Toy Story 5 Sneakily Addressed A Decades-Long Plot Hole

Though it seems to have divided critics, Toy Story 5 has proven an undeniable box office success. It’s achieved the franchise’s biggest ever opening weekend, raking in over £227 million in the two-day stretch.

We loved the new installment – entertainment editor Daniel Welsh described it as “a return to form for the beloved animated series [and] for Pixar in general, after a hit-and-miss run for the once-untouchable studio”.

And as ScreenRant pointed out, the movie should satisfy long-standing viewers on another front too: it addressed a decades-long plot hole.

Buzz Lightyear doesn’t know he’s a toy for much of the first 1995 Toy Story movie. He truly believes he’s a Space Ranger and tries to contact his Space Command.

But that leaves a problem fans have previously pointed out on sites like Reddit: if Buzz doesn’t think he’s a toy, why does he freeze when Andy (the human owner of the toys) enters a room he’s also in?

All the other toys stop moving and talking whenever a person can see them, presumably so they can keep up their secret activity unnoticed.

But, some fans have argued, if Buzz saw himself as another human, it didn’t make sense for him to maintain the illusion of inanimacy.

Toy Story 5 seems to have given us an answer.

The new movie begins with a batch of Buzz Lightyear toys, all of which (though they’d probably prefer “of whom”) think they’re real Rangers.

Like Andy’s Buzz Lightyear, they try to contact their Space Command and can’t get through. Instead, they end up in a shipping crate in a shipyard.

When a worker gets close to them, all of the toys freeze.

And once they come back to life, one of them asks: “Why did we freeeze?”

Nobody has an answer, though one Buzz muses: “fascinating”.

It doesn’t fully explain the plot hole. But it does address it, and it shows that freezing isn’t a conscious choice for the toys – meaning Buzz probably froxe because he didn’t have any other option.

Share Button

Analysis: Andy Burnham’s Big Speech Left Big Questions He Refused To Answer

Andy Burnham today showed exactly why Labour MPs are desperate for him to replace Keir Starmer as prime minister as he laid out his vision for the country.

The former mayor of Greater Manchester was pretty much everything the current PM is not.

From the smart-casual clothes he wore to the easy charm with which he delivered his speech, this was clearly a man who – unlike Starmer – is very comfortable in his own skin.

His remedy for the UK’s ills also stand in marked contrast to the man who he will replace in 10 Downing Street in less than a month’s time.

Burnham was clear that he wants nothing less than the complete “rewiring” of the way Britain is run, with a huge shift of power away from Westminster to local communities and regions across England.

That, he said, would lead to the biggest council house building programme of the post-war period, economic growth “in every postcode”, lower energy bills and prices coming down in the shops.

He also signalled a massive change in education policy, with a greater focus on technical qualifications rather than the drive to get more young people to go to university.

“I am going to do things differently,” Burnham declared. “I am going to break with the ‘more of the same’ approach that has got us here.

“I am going to give Britain the circuit-breaker it needs by building a more collaborative politics in Westminster, by taking power out of the centre and putting it in the hands of the people and places who can use it best.”

A bit like motherhood and apple pie, there was little in the speech that any reasonable person could, in good faith, take exception to.

But for all the soaring rhetoric about putting “hope in every heart”, it lacked one important thing: an explanation of how it will all work in practice.

Burnham failed to explain how putting more power in the hands of local politicians rather than those in Whitehall will magically improve the lives of everyone in the country was not explained.

It was therefore unfortunate, to put it mildly, that the many journalists who had been invited to watch the speech were not then given the opportunity to ask him questions about it.

Because let’s not forget, this is a man who was not even an MP a month ago, and yet stands on the threshold of assuming the highest office in the land without even having to go to the trouble of winning a leadership contest, let alone a general election.

What’s more, he is a man who – for all his previous ministerial experience from 20 years ago – has not even been an MP for the best part of a decade.

If this is not the time for him to answer detailed questions about what exactly he plans to do with the reins of power, then when till it be?

How does he plan to stop the small boats crossing the English Channel, for instance, or get to grips with the ballooning welfare bill?

And that’s before we even come to how he plans to deal with the threat posed by Vladimir Putin or repair the UK government’s relations with Donald Trump’s White House.

Which brings us to another – more worrying – difference between Andy Burnham and Keir Starmer.

For all his faults, the soon-to-be-former PM would not have made a speech like that and then refused to take any questions on it.

Listen to Commons People, the podcast that makes politics easy. Every week, Kevin Schofield and Kate Nicholson unpack the week’s biggest stories to keep you informed. Join us for straightforward analysis of what’s going on at Westminster.

Share Button

James Cleverly Fails To Back Kemi Badenoch Over Nazi Row

James Cleverly has refused to back Kemi Badenoch after she compared education secretary Bridget Phillipson to a Nazi.

The Tory leader said the cabinet minister “has acted like a Gestapo officer” by ending a tax break for private schools, which has led to some being forced to close due to falling pupil numbers.

She said: “I compared her to a Gestapo officer, acting like a Gestapo officer, with the way she was closing down those schools which didn’t appeal to her own ideology.”

Responding on X, Phillipson said: “The Gestapo marched hundreds of thousands of innocent people to their deaths. I’ve ended private schools’ tax breaks to invest in state schools.

“No responsible leader makes vile comparisons like this. Kemi Badenoch is not fit to be Prime Minister.”

On BBC One’s Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg show, shadow housing secretary Cleverly distanced himself from Badenoch’s choice of language.

Asked by presenter Victoria Derbyshire if he would have made that comparison, he said: “No I probably wouldn’t have done.”

Later in the interview, he said: “That wouldn’t have been the phraseology that I would use.”

Labour chair Anna Turley said: “Kemi’s top team won’t defend the indefensible because they know full well Kemi Badenoch’s comments were completely appalling and deeply inappropriate.

“Time and again Badenoch sinks below the standards the public rightly expect from a Leader of His Majesty’s opposition. The simple fact is she’s not up to the job.”

Listen to Commons People, the podcast that makes politics easy. Every week, Kevin Schofield and Kate Nicholson unpack the week’s biggest stories to keep you informed. Join us for straightforward analysis of what’s going on at Westminster.

Share Button

Victoria Derbyshire Roasts ‘Hypocritical’ Lucy Powell Over Liz Truss Snap Election Demand

Victoria Derbyshire branded Labour’s deputy leader “hypocritical” after she said Andy Burnham should not call a snap election, despite demanding one when Liz Truss quit.

Lucy Powell demanded the country go to the polls after Truss resigned as prime minister in October, 2022, after just 49 days in office.

On BBC One’s Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg, which was presented this morning by Derbyshire, Powell was reminded of a post she put on Facebook that day.

Derbyshire told her: “You posted ‘let the public decide the next prime minister. General election now’. Do you want a general election now so the public can decide their next prime minister?”

Powell said: “I think we were in very particular times after Liz Truss had crashed the economy, making big decisions that had nothing to do with the Conservative manifesto.”

But Derbyshire told her: “The principle is the same. Let the public decide on the next prime minister, you wrote. So that situation could apply to now. Do you want the public to decide on the next prime minister now?”

Changing tack, Powell said: “We live in a parliamentary democracy, where the prime minister is chosen by MPs.”

When the presenter pointed out that wasn’t what she was saying in 2022, Powell replied: “What we had then was two prime ministers in less than two months, one of whom who came along and didn’t listen to anyone around her.

“The big institutions that support this country took some big decisions for which every single one of us paid a very, very heavy price in inflation going through the roof and our mortgage rates going through the rook after a period of real disruption.”

Derbyshire said: “So you don’t think there should be a general election now. Is that not hypocritical?”

Powell replied: “No, I don’t think it is, because I think what people want to see now is us getting on with the job, delivering on the manifesto that we were elected on only two years ago.”

Burnham is set to become prime minister on July 20, barely a month after being elected MP for Makerfield.

Keir Starmer announced last Monday that he is standing down after losing the support of his MPs.

With no one else expected to throw their hat into the ring, Burnham will be named Labour leader at a special conference on July 17, and take over as PM three days later.

Listen to Commons People, the podcast that makes politics easy. Every week, Kevin Schofield and Kate Nicholson unpack the week’s biggest stories to keep you informed. Join us for straightforward analysis of what’s going on at Westminster.

Share Button

‘An Unmitigated Disaster’: Piers Morgan Slams Brexit And Says UK Would Vote To Rejoin EU

Brexit has been “an unmitigated disaster” and the UK would vote to rejoin the European Union “in a landslide”, Piers Morgan has said.

The broadcaster’s comments come as Britain marks the 10th anniversary of the 2016 referendum, which Leave won by 52% to 48%.

Since then, an astonishing six prime ministers have quit as British politics has lurched from one crisis to another in a period of unprecedented political turmoil.

On BBC One’s Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg programme, Morgan put that down to the country having “a succession of terrible governments”.

He added: “What happened in 2016, 10 years ago? We voted to leave the European Union.

“I had an open mind, I voted to Remain, but I said ‘OK, Brexit is the brave new world, if it’s going to change our fortunes for the better I’d be the first to say great’.

“And it’s been a pretty well unmitigated disaster. Every prime minister, every government, has to deal with events. This was a self-inflicted injury.

“When David Cameron called that Brexit referendum, he assumed he was going to win it. And who was it sold this to the country? Nigel Farage, the snake oil salesman.

“I hope he comes on your show next week and I hope you properly grill him about why should we believe you now?”

Morgan added: “The first thing Andy Burnham should do [when he becomes PM], apart from call an election [and if he] calls it and wins it, have another referndum.

“Ask the British public whether they still believe that Brexit has been a great success. And I think this country would vote in a landslide to go back into the European Union, albeit in a leading role to reform the EU.”

Listen to Commons People, the podcast that makes politics easy. Every week, Kevin Schofield and Kate Nicholson unpack the week’s biggest stories to keep you informed. Join us for straightforward analysis of what’s going on at Westminster.

Share Button

Across The World, Young People Are Experiencing ‘Climate Grief’

Schools have closed. Wildfires have broken out. Trains have been cancelled and buses have caught on fire.

It’s not just the UK, and it’s not just this month. Parts of France and Spain have experienced exceptionally high heat, while India has been battling a weeks-long, unbearably hot spell. The El Niño currently in place will probably bring very hot weather “nearly everywhere for June to August,” the UN said.

These warming trends have been growing for decades, and are expected to continue. So perhaps it’s no wonder people – especially younger people – are experiencing “climate grief”.

In a TikTok, UK poster Daisy said: “Climate grief is so crazy… the world I grew up in is just gone. I spend my summers bracing for hellish heat in a country that has no infrastructure for it.”

The comments were filled with people from the UK and across the world who agreed with the sentiment – “my kids have never experienced a snow day,” one reads. Other replies came from the US, Germany, Poland, the Netherlands, and more.”

Here, HuffPost UK spoke to 19-year-old German student Emilia Werth (who commented on Daisy’s video), Alison Kirkman from Greenpeace UK, and psychologist Dr Candice O’Neil about the phenomenon.

What is “climate grief”?

Dr O’Neil said, ”[Climate grief is] a deeply existential concern and links heavily with fears around mortality, death and dying – the ambiguity of all that we know about the world around us changing and evolving beyond our control.”

It’s “especially prevalent with younger generations who are thought to be more conscious and proactive about… our climate.”

Maybe you’ve begun to miss the sense of certainty that used to come with changing seasons and holidays, or are worried you’ll never experience the autumn and winter you loved as a child again.

Kirkman said that for her, “Summer swifts feel fewer where I live this year. I find myself searching for them, every day willing more to come, but lack of insects have seen some bird numbers plummet to record lows.

“Grass verges and hedgerows no longer buzz with clouds of butterflies and bees and wildflowers are increasingly absent – often shaded out by grasses and other dominant greenery as fertilisers seep into soils at field edges.

“For younger generations especially, there is a painful sense that parts of the natural world are being lost before they’ve had the chance to know them.”

Werth said she began feeling “climate grief” aged around 10.

“I was aware of climate change before, but realizing us humans are the direct cause of it deeply troubled me, I think. I often feel helpless,” she told HuffPost UK.

“I… feel like it doesn’t matter what I do as an individual, it will never be enough. In general, I feel a kind of Weltschmerz (pain for the world/what’s happening in the world).

“It makes me anxious to the point where I am terrified of… any kind of heat.”

How can we live with “climate grief”?

We asked environmental campaigning group Greenpeace how they handle “climate grief”.

Kirkman said: “Giving space to climate and nature grief matters because it can easily turn into numbness or despair. But it’s also a powerful reminder of the things we love and turning our grief into action is one of the best ways of finding hope again.”

For instance, she said, wildlife loss is not inevitable.

“Nature will bounce back if we let it, so by speaking up together… we can turn our grief into the kind of pressure ministers can’t ignore.”

Dr O’Neil had similar advice.

“Seek to join online or in-person groups with a shared mission” to help the climate, she wrote.

“Other ways of coping might be discussing concerns in the hopes of educating and influencing friends and loved ones to adapt habits which keep us conscious and mindful of our climate.”

This can help you to reframe issues from ”‘I’m not doing enough to protect the climate’ to ‘I am actively working to protect the climate, my choices reflect my purpose-driven goal to live with an awareness and committed action towards this,’” she ended.

Share Button

‘I’m Not Lying’: Fiona Bruce Clashes With Zia Yusuf In BBC Question Time Bias Row

BBC Question Time presenter Fiona Bruce clashed with Zia Yusuf after he suggested the show’s audience was not balanced.

Reform UK’s home affairs spokesman complained after only eight people put their hands up when he asked who supported the party.

But Bruce hit back by insisting the BBC was “scrupulous” in ensuring the make-up of the audience represented wider public opinion.

After one audience member said Nigel Farage should never be prime minister, Yusuf said to Bruce: “You did ask earlier who supports Reform, and I make out four people in the audience put their hands up, which is interesting given Reform is at 28% in the polls.

“It’s a genuine question, can we get a show of hands from people who actually support Reform?”

When several people put their hands up, Bruce told him: “I think you’ll see that’s a bit more than four.”

Yusuf said: “I make that eight. It’s certainly nowhere close to representative I’m afraid, Fiona.”

But Bruce told him: “Can I just point out there are more people than that in the audience, they’re just not putting their hands up.”

Yusuf said: “We’ll all have to take the BBC’s word for that.”

In response, Bruce said the corporation was “scrupulous” in ensuring the Question Time audience is balanced.

“I’m certainly not lying about it, I can tell you that,” she said.

When Yusuf then asked “where’s the evidence”, the presenter replied: “As you know, we interview everybody over the phone, we check their social media.

“But what also happens is not everyone wants to put their hand up and show their political allegiance on national television, and there is nothing I can do about that, I’m afraid.”

Listen to Commons People, the podcast that makes politics easy. Every week, Kevin Schofield and Kate Nicholson unpack the week’s biggest stories to keep you informed. Join us for straightforward analysis of what’s going on at Westminster.

Share Button

The ‘Overlooked’ Social Anxiety Symptom That Appears When You Say Someone’s Name

When you think about social anxiety, you might imagine common symptoms like sweating, avoiding group conversations, and trembling.

But a 2025 paper called another lesser known sign of social anxiety – dubbed alexinomia – “important” and “overlooked”.

Alexinomia, which seems to have been coined in 2023 in a Frontiers study, may also be linked to autism and mental health conditions, though it is not an illness or diagnosis in and of itself. Research from 2024 suggests it may be more “widespread” than many of us realise.

Here, we spoke to BACP-certified therapists Kamalyn Kaur and Bhavna Raithatha about what the term means, who it might affect, and what to do if you think you have it.

What is alexinomia?

“Alexinomia is the fear of speaking someone’s name,” Raithatha told us.

Kaur described it as “when someone experiences extreme discomfort, difficulty, or even anxiety when using a person’s name in conversation, even when they know the person’s name and the person really well”.

An example, Kaur added, might be that someone is able to ask their friend Hannah, “Can you please pass me the salt?”, but would find it harder to say “Hannah, can you please pass me the salt?”.

“Using the person’s name can trigger feelings of vulnerability, self-consciousness, or emotional exposure,” Kaur added.

Mentioning someone’s name directly might feel too intimate or embarrassing: “Often the difficulty is less about the name itself and more about what the name represents emotionally,” Kaur continued.

“For some people saying the name out loud feels like suddenly acknowledging closeness in a relationship e.g. ‘If I say your name, I’m stepping into closeness I don’t fully safe in yet’.”

She said that “avoidants or anxious-avoidants” may find that “saying someone’s name brings up a fear of dependency or attachment, so not using the person’s name becomes a subtle way of staying emotionally regulated and feeling in control”.

Who might get alexinomia?

According to Kaur, the condition may be more likely among people who experience:

  • Social anxiety
  • Shyness or self-consciousness
  • Fear of being judged or noticed
  • Insecure attachment patterns
  • Difficulty with emotional intimacy or vulnerability
  • A history of feeling emotionally unsafe or unstable in relationships.

Then, Raithatha continued, there’s culture to consider. “Historically and culturally, many people are raised to address others as uncle or auntie, Mrs or Mr so and so. To then be expected (as I was) to address people not only by their names, but elders by their first name was incredibly anxiety provoking. I still address people with their titles out of respect,” she told us.

Meanwhile, others may be worried about saying someone’s name wrong, could have come from a background which involved a lot of bullying, and/or have been silenced often as a child – all of which the therapist said may increase your odds of developing alexinomia.

What should I do if I have alexinomia?

“Like many anxiety related behaviours, avoidance tends to strengthen the fear so it’s best to gradually expose yourself to saying the name rather than avoid it altogether,” Kaur shared.

Some first steps may include saying the person’s name when you are alone, using it in text messages before actually saying it, practising short greetings (e.g., ‘Hi Hannah’, ‘Nice to see you, Hannah,’” and gradually using people’s names in real conversations.

Small, repeated challenges can help over time, she advised.

Additionally, Alexinomia appears closely linked to social anxiety, so experts suggest working on this could also help with the former.

“Approaches such as cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), nervous system regulation, somatic approaches, and self-compassion practices can help,” said Kaur.

The therapist also thinks becoming self-aware of, and staying present during, the discomfort can help. Ask yourself questions like:

  • What do I worry will happen if I say their name?
  • Does it feel too intimate?
  • Am I worried about sounding awkward?
  • Do I worry about drawing attention to myself?

Raithatha ended that, ultimately, the important thing is to have tried: “You should be proud for trying, the more you do it, the easier it will feel.”

Share Button

Personal Trainer Shares The ‘Single Most Valuable’ Piece of Gym Equipment

We recently asked coffee experts how they’d perfect barista-level cuppas at home, without any fancy equipment.

After all, the endless gadgets and machinery pros use can hog space and drain your bank account ― the same can be said for gym equipment.

Most of us can’t pack a treadmill, an elliptical, a stair master, a full rack of weights, and a Smith machine into our homes, after all.

So, we thought we’d ask Sam Quinn, a personal training lead at Nuffield Health Devonshire, which one piece of gym kit he can’t go without.

If Sam had to pick, he’d go with an Olympic barbell

The fitness expert told HuffPost UK: “The Olympic barbell is the single most valuable piece of equipment for achieving athletic performance, fitness goals, and changing body composition.”

It’s suitable for beginners and pros alike, the personal trainer added, explaining that its versatility makes it a must-have.

“The 20KG 7ft long Olympic barbell is used for resistance and strength training, building muscle, powerlifting and Olympic weightlifting,” Sam advised.

“This enables the individual to have the ability to train whichever muscle group of the body they are looking to develop or improve all physical characteristics from strength, power or speed using only one piece of equipment.”

We’ve written before at HuffPost UK about how important resistance and strength training is, especially as we age.

Of course, everyone’s at different points in their strength training, and progressive overload is key for muscle growth.

So it’s a good thing “the bar is loaded with plates varying in weight for resistance training,” allowing each user to change the intensity according to their ability.

Though some machines dedicate themselves to one part of our anatomy, though, Sam told us that the barbell can be “used to develop all the various movement patterns of the body.”

What exercises can I do with an Olympic barbell?

“The Olympic bar is a versatile, robust and easy-to-use piece of equipment,” Sam told HuffPost UK.

“The exercises that can be performed with the Olympic barbell include clean and jerk, snatch, bench press, squat, deadlift, bent over row, overhead press, hip thrust, landmine presses, bicep curls and skull-crushers.”

That’s a lot of bulk for your buck…

Share Button

Got A Rude Child? Parenting Expert Shares The Two Words You Should Say To Them

A parenting coach has shared the two-word response parents can use if their kids are being disrespectful – and it’s surprisingly simple.

In a TikTok video, Mike Wallach, who runs Apparently Parenting, said: “Stop letting your kids walk all over you with this one trick.

“It’s super simple – and when done correctly, they rarely push back against it.”

What’s the trick?

The parenting coach and behaviour analyst said if a child is disrespectful or rude towards you, all you need to say in response is: “Try again.”

This can be used in a variety of scenarios, added the parenting coach, such as “when they slam the door, when they yell back ‘no’, when they’re playing too rough, [or] when they snatch a toy out of someone’s hand”.

“They immediately know what needs to be done to change their behaviour,” he explained.

Of course, some younger children might need a bit more direction than simply “try again”. If they say something rude to you, or shout at you, you could respond: “That’s not how we talk to each other. Can you try again?”

If they shout a demand at you, like “I want a snack!” you could respond: “Let’s try that again. How do we ask nicely?”

When kids are rude it might be tempting to raise your voice, but parenting pros suggest remaining calm and speaking in a steady voice, otherwise the situation will likely escalate.

According to My Parenting Solutions, asking for a replay is “so simple and effective”. But if your child is having a tantrum, it’s probably best to wait until they’ve calmed down to encourage them to try again.

The method can work well, because you’re giving children the opportunity to practice acting respectfully.

Any more tips?

Yes! If your child is being angry or rude, or having constant tussles with siblings, ‘special time’ might just help.

Child psychologist Dr Becky Kennedy, founder of Good Inside, described it as the “best bang-for-your-buck” parenting strategy.

Put simply, ‘special time’ is a period of time you carve out in your day where you and your child have one-on-one time together.

“So often, our attention as parents is split between work, siblings, admin, getting everyone fed, and the endless mental to-do list and demands on our time and resources,” Anna Mathur, a psychotherapist and author of The Uncomfortable Truth, told HuffPost UK.

But special time “cuts through that noise”.

It could be five minutes, it could be 15 minutes – but the idea is you get rid of all distractions and just sit and spend time with your kid.

Mathur said it works because “even 10 minutes of dedicated one-on-one time is a statement that tells your child: you matter, you’re seen, I want to be with you” and helps kids “feel emotionally secure, which strengthens their nervous system and improves behaviour”.

Share Button