed at SpaceX.

Musk can only be removed as chair or chief executive by a majority vote of the class B shareholders — and personally controls 93.6 per cent of the share class — in effect guaranteeing his position.

Musk has agreed to a “lock-up” period — the amount of time before which pre-IPO shareholders can sell their stakes — of 366 days, twice as long as the 180-day lock-up period typical of most IPOs.

Some other large shareholders will have lock-ups that resemble Musk’s while others will be free to sell out of their positions after the standard 180 days.

Potential hiccups from Musk’s unchallenged control were highlighted by the disclosure that SpaceX bought $131mn of Cybertrucks from Tesla last year at retail price. That could equate to 1,500 of the poorly selling vehicles.

Cosmic risk factors

The concentration of power in Musk’s hands, as well as the chief executive’s potential conflicts of interest, are cited in 37 pages of risk disclosures — alongside the technical complexity of pulling off aims such as lunar power generation.

The extensive risk warnings reflect a company that operates across three distinct sectors having swallowed Musk’s social media site X and AI lab xAI. The S-1 lays out dangers ranging from onerous regulation to “space-related risks” including “radiation from solar and cosmic sources; micrometeoroids and orbital debris” and “human injury or death”.

The company also points to ongoing litigation and regulatory probes into the creation of non-consensual explicit images and “content representing children in sexualized contexts”.

Wednesday’s filing also warns: “We have a history of net losses and may not achieve profitability in the future.”

Goldman beat most of Wall Street to lead position

Goldman Sachs pipped rivals Morgan Stanley, JPMorgan, Citigroup, Bank of America and UBS to lead the IPO, which features a total of 23 Wall Street lenders that will act as underwriters on the deal.

Retail investors will be allocated a chunk of the freshly listed shares via Charles Schwab, Fidelity’s brokerage unit and Robinhood, among others.

Legal advisers on the deal include Gibson Dunn and Davis Polk.