Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[Ghengis Jon]

You're in fine form this morning.

[iam416]

Thank you! I wish I could see how terrible everything is, but I don't. So, I'm in good spirits.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Good detailed piece on the Withdrawal letter fuckup. Nobody at the Pentagon knew where the letter had come from at first, and their first instincts were to declare it enemy disinformation. But they eventually had to concede that someone had just made a horrible mistake.

https://thedispatch.com/p/anatomy-of-a-screw-up-the-story-behind

[Hannibal]

Understood. So do you think Disney is a valid comparison to Enron.

My previous comment about Disney stock price was not intended to show whether their acquisition of LucasArts was either good or bad. It was to show that Disney using stock in lieu of cash was not some sort of master stroke that reduced the price of the acquisition. if anything, it made it worse because they gave up a portion of the claims to future profits on Marvel, The Lion King, Frozen, etc, in exchange for cash. For the past seven years, investors have valued the former much greater than the latter.

Disney's stock climbed significantly before they ever saw a dime of revenue from any of the new movies. I don't think that any movement in the stock should be interpreted as a judgement of whether that move has been extremely profitable for them. I have little doubt that investors saw it at the time as a good move, but that was also before anyone knew that Kathleen Kennedy was the movie producer version of Rich Rodriguez burning the Michigan football program to the ground. But meanwhile, the Marvel Universe has exploded in popularity and Disney's live action remakes of 90s animated films have been massive hits. Last year alone they had six movies (not Rise of Skywalker) gross over a billion dollars. The last two Avengers movies by themselves have grossed close to five billion. Their epic fuckups with the Star Wars franchise are being subsidized by comic book movies and nostalgia for their 90s animated hits.

[Hannibal]

Good detailed piece on the Withdrawal letter fuckup. Nobody at the Pentagon knew where the letter had come from at first, and their first instincts were to declare it enemy disinformation. But they eventually had to concede that someone had just made a horrible mistake.

https://thedispatch.com/p/anatomy-of...e-story-behind

It was 4D chess.

[Jeff Buchanan]

Speaking of the impending collapse of the world order as we know it and according to about all of the media 'ceptin' a very few hold-outs (you have links above).........the stock market, is, as we all know, not a great indicator of the state of the global economy but it is a very good indicator of the impact of messaging from the mouths of world leaders. In this case spokespersons for Trump, Trump himself ("terrorist" in chief) and whatever terrorist Iran trots out to state their country's positions. Worth noting that Iran's Supreme Leader - who reportedly likes to "work in the shadows" has been publicly no where to be seen. Guess he's in the "shadows" ..... don't blame him with that crazy guy in the WH training laser sights on him 24/7/365:

Khamenei.jpg

Gotta love that 16th century outfit, turban and robes! Anyway, Iran's Foreign Minister spoke with Martha Raditz, the Jane Fonda of the modern era, who is in Tehran reporting, well, of course, the upcoming ABC News version of WWIII. He actually sounded a bit frightened of the Orange Menace in Washington himself in stumbling through a rambling dialogue that Iran would strike when it chooses (uncomfortable pause), where it chooses and, um, sometime in the future and not on America's schedule.... duhhh.

Meanwhile the true indicator of where things stand in the ME, the stock markets, the DJ is up just under 70 points and "ascending."

Seriously though, Iran's capacity to carry off something big and impactfull - as in 911 - is not likely to happen. The Iranian Foreign Minister was asked by Jane, I mean Martha, Raditz whether Iran would target civilians. He said Iran will not and is not a criminal like your American President is ..... and he went on to quote the Geneva Conventions on war crimes. Jeebuz. Jane, I mean Martha, should have gotten up and walked out and made sure that was on camera. But, no.

To reiterate, Iran will continue to take pot shots at US interests to include shipping in the Straights of Hormuz, US installations and personnel in the ME, maybe at home. As usual, Al Jezeera wrote a piece a while back, correctly, I believe, predicting Iran's options are limited ..... speaking of which, I have a friend who works on a base in Virginia. She told me yesterday it took her 90 minutes to get through the main gate. Clearly armed MPs 100 yards in front of the main gate were stopping every car and searching it with dogs ostensibly able to sniff explosives. The military is taking precautions.

Possibly more importantly in restraining Iran is the largely unreported news that globally, mostly behind the scenes, the US's Western Allies are not condemning, if not out right supporting (Boris, Erdogan indirectly) Trump's tactics in Iran. To me, the good news is that as far as international support goes for the Islamic Republic of Iran and it's leadership we're not hearing much. That puts the Mullahs in a tough spot. On one hand they want to publicly damage the US with some kind of punitive action, probably carried out overtly by their military and on the other, have to curry favor with the EU and their Chinese and Russian supporters who have said they don't want WWIII or anything remotely close to it to erupt over the ME sandbox. Too disruptive to their own strategic interests ..... and of course, although I think this is very unlikely, Iran has to think about General Schwartzkof and Operation Desert Storm that the US pulled off in 1990, all the dead Iraqi troops, stinking corpses in the hot sun, lining the road to Baghdad. Could happen and that's a nice counterbalance in the current circumstance. The crazy "terrorist in a suit" siting in the WH could order that.

[Dr. Strangelove]

I don't get the popularity of the live-action remakes. And I should put "live-action" in quotes because many of those are mostly CGI. I've seen a couple and the Jungle Book was the only one I liked. The Aladdin and Lion King versions looked hideous.

[iam416]

Good stuff, Buchanan.

[AlabamAlum]

So, DSL is a big fan of The Jungle Book live-action/CGI remake.

Talent, come get your boy before he starts giving his opinion on which Power Ranger was the best fighter.

[Hannibal]

I don't get the popularity of the live-action remakes. And I should put "live-action" in quotes because many of those are mostly CGI. I've seen a couple and the Jungle Book was the only one I liked. The Aladdin and Lion King versions looked hideous.

I don't either. I don't understand who pumps money into this shit, be it a live action remake of a 90s cartoon or Marvel movie #86.12A. Movies are in a hardcore Dark Age right now. It could be the #1 driving force behind the popularity of TV serials and streaming services like Netflix.

[Jeff Buchanan]

I don't either. I don't understand who pumps money into this shit, be it a live action remake of a 90s cartoon or Marvel movie #86.12A. Movies are in a hardcore Dark Age right now. It could be the #1 driving force behind the popularity of TV serials and streaming services like Netflix.

....... also Prime Video. Both The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel and Jack Ryan are running in their current, new seasons. Haven't stepped out to watch a movie in a while. Streaming content is better than anything coming out of Hollywood. I might go see 1917, but nobody is serving martinis in the theaters ..... yet. We have one of those IMAX theaters near us that do show Hollywood features. Last time I went to see a movie there - Black Panther - I was out 80 bucks for 3 tix and a big tub of greasy popcorn.

[Dr. Strangelove]

I don't either. I don't understand who pumps money into this shit, be it a live action remake of a 90s cartoon or Marvel movie #86.12A. Movies are in a hardcore Dark Age right now. It could be the #1 driving force behind the popularity of TV serials and streaming services like Netflix.

Actually the one exception might be Horror. There's been some creativity over the past decade there. Stuff that kind of hearkens back to 70's style psychological/weird/supernatural horror rather than slasher films, torture porn, or Paranormal Activity found footage shit.

I've heard people explain that there's very little middle ground right now. You either make a huge budget movie based off a known property/franchise or you make a small indy film. Very little appetite for taking risks and very little room for mid-budget flicks. You're right, that stuff gets turned into tv shows instead.

[Ghengis Jon]

Peer into the future....?



Capture.JPG

[Hannibal]

Actually the one exception might be Horror. There's been some creativity over the past decade there. Stuff that kind of hearkens back to 70's style psychological/weird/supernatural horror rather than slasher films, torture porn, or Paranormal Activity found footage shit.

I've heard people explain that there's very little middle ground right now. You either make a huge budget movie based off a known property/franchise or you make a small indy film. Very little appetite for taking risks and very little room for mid-budget flicks. You're right, that stuff gets turned into tv shows instead.

I wouldn't rule out just good old fashioned incompetence and idiocy in filmmaking. The cost of making movies has skyrocketed while the creative quality has gone down. Badly.

You need look no further than a couple of movies made in 1982 -- The Thing and Bladerunner to see this. Both movies are hailed for having some of the greatest visual effects of all time. Both movies have held up remarkably well, and both movies were made on a budget that, adjusted for inflation, would today be considered quite low. The Empire Strikes Back is probably the pinnacle of the Star Wars series as far as visuals are concerned and adjusted for inflation, it was made for maybe half of what Rise of Skywalker was made.

Some comedies and biopics have been OK. Knives Out was really good. Ford vs. Ferrari was excellent. For the most part though, I look at the top four or five box office movies every week and it's a wasteland.

[entropy]

I don't either. I don't understand who pumps money into this shit, be it a live action remake of a 90s cartoon or Marvel movie #86.12A. Movies are in a hardcore Dark Age right now. It could be the #1 driving force behind the popularity of TV serials and streaming services like Netflix.

The cost of going to the movies (especially when you add in popcorn and soda) is driving people to be more selective. Studio's have repsonded by focusing production on movies they feel will be hits. Generally, this means nothing to unique, nothing too foreign and mostly retreading of the past (themes and movies). So much money is sunk into these blockbusters that they have to succeed. Hence, little to no risk is taken and mass appeal wins (just like taco bell).