• Michel Barnier, the EU's chief Brexit negotiator, also said Friday that he had a "constructive meeting" with the U.K.'s Brexit Secretary Stephen Barclay, continuing the positive language from Europe, per AP.

Yes, but: The U.K. is set to exit the EU on Oct. 31, so any hope for a deal is getting close to the wire. Johnson has promised to exit the EU "do or die" at the end of the month, indicating that he'd be willing to stomach the expected economic shock of a no-deal Brexit.

• Tusk acknowledged the time crunch in his remarks, saying, "Of course, there is no guarantee of success and the time is practically up — but even the slightest chance must be used. A no-deal Brexit will never be the choice of the EU."

The bottom line: There have been positive signals from both sides before as the U.K. approached its previously planned exit dates under former Prime Minister Theresa May. She was able to produce a fully negotiated withdrawal agreement that took months to hammer out — and it was soundly rejected on multiple occasions by Parliament.

• "So, in summary, there's a narrow pathway to a landing zone, which could give access to a tunnel, which would pass under a summit, but perhaps reach sunlit uplands rather than the last ditch before the cliff edge," astutely tweets the AFP's Dave Clark.

Go deeper: Northern Ireland's Brexit balancing act

• Plus, China only has 38 official slots for international films to be shown in the country on the most generous revenue-sharing terms, making competition fierce.

The big picture: The country's rampant censorship makes things difficult for foreign films. Beyond unsurprising restrictions on graphic nudity, sex and violence, China's censors can balk at anything from men wearing earrings to ghosts.

• Its censors also won't allow homosexuality to be depicted on screen, leading to controversy surrounding 2018's "Bohemian Rhapsody." Even Rami Malek's Oscar acceptance speech for playing Freddie Mercury in the film was censored on one of China's biggest streaming networks.
• However, China's sensitivity on domestic political issues is what often causes some of the harshest — and, to Americans, most absurd — acts of censorship.

Perhaps the most extreme example was the 2018 decision to not allow Disney's "Christopher Robin" to be released, purportedly because Chinese President Xi Jinping's resemblance to Winnie the Pooh had become a joke among activists who resisted the country's Communist regime.

• Censors also blocked the release of 2013's "World War Z," amplifying the film's relative financial disappointment for its studio, Paramount. Theories for its ban range from a reference to the film's zombie outbreak starting in China to a Chinese shadow ban on its leading man, Brad Pitt, for starring in "Seven Years in Tibet" in 1997.
• 2012's "Red Dawn" saw its entire original plot, which featured China invading America to reclaim its debt, rewritten after filming to feature North Korea as its enemy instead — and still couldn't get a Chinese release.

Many American films do get released, but only with copious cuts to please the censors. While these usually involve slicing scenes of violence or sex, they often involve more politically-minded edits.

• 2012's James Bond film "Skyfall" finally got released in China in 2013, but only after it cut references to prostitution in Macau and had its subtitles changed to mask references of torture by Chinese police.
• Another popular franchise entry, 2007's "Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End," had roughly 10 minutes of footage involving Chow Yun-fat's character cut over a determination that his portrayal somehow vilified the Chinese people.
• And 2006's "Mission Impossible III" had footage cut from its opening sequence — a Tom Cruise chase sequence in Shanghai — because censors believed the underwear hanging to dry on clotheslines presented the country in a bad light.

The bottom line: Despite the handwringing over China's economic ability to suppress Americans' freedom of speech, Hollywood film studios have willingly ceded their artistry to China's censors for years — on issues big and small — in pursuit of the almighty dollar.

Go deeper: China's vise grip on corporate America

• Johnson asked the Justice Department earlier this week to look into links between Ukraine and Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign. His letter questioned the narrative that Biden's actions in Ukraine had nothing to do with his son's connection.
• However, it was also discovered that he signed onto a 2016 letter that mirrored Biden's work to reform Ukraine's prosecutor general and judiciary.
• There is no evidence that Biden's reform work in Ukraine was to protect his son's business dealings, as the president and some of his allies allege, or that he committed any form of corruption.

The state of play: Sondland, a Trump political appointee who donated $1 million to the president's inaugural committee, denied that there was a quid pro quo between the Trump administration and Ukraine's government in a series of text messages that former Ukraine special envoy Kurt Volker provided to a group of House committees investigating the Trump-Ukraine matter.

• "I think it’s crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign," Bill Taylor, the top U.S. diplomat to Ukraine, texted Sondland.
• Sondland texted back: "Bill, I believe you are incorrect about President Trump's intentions. The President has been crystal clear no quid pro quo's of any kind."
• The New York Times reported that Sondland's response came only after he spoke to the president.

Go deeper: House committees release texts from former Ukraine envoy Kurt Volker