Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Warner Brothers decides there is no one Better Than Ezra   (yahoo.com) divider line
    More: Asinine, Injunction, Restraining order, Abuse, Woman, Ezra Miller problem, company's Q2 earnings, young woman, parents of an 18-year-old activist  
•       •       •

3651 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 06 Aug 2022 at 12:50 PM (6 days ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



99 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2022-08-06 10:38:18 AM  
Norm Macdonald better than ezra joke
Youtube 7zjr9hh9ZIM
I'm pretty sure Ezra is number two.
 
2022-08-06 10:49:22 AM  
That CEO, Zaslav or whatever... he honestly seems like the dumbest motherf*cker in a long time. Literally every decision is wrong.

Almost seems like he's trying to destroy the company/stock so someone can buy it cheap.
 
2022-08-06 10:54:16 AM  
WB is intent on self-destruction.
 
2022-08-06 10:58:06 AM  
Why not just write this one off on taxes and actually release Batgirl?
 
2022-08-06 10:58:48 AM  

NeoCortex42: Why not just write this one off on taxes and actually release Batgirl?


You know they'll just shelve both as a tax write off.

Why the hell are these allowed to be tax write offs anyway?
 
2022-08-06 11:31:39 AM  

NeoCortex42: Why not just write this one off on taxes and actually release Batgirl?


Batgirl wasn't filmed for theaters. So they could either spend tons more money on reshoots and finish it or take a tax write off, and this new WB motherfarker is lazy as shiat, so he's taking the tax write off. He's also removing shiat at a rapid clip from HBOMax.

He seems to think he's going to make billions at the box office like the Marvel universe but with DC properties and streaming is going to be a reality wasteland like all of the Discovery owned channels you have on cable right now. The man is a menace to creativity.
 
7 days ago  

Aar1012: NeoCortex42: Why not just write this one off on taxes and actually release Batgirl?

You know they'll just shelve both as a tax write off.

Why the hell are these allowed to be tax write offs anyway?


Because they are business losses, and those are allowed to be used for tax deductions.  And, on paper, the studio will have lost serious money.  I say on paper, because legally WB didn't make BG - a corporation called BG (which does happen to have a board composed solely of WB execs, but it still legally separate) made BG.  Now, the board of BG contracted with WB for every aspect of the production, from funding to cast to crew to effects to marketing.  So, WB has sunk a metric shiatload of money into BG because every one of those things was contracted at a seriously inflated price, which BG agreedf to since it was the same people that were making the offer.  When the board of BG happened to close is doors - completely independently of course - WB now has a massive loss, as it has no way to recoup the expenses it paid to BG without the movie being shown.  Business losses can be, at least partially, counted against your profits for tax purposes.  Did WB make BG solely to kill it?  Almost certainly not.  They still had to pay out for work done, so they did part with money along the way, and they can't claim the whole amount on their taxes, ie they aren't saving anything because paying $20M to save $10M makes no godsbedamned sense.  However, if they think that various expenses to complete the movie and send it out will sink them further, paying $20M to save $10M now is a better option from a purely mathematical point than paying $40M to save $15M later.
 
7 days ago  
Just reshoot all his parts with a TV Flash.  Old or current, doesn't matter.
 
7 days ago  

Aar1012: NeoCortex42: Why not just write this one off on taxes and actually release Batgirl?

You know they'll just shelve both as a tax write off.

Why the hell are these allowed to be tax write offs anyway?


My question in a redlit thread:

Any accountants here? Curious.

When can a company consider a business expense as a tax write-off?

If you make a product and it does not sell, then you've just lost whatever money you put into the product. But you can't normally use it as a tax write-off, right?
 
7 days ago  

bostonguy: Aar1012: NeoCortex42: Why not just write this one off on taxes and actually release Batgirl?

You know they'll just shelve both as a tax write off.

Why the hell are these allowed to be tax write offs anyway?

My question in a redlit thread:

Any accountants here? Curious.

When can a company consider a business expense as a tax write-off?

If you make a product and it does not sell, then you've just lost whatever money you put into the product. But you can't normally use it as a tax write-off, right?


It depends on the specifics of the tax code, but usually, normal expenses can be deducted from your taxes.  So, per your example, making 500 widgets could be deducted, though you could not deduct the profits you would have made if they all sold.  WB can't deduct theoretical ticket sales for the movie, but they can deduct the costs they already sunk into the picture, just as Bostonguy Widgets Inc. could deduct the expenses to make its widgets, even if the company went under form not selling the widgets.
 
7 days ago  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
6 days ago  
When you're being accused of child abuse, perhaps wearing a necklace of replica child skulls is not the best idea.
 
6 days ago  
This is a business decision. I've read WB has anywhere from 300-400 million invested in The Flash, they're NOT going to shelve this movie. But does anyone seriously think they're keeping Ezra on after this?
 
6 days ago  

ethasintham: This is a business decision. I've read WB has anywhere from 300-400 million invested in The Flash, they're NOT going to shelve this movie. But does anyone seriously think they're keeping Ezra on after this?


With the doofus in charge now?  I'm assuming he will become Superman-Flash with his own new tentpole franchise, and get a 50-movie deal, paid whether the movies get made or not
 
6 days ago  

NewportBarGuy: That CEO, Zaslav or whatever... he honestly seems like the dumbest motherf*cker in a long time. Literally every decision is wrong.

Almost seems like he's trying to destroy the company/stock so someone can buy it cheap.


Every agent in town is going to tell this guy to fark himself.  He better keep his hands off HBO Max, it's our best streaming service.
 
6 days ago  

Ragin' Asian: When you're being accused of child abuse, perhaps wearing a necklace of replica child skulls is not the best idea.


Seems like the least of his recent bad ideas.
 
6 days ago  

phalamir: ethasintham: This is a business decision. I've read WB has anywhere from 300-400 million invested in The Flash, they're NOT going to shelve this movie. But does anyone seriously think they're keeping Ezra on after this?

With the doofus in charge now?  I'm assuming he will become Superman-Flash with his own new tentpole franchise, and get a 50-movie deal, paid whether the movies get made or not


Actually doofus-in-charge may be a member of Ezra's cult. So far he's doing exactly what his master has decreed.

If WB was smart they'd start deep faking Grant Gustin's face over Ezra's for the entire movie.

/Ezra, the new Superman's mustache
 
6 days ago  

bluorangefyre: Just reshoot all his parts with a TV Flash.  Old or current, doesn't matter.


Fark user imageView Full Size


Would watch. And honestly, that Flash has probably humped less legs without consent.
 
6 days ago  

GardenWeasel: WB is intent on self-destruction.


It's a comic book studio, it won't stay dead.
 
6 days ago  

NeoCortex42: Why not just write this one off on taxes and actually release Batgirl?


They can say the entire $90 million is a loss.  That changes their tax situation considerably. On HBO Max unless it's a premium release, it'll hardly earn anything, because it's just a calculation against existing subscriptions.

It's a  morally and creatively bankrupt move, but it actually makes a weird kind of financial sense.
 
6 days ago  
i'm not against them releasing it... The fanfare around it might make it a trainwreck is always interesting.

What i'm scared of, is what if they release it, and fans herald it as something great, which would embolden this kid's behavior and his delusions of grandeur.
 
6 days ago  

bluorangefyre: Just reshoot all his parts with a TV Flash.  Old or current, doesn't matter.


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
6 days ago  
I swear if they keep this, but then go after Doom Patrol too then the head dude is probably one of the creepers and wants revenge against Brenden Frasier who deserves more work not less (you know, you'd still go see a Mummy 4 if they had a good plot for it or added a Rachel Weisz topless scene)
 
6 days ago  

Snapper Carr: bluorangefyre: Just reshoot all his parts with a TV Flash.  Old or current, doesn't matter.

[Fark user image 185x272]


Snapper Carr: bluorangefyre: Just reshoot all his parts with a TV Flash.  Old or current, doesn't matter.

[Fark user image 185x272]


Hell, they both have appeared on the current one, just use them both, in different scenes. It'll help you do reshoots in half the time. Just blame the Speedforce
 
6 days ago  
I'm getting really tired of these studios making decisions without first consulting me.
 
6 days ago  
Came to post Norm joke, I see it is already done.

/Proud.
 
6 days ago  

ethasintham: This is a business decision. I've read WB has anywhere from 300-400 million invested in The Flash, they're NOT going to shelve this movie. But does anyone seriously think they're keeping Ezra on after this?


It's also a hyperfocus on Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman (pleasantly surprised at that) Aquaman and Flash going forward by the studio.  They made that clear on the Investor's phone meeting the other day. There's supposedly am entire 10 year plan being built, with every use of the characters, and after the current movies in the tank, likely entire reboots.  Not said, out loud by anyone, but I suspect likely, is Pattinson's Batman being the root of a new universe.  Affleck is back as a standin for the remaining DCEU films though, popping up in Aquaman 2, for example. I'm assuming Wonder Woman and Supes will be recast.  Eventually both Aquaman and Flash too, despite statements of confidence in those actors.  In Aquaman's case, to cast younger I bet, since even super-jacked Momoa gets old eventually, right?  They'll squeeze the money out of Aquaman and Flash, ditch the rest and write them off, and finally do a complete reboot (with or without Pattinson).
 
6 days ago  

phalamir: bostonguy: Aar1012: NeoCortex42: Why not just write this one off on taxes and actually release Batgirl?

You know they'll just shelve both as a tax write off.

Why the hell are these allowed to be tax write offs anyway?

My question in a redlit thread:

Any accountants here? Curious.

When can a company consider a business expense as a tax write-off?

If you make a product and it does not sell, then you've just lost whatever money you put into the product. But you can't normally use it as a tax write-off, right?

It depends on the specifics of the tax code, but usually, normal expenses can be deducted from your taxes.  So, per your example, making 500 widgets could be deducted, though you could not deduct the profits you would have made if they all sold.  WB can't deduct theoretical ticket sales for the movie, but they can deduct the costs they already sunk into the picture, just as Bostonguy Widgets Inc. could deduct the expenses to make its widgets, even if the company went under form not selling the widgets.


there's also the chance that they can withhold release and try to get an insurance payment on it as well.
 
6 days ago  
So I haven't actually been following the Batwoman movie dealy. Isn't that also basically finished?
 
6 days ago  

TDWCom29: So I haven't actually been following the Batwoman movie dealy. Isn't that also basically finished?


Might have already been covered in the thread now that i think of it
 
6 days ago  
"new Warner Bros. Discovery CEO David Zaslav "

i.kym-cdn.comView Full Size


* the studio trying to cover its ass after that shiatpig murders somebody during a press tour will be fun to watch.
 
6 days ago  

Kris_Romm: ethasintham: This is a business decision. I've read WB has anywhere from 300-400 million invested in The Flash, they're NOT going to shelve this movie. But does anyone seriously think they're keeping Ezra on after this?

It's also a hyperfocus on Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman (pleasantly surprised at that) Aquaman and Flash going forward by the studio.  They made that clear on the Investor's phone meeting the other day. There's supposedly am entire 10 year plan being built, with every use of the characters, and after the current movies in the tank, likely entire reboots.  Not said, out loud by anyone, but I suspect likely, is Pattinson's Batman being the root of a new universe.  Affleck is back as a standin for the remaining DCEU films though, popping up in Aquaman 2, for example. I'm assuming Wonder Woman and Supes will be recast.  Eventually both Aquaman and Flash too, despite statements of confidence in those actors.  In Aquaman's case, to cast younger I bet, since even super-jacked Momoa gets old eventually, right?  They'll squeeze the money out of Aquaman and Flash, ditch the rest and write them off, and finally do a complete reboot (with or without Pattinson).


Yay! The same piece of chewing gum for a century, I'm sure.
 
6 days ago  

mongbiohazard: Yay! The same piece of chewing gum for a century, I'm sure.


We had vampires for like ten years, then it was over. We had zombies for like ten years, then it was over.

One day, superhero movies and TV shows will not be over but will probably become less common again.

Then, we'll have the new thing.
 
6 days ago  

bostonguy: mongbiohazard: Yay! The same piece of chewing gum for a century, I'm sure.

We had vampires for like ten years, then it was over. We had zombies for like ten years, then it was over.

One day, superhero movies and TV shows will not be over but will probably become less common again.

Then, we'll have the new thing.


Superhero movies have been popular for at least 40 years. Obviously there are a lot more now. But Superman was the #1 movie of 1978, and the sequels were popular too, Keaton Batman movies were incredibly popular. Same with the Toby Spider-man movies. I'm sure I'm leaving multiple other examples out.  It's not a passing fad
 
6 days ago  

TDWCom29: bostonguy: mongbiohazard: Yay! The same piece of chewing gum for a century, I'm sure.

We had vampires for like ten years, then it was over. We had zombies for like ten years, then it was over.

One day, superhero movies and TV shows will not be over but will probably become less common again.

Then, we'll have the new thing.

Superhero movies have been popular for at least 40 years. Obviously there are a lot more now. But Superman was the #1 movie of 1978, and the sequels were popular too, Keaton Batman movies were incredibly popular. Same with the Toby Spider-man movies. I'm sure I'm leaving multiple other examples out.  It's not a passing fad


Oh sure. I'll grant that. I just mean we'll reach a point where there won't be like 20 new superhero movies and TV shows every year from all the film and TV companies. It'll be like how it was before. Fewer of them.
 
6 days ago  

TDWCom29: So I haven't actually been following the Batwoman movie dealy. Isn't that also basically finished?


Yes.  But it was essentially a prestige TV movie, a la Netflix's standard fare.  Which is not to knock prestige TV movies.  But they are not going to stand up to prestige theater movies.  If nothing else, they just don't have the budget to get the shots and the effects that you can get with PTM money.  But Big Daddy Doofus has declared everything has to be PTM going forward - or bargain-basement cable television trash.  No inbetweensies.  But BG cost too much to make its money back as BBCTT, and it just doesn't have the high gloss to be a PTM.  So, it got just killed in the driveway.  It ought to have been the PTVM it was built as, and it probably would have done fine.  But since that does not fit in The Vision, it was double-tapped and left for the garbagemen.
 
6 days ago  

bostonguy: TDWCom29: bostonguy: mongbiohazard: Yay! The same piece of chewing gum for a century, I'm sure.

We had vampires for like ten years, then it was over. We had zombies for like ten years, then it was over.

One day, superhero movies and TV shows will not be over but will probably become less common again.

Then, we'll have the new thing.

Superhero movies have been popular for at least 40 years. Obviously there are a lot more now. But Superman was the #1 movie of 1978, and the sequels were popular too, Keaton Batman movies were incredibly popular. Same with the Toby Spider-man movies. I'm sure I'm leaving multiple other examples out.  It's not a passing fad

Oh sure. I'll grant that. I just mean we'll reach a point where there won't be like 20 new superhero movies and TV shows every year from all the film and TV companies. It'll be like how it was before. Fewer of them.


Eh, we'll see. Westerns were popular and abundant for about 30 years
 
6 days ago  

NewportBarGuy: That CEO, Zaslav or whatever... he honestly seems like the dumbest motherf*cker in a long time. Literally every decision is wrong.

Almost seems like he's trying to destroy the company/stock so someone can buy it cheap.


It thoroughly bemuses me that AT&T buys WarnerBros and proceeds to release a service called HBO MAX that releases its own originals that are distinctly different from HBO (but also contains HBO) and also has other services called HBO GO and HBO NOW and everyone on Fark, and Reddit, and literally everywhere was like 'This is utterly stupid and confusing!'

So then WarnerBros, renamed WarnerMedia, gets sold to Discovery... and basically his first major decision is to do EXACTLY that... nuke all the services, fold HBO MAX into HBO, and make it ridiculously less confusing and suddenly all those same people are like 'WTF IS HE DOING!  WE LOVE OUR CONFUSION!  DON'T MESS WITH CONFUSION!'

It's seriously like everyone just wants to be angry, at everything, all the time.
 
6 days ago  

jake3988: NewportBarGuy: That CEO, Zaslav or whatever... he honestly seems like the dumbest motherf*cker in a long time. Literally every decision is wrong.

Almost seems like he's trying to destroy the company/stock so someone can buy it cheap.

It thoroughly bemuses me that AT&T buys WarnerBros and proceeds to release a service called HBO MAX that releases its own originals that are distinctly different from HBO (but also contains HBO) and also has other services called HBO GO and HBO NOW and everyone on Fark, and Reddit, and literally everywhere was like 'This is utterly stupid and confusing!'

So then WarnerBros, renamed WarnerMedia, gets sold to Discovery... and basically his first major decision is to do EXACTLY that... nuke all the services, fold HBO MAX into HBO, and make it ridiculously less confusing and suddenly all those same people are like 'WTF IS HE DOING!  WE LOVE OUR CONFUSION!  DON'T MESS WITH CONFUSION!'

It's seriously like everyone just wants to be angry, at everything, all the time.


Found Zaslav's account!
 
6 days ago  

jake3988: It thoroughly bemuses me that AT&T buys WarnerBros and proceeds to release a service called HBO MAX that releases its own originals that are distinctly different from HBO (but also contains HBO) and also has other services called HBO GO and HBO NOW and everyone on Fark, and Reddit, and literally everywhere was like 'This is utterly stupid and confusing!'

So then WarnerBros, renamed WarnerMedia, gets sold to Discovery... and basically his first major decision is to do EXACTLY that... nuke all the services, fold HBO MAX into HBO, and make it ridiculously less confusing and suddenly all those same people are like 'WTF IS HE DOING!  WE LOVE OUR CONFUSION!  DON'T MESS WITH CONFUSION!'

It's seriously like everyone just wants to be angry, at everything, all the time.


Uhh, GO and NOW both went away with MAX. Only reason they remained for any point of time after MAX release is because of stalled agreements with Roku. Once that went live at the end of 2020, both GO and NOW went away. What you imagine people complaining about hasn't been a complaint for a year and a half, at least, because it was all rolled into MAX, which worked just fine.
 
6 days ago  

TDWCom29: bostonguy: TDWCom29: bostonguy: mongbiohazard: Yay! The same piece of chewing gum for a century, I'm sure.

We had vampires for like ten years, then it was over. We had zombies for like ten years, then it was over.

One day, superhero movies and TV shows will not be over but will probably become less common again.

Then, we'll have the new thing.

Superhero movies have been popular for at least 40 years. Obviously there are a lot more now. But Superman was the #1 movie of 1978, and the sequels were popular too, Keaton Batman movies were incredibly popular. Same with the Toby Spider-man movies. I'm sure I'm leaving multiple other examples out.  It's not a passing fad

Oh sure. I'll grant that. I just mean we'll reach a point where there won't be like 20 new superhero movies and TV shows every year from all the film and TV companies. It'll be like how it was before. Fewer of them.

Eh, we'll see. Westerns were popular and abundant for about 30 years


Westerns were attached to nostalgia for specific history and other cultural forces that were adjacent to the times.  People's living grandparents remembered the 1880's and 1890's in the 1940s and 1950s.  In the 1960s and 1970s people's parents remembered the first wave of Westerns and linked to that nostalgia.  While many people remain from last wave of Westerns, as a society we don't absorb our tastes and preferences from earlier generations in the same way anymore, plus it would be a riff on a riff now.

Superhero movies reinvent themselves for the times far more than Westerns do.  While period Suoerhero stuff is almost a subgenre, far more of the product is contemporary to the times and current culture.  The exceptions (like Magneto's holocaust background) become increasingly hard to manage.
 
6 days ago  

NewportBarGuy: That CEO, Zaslav or whatever... he honestly seems like the dumbest motherf*cker in a long time. Literally every decision is wrong.

Almost seems like he's trying to destroy the company/stock so someone can buy it cheap.


No CEO can be dumber than edgelord muskrat
 
6 days ago  

Kris_Romm: TDWCom29: bostonguy: TDWCom29: bostonguy: mongbiohazard: Yay! The same piece of chewing gum for a century, I'm sure.

We had vampires for like ten years, then it was over. We had zombies for like ten years, then it was over.

One day, superhero movies and TV shows will not be over but will probably become less common again.

Then, we'll have the new thing.

Superhero movies have been popular for at least 40 years. Obviously there are a lot more now. But Superman was the #1 movie of 1978, and the sequels were popular too, Keaton Batman movies were incredibly popular. Same with the Toby Spider-man movies. I'm sure I'm leaving multiple other examples out.  It's not a passing fad

Oh sure. I'll grant that. I just mean we'll reach a point where there won't be like 20 new superhero movies and TV shows every year from all the film and TV companies. It'll be like how it was before. Fewer of them.

Eh, we'll see. Westerns were popular and abundant for about 30 years

Westerns were attached to nostalgia for specific history and other cultural forces that were adjacent to the times.  People's living grandparents remembered the 1880's and 1890's in the 1940s and 1950s.  In the 1960s and 1970s people's parents remembered the first wave of Westerns and linked to that nostalgia.  While many people remain from last wave of Westerns, as a society we don't absorb our tastes and preferences from earlier generations in the same way anymore, plus it would be a riff on a riff now.

Superhero movies reinvent themselves for the times far more than Westerns do.  While period Suoerhero stuff is almost a subgenre, far more of the product is contemporary to the times and current culture.  The exceptions (like Magneto's holocaust background) become increasingly hard to manage.


I mean, I guess? But none of what you said means superhero movies can't remain popular for the foreseeable future which was more my point
 
6 days ago  

TDWCom29: I mean, I guess? But none of what you said means superhero movies can't remain popular for the foreseeable future which was more my point


Not to mention, Westerns were pure fantasy.  A Western has never even tangentially touched reality, even when the American West frontier was still a thing, even when they referenced real people.  Even contemporary Westerns were basically "Wyatt Earp is Batman" rather than a recitation of Wyatt Earp's actual exploits.  By the time you get into the 1900s, they are indistinguishable from fanfiction about Merlin.  And when you get to movie Westerns, it is "Kit Marlowe's Romeo and Merlin".  Infinity War had more in common with objective reality than anything John Wayne shat out.  So, the idea we can't endlessly roll out superhero movies because of the gritty factuality of Westerns is laughable.
 
6 days ago  

phalamir: TDWCom29: I mean, I guess? But none of what you said means superhero movies can't remain popular for the foreseeable future which was more my point

Not to mention, Westerns were pure fantasy.  A Western has never even tangentially touched reality, even when the American West frontier was still a thing, even when they referenced real people.  Even contemporary Westerns were basically "Wyatt Earp is Batman" rather than a recitation of Wyatt Earp's actual exploits.  By the time you get into the 1900s, they are indistinguishable from fanfiction about Merlin.  And when you get to movie Westerns, it is "Kit Marlowe's Romeo and Merlin".  Infinity War had more in common with objective reality than anything John Wayne shat out.  So, the idea we can't endlessly roll out superhero movies because of the gritty factuality of Westerns is laughable.


So Unforgiven's a bunch of bullshiat?
 
6 days ago  
They may as well add Kevin Spacey in post.
 
6 days ago  

TDWCom29: Kris_Romm: TDWCom29: bostonguy: TDWCom29: bostonguy: mongbiohazard: Yay! The same piece of chewing gum for a century, I'm sure.

We had vampires for like ten years, then it was over. We had zombies for like ten years, then it was over.

One day, superhero movies and TV shows will not be over but will probably become less common again.

Then, we'll have the new thing.

Superhero movies have been popular for at least 40 years. Obviously there are a lot more now. But Superman was the #1 movie of 1978, and the sequels were popular too, Keaton Batman movies were incredibly popular. Same with the Toby Spider-man movies. I'm sure I'm leaving multiple other examples out.  It's not a passing fad

Oh sure. I'll grant that. I just mean we'll reach a point where there won't be like 20 new superhero movies and TV shows every year from all the film and TV companies. It'll be like how it was before. Fewer of them.

Eh, we'll see. Westerns were popular and abundant for about 30 years

Westerns were attached to nostalgia for specific history and other cultural forces that were adjacent to the times.  People's living grandparents remembered the 1880's and 1890's in the 1940s and 1950s.  In the 1960s and 1970s people's parents remembered the first wave of Westerns and linked to that nostalgia.  While many people remain from last wave of Westerns, as a society we don't absorb our tastes and preferences from earlier generations in the same way anymore, plus it would be a riff on a riff now.

Superhero movies reinvent themselves for the times far more than Westerns do.  While period Suoerhero stuff is almost a subgenre, far more of the product is contemporary to the times and current culture.  The exceptions (like Magneto's holocaust background) become increasingly hard to manage.

I mean, I guess? But none of what you said means superhero movies can't remain popular for the foreseeable future which was more my point


I'm agreeing that they CAN.

Vs. Westerns.  Which died after 40 years or so of supremecy for specific reasons (that kids didn't romanticize Western culture their grandparents told stories about anymore, or a few decades later, have films riffing directly off those).  Society moved on from the old west, with only occasional returns like the Westworld series (which is sci-fi anyway).

Superhero stuff is more timeless.  They're not linked to any specific time.
 
6 days ago  

Aar1012: Why the hell are these allowed to be tax write offs anyway?


Rich people vote and contribute to campaigns.
 
6 days ago  

phalamir: TDWCom29: I mean, I guess? But none of what you said means superhero movies can't remain popular for the foreseeable future which was more my point

Not to mention, Westerns were pure fantasy.  A Western has never even tangentially touched reality, even when the American West frontier was still a thing, even when they referenced real people.  Even contemporary Westerns were basically "Wyatt Earp is Batman" rather than a recitation of Wyatt Earp's actual exploits.  By the time you get into the 1900s, they are indistinguishable from fanfiction about Merlin.  And when you get to movie Westerns, it is "Kit Marlowe's Romeo and Merlin".  Infinity War had more in common with objective reality than anything John Wayne shat out.  So, the idea we can't endlessly roll out superhero movies because of the gritty factuality of Westerns is laughable.


Largely true, though that could pretty much be said for any broad genre, particularly from the Westerns' golden era.  Gangster films, detective films, war films, martial arts films, etc.
 
6 days ago  

Concrete Donkey: NewportBarGuy: That CEO, Zaslav or whatever... he honestly seems like the dumbest motherf*cker in a long time. Literally every decision is wrong.

Almost seems like he's trying to destroy the company/stock so someone can buy it cheap.

No CEO can be dumber than edgelord muskrat


Fair point, but this asshole sure is trying.
 
Displayed 50 of 99 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


X
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.