drotto

Beat me too it. Just saw this. https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/18/entertainment/jonathan-majors-trial-verdict/index.html So crisis meeting tonight at Disney, and how many scripts and projects will be u deriving a complete overhaul tomorrow?

So they have not figured out what the show even is yet. Good to know.

We are deliberating the new evidence just as the jury is. 😉

Force them to get creative, and maybe worry about character and story over spectacle again. Look back to Deadpool, I know it is a few years old at that point, but the budget was $58M. Look at Joker, and a small budget, especially by comic movie standards. Each did just as well or better then their big budgets siblings. Plus, the path to profit was comparatively low. Please, somebody show me where the money is being spent on these films? It sure is not on the screen. Go watch Godzilla Minus One. The reported budget is $15M, and the director claims it is lower than that. It looks way better then anything the MCU has put out the last 3 years. That entire budget for the movie was significantly less then one episode of She Hulk. Let that sink in.

Looking forward to it. Also curious the effects on the stories that Ortega is pushing for the character to be closer to her roots in presentation. Specifically, no love triangles, and caring how anyone perceives her. My guess is she was brought up on Christina Ricci's version, and wants to be more like that.

Innocent till proven guilty, but wow that has Stockholm syndrome written all over it.

Thought that decapitated character looked familiar.

Or a sad commentary on the industry. The rank and file either feel powerless, and despite the "win" they really do do get much out of it. Meaning in a gig oriented industry, lower level people still will not make a livable wage, no matter the changes. Or, like you said, the majority of the members are really not active anymore. Yet another indication, it is an industry that favors the lucky elites and most memebers have been pushed into other vacations. Really not convinced this is the historic win that SAG has been claiming.

That envelope should be filled with cobwebs. That is clearly more money than the movie made.

He conveniently leaves out hiring the best most talented people for a given project.

It was based on the pipedream that streaming was an endless source of easy cash as long as you had enough content to keep people engaged. As we have now seen streaming is a money pit, not a revenue driver. The Fox deal could turn out to be the thing that actually sinks Disney. I do not think Disney will ever go away, but it has gone from from a giant, to a possible takeover candidate because of that deal. Plus, what has Disney actually done with those IP's? Are they ignoring properties that could actually get them out of this current hole?

Disney appears to be floundering, and certain branches of the media are desperately trying to find reasons, but are failing talk about, or unwilling to admit the real reasons. They are not creating interesting, original, well crafted stories, and have lost sight of who their audience historically is.

Honestly, I do not think they planned out anything past Endgame. They are now trying to pull together the random threads and a multuverse villain became the easiest potential solution, so they ran with it. Additionally, I think it has become very clear that Favreau, Purlmutter, Gunn, the Russo brothers and the disbanded story group, where the ones actually setting a timeline and creating a solid outline. Feige has shown no ability to do this after all those people have left or been forced out. Recent stories have even stated that Gunn basically asked for and created a lot of phases 2 and 3's plot points, because he needed to know how to make his Guardians movie fit in.

Are those the same 4 million subs they got only because of the $1.99 special monthly subscription the last few weeks. The same quarter where the subscriptions went up, but the revenue per subscriber went down? Oh, yeah also forgot the same service that never gives out actual numbers.

Wish also only hit 3rd in it's opening weekend. Apparently that also includes $500,000 from the previous weekend when a limited early release was done. Really bad months, no really bad year for Disney films.

Watched it last night with my wife, both felt it was good not great. Did spark some conversation on did the writer intend some of the messaging that came across in the final product or not. Especially, when the Barbie land matriarchy, does not really come across looking that good either. But that did keep the movie from coming across as heavy handed as some were claiming. I have to admit that both Robbie and Gosling were perfectly cast.

Yes, but many of these streams have been greatly reduced or even eliminated with Dinsey now putting everything onto a proprietary streaming service. Being purchased by D+ is money shifting pockets, not being made. DVD/Blu-ray is tiny now, this film is not being sold to places like Netflix or HBO, like it would be in the past, ABC is another arm of Disney so does not really count, and with D+, VOD is not a thing with this film. Also toys and merchandising seems to be miniscule compared to past MCU properties. Ms Marvel has already bombed as a character in video games with the last Avenger game, where she was the central character, posting millions in loses. I know film finances are murky at best, and usually downright fraudulent, but the last few films will be very hard pressed to ever make their budgets and marketing back.

Is this movie going to be under $200M world wide? How does the MCU move forward after this and Quantumania?

Is it OK to say you can never make a movie that will appeal to all people, and that to an extent tastes in things like movies do seem to break down along certain demographics? So it is OK for movies to target specific audiences? Therefore, trying to bring certain genres to new audiences can be tried but may fail. I come back to an earlier argument that the MCU had achieved maximum market penetration across all demographics by Endgame. Meaning the women who would be interested in seeing superhero fair already were. That the movies being male dominated was not an issue for them. They liked the films for what they were already. Therefor, changing the formula to try and increase market appeal to more women, was doomed to fail. The women not watching by then did not care and would never care. The untapped market was an illusion. This is actually born out by the Marvels where men were 61% of the audience. So despite all the changes, the core demographic was not altered.

Iger never really left. He was kept on in an advisory position, was still on the board, and never even vacated his office. Most of the issues happening now started under Iger and Chapick inherited them. The Marvels was greenlit under Iger. Disney + was Iger's baby. The awful overpayment for FOX was all Iger. A big potion of the mess Iger must now deal with is his own fualt.

Yes, the female demagraphic that Disney was aiming for and hoping would show up stayed home.

It's already been done. Many many times. When was rhe last time a big crowd of battles scene was not heavily CGI characters.

But the messaging years ago seemed to lack the in your face or even abrasive qualities that it has take on in more recent times. Almost a here is what I think, but if we disagree we can talk about it, and maybe still be friends. Also, creators would let the viewers judge for themselves. Now the creators attack and tend to get very combative when challenged. It really feeds the worst on both sides of the issues.

Never questioned it. There is definitely a time and a place for it also. But there is also a time and place for movies to be mostly devoid of those things, and just be escapism.

It gives credence to the idea that certain critics (I am not singling her out her, it just came across as very transparent after this video), are either getting paid off, or so afraid to lose access that they can't be too harsh. I know this has been mentioned on the RT thread.