It is. I was just reading that last night. Apparently their argument is that when they bought Fox, they bought the assets but NOT the liabilities. Insane.
― soaring skrrrtpeggios (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Thursday, 19 November 2020 15:36 (three years ago) link
Crooked as hell. Hopefully they do the right thing
― Nhex, Thursday, 19 November 2020 15:44 (three years ago) link
Tracer wait until you hear about the guy who coincidentally started getting a million-dollar annual stipend from a future division of Disney, after he started going to court to testify that authors don't deserve royalties, because if they'd signed non-existent contracts decades before, the contracts probably would have said they had no rights
― @oneposter (💹) (sic), Thursday, 19 November 2020 21:13 (three years ago) link
Does the world need to fall apart completely for Disney to die?
― Robert Adam Gilmour, Thursday, 19 November 2020 22:04 (three years ago) link
it’s a small world, after all
― mh, Thursday, 19 November 2020 22:05 (three years ago) link
Apparently their argument is that when they bought Fox, they bought the assets but NOT the liabilities. Insane.
This is insane enough that, no matter how many high-paid lawyers Disney can throw at this suit, the judge who adjudicates Foster's case needs to award him some sky-high punitive damages. Something so big that Disney stock takes a hit.
― The Solace of Fortitude (Aimless), Friday, 20 November 2020 00:34 (three years ago) link
They presumably think that the chance of setting legal precedent is worth the risk. And if you're soullessly evil, this is true!
― @oneposter (💹) (sic), Friday, 20 November 2020 01:42 (three years ago) link
Some discussion over on the "what to watch on streaming services" thread about AT&T, already slashing all their entertainment divisions (and various other ones) in order to make up losses on the botched launch of HBO Max, going day-and-date for all 2021 theatrical releases.
In this Daily Beast interview with Steven Soderbergh, he has several thoughts about this being a moderate move (NB: he has an exclusive deal with HBO Max already):
Is this the beginning of the end for theaters?No. Not at all. It’s just a reaction to an economic reality that I think everybody is going to have to acknowledge pretty soon, which is that even with a vaccine, the theatrical movie business won’t be robust enough in 2021 to justify the amount of P&A you need to spend to put a movie into wide release. There’s no scenario in which a theater that is 50 percent full, or at least can’t be made 100 percent full, is a viable paradigm to put out a movie in. But that will change. We will reach a point where anybody who wants to go to a movie will feel safe going to a movie.I think somebody sat down and did a very clear-eyed analysis of what COVID is going to do in the next year, even with a potential vaccine, and said, I don’t see this as being workable in 2021. Because let’s be clear: there is no bonanza in the entertainment industry that is the equivalent of a movie that grosses a billion dollars or more theatrically. That is the holy grail. So the theatrical business is not going away. There are too many companies that have invested too much money in the prospect of putting out a movie that blows up in theaters—there’s nothing like it. It’s all going to come back. But I think Warners is saying: not as soon as you think.Are you worried that once the genie is out of the bottle, it’ll be difficult to put it back in?No. I think it’ll finally push the studios and NATO (National Association of Theater Owners) to have some practical and realistic conversations about windowing. Because there needs to be more fluidity. There’s not going to be one template that fits every movie. Every movie is different. You need the flexibility. If you’re in a bad situation, and you’ve got a movie that you opened wide, and you know Friday at 3 p.m. it’s not working, you need to be able to get it on a platform as soon as possible. You spent so much money trying to make this work, and if it didn’t, you should be able to do whatever you want to do. Theaters are going to be pushing you out anyway because you bombed. They’re looking for the next thing that’s going to work. I just think we live in a technological world that allows for fluidity that we’re just not seeing right now. We’re still seeing this broad template that’s supposed to work for everything, and that’s not how it’s going to get solved.Will theaters wind up being only the domain of big-budget spectaculars?I think there are a lot of factors to consider when wondering if that’s the way things are going to go. One variable that hasn’t really been scaled up is that, now that we live in an all-digital world, all of these big theater chains have the ability to turn themselves into repertory cinemas in which they screen films from any period of the last 120 years for audiences who’ve never seen them in a theater. There are all these movies from the ‘70s, ‘80s, ‘90s, and early aughts that nobody has seen in a theater. Big hits, great movies. And I’m waiting for somebody to go, OK, we’re going to have a program where everybody knows that on these certain nights, or on the weekend, you put them out. When I was growing up, the repertory cinema had the calendar for the fall, and you would know, oh, they’re going to show Deliverance, they’re going to show this. There are options here to get people back into the habit of going to see movies, and giving them something they’ve haven’t seen before, that aren’t being explored at any sizeable scale. So that’s one thing.The other thing is, every time we think that it’s just going to be tentpoles and blockbusters—and art-house movies on the other end—something shows up in the middle and works. Downton Abbey made a lot of money. That movie was coming out when we were in discussions with Warners about Let Them All Talk, and I pointed to that as an example of what I consider to be our audience. That’s our demographic; that’s the audience I want. And look, they showed up for that.
No. Not at all. It’s just a reaction to an economic reality that I think everybody is going to have to acknowledge pretty soon, which is that even with a vaccine, the theatrical movie business won’t be robust enough in 2021 to justify the amount of P&A you need to spend to put a movie into wide release. There’s no scenario in which a theater that is 50 percent full, or at least can’t be made 100 percent full, is a viable paradigm to put out a movie in. But that will change. We will reach a point where anybody who wants to go to a movie will feel safe going to a movie.
I think somebody sat down and did a very clear-eyed analysis of what COVID is going to do in the next year, even with a potential vaccine, and said, I don’t see this as being workable in 2021. Because let’s be clear: there is no bonanza in the entertainment industry that is the equivalent of a movie that grosses a billion dollars or more theatrically. That is the holy grail. So the theatrical business is not going away. There are too many companies that have invested too much money in the prospect of putting out a movie that blows up in theaters—there’s nothing like it. It’s all going to come back. But I think Warners is saying: not as soon as you think.
Are you worried that once the genie is out of the bottle, it’ll be difficult to put it back in?
No. I think it’ll finally push the studios and NATO (National Association of Theater Owners) to have some practical and realistic conversations about windowing. Because there needs to be more fluidity. There’s not going to be one template that fits every movie. Every movie is different. You need the flexibility. If you’re in a bad situation, and you’ve got a movie that you opened wide, and you know Friday at 3 p.m. it’s not working, you need to be able to get it on a platform as soon as possible. You spent so much money trying to make this work, and if it didn’t, you should be able to do whatever you want to do. Theaters are going to be pushing you out anyway because you bombed. They’re looking for the next thing that’s going to work. I just think we live in a technological world that allows for fluidity that we’re just not seeing right now. We’re still seeing this broad template that’s supposed to work for everything, and that’s not how it’s going to get solved.
Will theaters wind up being only the domain of big-budget spectaculars?
I think there are a lot of factors to consider when wondering if that’s the way things are going to go. One variable that hasn’t really been scaled up is that, now that we live in an all-digital world, all of these big theater chains have the ability to turn themselves into repertory cinemas in which they screen films from any period of the last 120 years for audiences who’ve never seen them in a theater. There are all these movies from the ‘70s, ‘80s, ‘90s, and early aughts that nobody has seen in a theater. Big hits, great movies. And I’m waiting for somebody to go, OK, we’re going to have a program where everybody knows that on these certain nights, or on the weekend, you put them out. When I was growing up, the repertory cinema had the calendar for the fall, and you would know, oh, they’re going to show Deliverance, they’re going to show this. There are options here to get people back into the habit of going to see movies, and giving them something they’ve haven’t seen before, that aren’t being explored at any sizeable scale. So that’s one thing.
The other thing is, every time we think that it’s just going to be tentpoles and blockbusters—and art-house movies on the other end—something shows up in the middle and works. Downton Abbey made a lot of money. That movie was coming out when we were in discussions with Warners about Let Them All Talk, and I pointed to that as an example of what I consider to be our audience. That’s our demographic; that’s the audience I want. And look, they showed up for that.
― huge rant (sic), Sunday, 6 December 2020 01:44 (three years ago) link
I’d love for his multiplex repertory idea to take off but that feels like something that already would have. Fathom Events do not get good reviews locally for picture quality.
― onlyfans.com/hunterb (milo z), Sunday, 6 December 2020 01:46 (three years ago) link
it's not totally off-base. My local (non-AMC, non-Regal) chains already do one or two rep screenings a month. i do think it just hasn't fully been done right, aside from smaller examples like Alamo
― Nhex, Sunday, 6 December 2020 01:55 (three years ago) link
More writers coming out and forming a task force to try to get Disney to pay the royalties they're ignoring.
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2021/apr/28/disneymustpay-authors-form-task-force-missing-payments-star-wars-alien-buffy
This is such nickel and dime bullshit, all the book and comic royalties they could possibly owe would be a rounding error on one page of their books.
― Joe Bombin (milo z), Thursday, 29 April 2021 01:40 (two years ago) link
This situation is no longer hypothetical. Fox had licensed the comics rights to Buffy the Vampire Slayer to Dark Horse. After Disney purchased Fox, they withdrew those rights from Dark Horse and granted them to Boom! Comics. When one Buffy author contacted Boom! about missing royalties they were told that “royalties don’t transfer.”Disney is one of the owners of Boom! Comics.
Disney is one of the owners of Boom! Comics.
― Nhex, Thursday, 29 April 2021 03:29 (two years ago) link
Surely this is... illegal behaviour?
― Li'l Brexit (Tracer Hand), Thursday, 29 April 2021 09:27 (two years ago) link
....from Disney?
― bobo honkin' slobo babe (sic), Thursday, 29 April 2021 09:56 (two years ago) link
Not long ago, in one of the John Carpenter threads, sic gave an overview of how fucked-up Boom is as a comics publisher.
Big Trouble is a film that revels in physicality, I can see light 2D-styled drawing not connecting with someone trying to evoke the film in their reading (the text on that page said Eric Powell, but the image clearly wasn't Powell).fyi Boom is one of the most outrageously exploitative publishers in the field, reading their output from your municipal library is a better option if you have it.― grab bag cum trash bag (sic), Friday, March 5, 2021 7:26 AM (one month ago) bookmarkflaglinkThat's a bummer - I've really been enjoying Something is Killing the Children. How outrageously exploitative are they?― peace, man, Monday, March 8, 2021 12:04 PM (one month ago) bookmarkflaglinkThey pay $35 a page for scripts, $100 a page for writing & drawing. Make t-shirts and merch of artists' work without compensation. Underpay invoices, pay months late, sometimes ghost artists altogether. Recruitment model is largely to give young artists their first jobs so it's easier to rip them off. "Some shady stuff in their contracts, and sometimes tries to secretly annul contracts by slipping extra clauses into the fine print of their payment vouchers," per one former worker.(I assume Tynion is treated better, likewise John Allison - but I have also assumed that Allison stopped drawing Giant Days himself when it went to Boom bcz their rates weren't worth it.)― armoured van, Holden (sic), Monday, March 8, 2021 2:24 PM (one month ago) bookmarkflaglink
fyi Boom is one of the most outrageously exploitative publishers in the field, reading their output from your municipal library is a better option if you have it.
― grab bag cum trash bag (sic), Friday, March 5, 2021 7:26 AM (one month ago) bookmarkflaglink
That's a bummer - I've really been enjoying Something is Killing the Children. How outrageously exploitative are they?
― peace, man, Monday, March 8, 2021 12:04 PM (one month ago) bookmarkflaglink
They pay $35 a page for scripts, $100 a page for writing & drawing. Make t-shirts and merch of artists' work without compensation. Underpay invoices, pay months late, sometimes ghost artists altogether. Recruitment model is largely to give young artists their first jobs so it's easier to rip them off. "Some shady stuff in their contracts, and sometimes tries to secretly annul contracts by slipping extra clauses into the fine print of their payment vouchers," per one former worker.
(I assume Tynion is treated better, likewise John Allison - but I have also assumed that Allison stopped drawing Giant Days himself when it went to Boom bcz their rates weren't worth it.)
― armoured van, Holden (sic), Monday, March 8, 2021 2:24 PM (one month ago) bookmarkflaglink
― peace, man, Thursday, 29 April 2021 11:50 (two years ago) link
Oh wait, you just posted here in the hour that I've had this thread open. lol.
― peace, man, Thursday, 29 April 2021 11:51 (two years ago) link
Ouch. I had no idea they were so bad (or that they were even owned by Disney, before this article) - a shame because I like a lot of their output.
― Nhex, Thursday, 29 April 2021 13:40 (two years ago) link
Disney doesn’t own them in whole: 20th Century Fox bought a piece of them in 2017, and Disney inherited that in 2019.Amusingly enough, Boom! had the licence for Disney comics c. 2009-2010, but it was pulled after repeated contract violations, including sending stories to print without getting them approved by Disney.
― bobo honkin' slobo babe (sic), Thursday, 29 April 2021 16:37 (two years ago) link
great news!
Amazon is weeks into negotiations on a deal to acquire MGM for about $9 billion, industry sources tell Variety.Chatter that Amazon (and other tech giants) have been sniffing around MGM has circulated for some time. But sources indicated that Amazon’s interest in acquiring the studio has taken on a new tenor beyond the usual rumor mill. The deal is said to be being orchestrated by Mike Hopkins, senior VP of Amazon Studios and Prime Video, directly with MGM board chairman Kevin Ulrich, whose Anchorage Capital is a major MGM shareholder.
Chatter that Amazon (and other tech giants) have been sniffing around MGM has circulated for some time. But sources indicated that Amazon’s interest in acquiring the studio has taken on a new tenor beyond the usual rumor mill. The deal is said to be being orchestrated by Mike Hopkins, senior VP of Amazon Studios and Prime Video, directly with MGM board chairman Kevin Ulrich, whose Anchorage Capital is a major MGM shareholder.
https://variety.com/2021/digital/news/amazon-mgm-acquisition-talks-9-billion-1234975168/
― bobo honkin' slobo babe (sic), Tuesday, 18 May 2021 06:34 (two years ago) link
https://nitratediva.wordpress.com/2021/05/16/dave-kehr-fox-film-interview/?fbclid=IwAR1XOJwqx0_LtfpfuOAtsWOz0TXS3hY5UGPvN6I8WBRGGCr_C9pQPi04lUM
THIS is why I was afraid that Disney would put the surviving pre-1935 Fox films into the vault next to Song of the South, never to be heard from again. Some of these titles, when I saw them at AFI or Capitolfest, are as jaw-dropping as this interview claims.
Does anyone here have access to MoMA's Virtual Cinema? I hesitate to spend $110 a year for a plethora of artist documentaries that lack the entertainment value of paint drying, in order to access two or three Fox pre-Code films.
― Infanta Terrible (j.lu), Tuesday, 18 May 2021 13:54 (two years ago) link
$110 a year isn't THAT bad compared to other services, but on top of everything else I'm paying for...
― Nhex, Tuesday, 18 May 2021 14:21 (two years ago) link
Exactly--I already pay $90 a year for the Criterion Channel, plus whatever ungodly sum per month for cable in order to get TCM.
https://harpers.org/archive/2021/06/stages-of-grief-what-the-pandemic-has-done-to-the-arts/
"We need an art movement like the one we have for food, a movement for responsible consumption."
Okay, but how about transparency and responsibility in art distribution? If I buy a theater ticket/book/concert ticket, how much of what I am paying goes to the creator, how much to venue/production overheads, and how much into corporate coffers?
― Infanta Terrible (j.lu), Tuesday, 18 May 2021 14:33 (two years ago) link
Amazon Buys MGM
https://variety.com/2021/digital/news/amazon-buys-mgm-studio-behind-james-bond-for-8-45-billion-1234980526/
― blue whales on ambient (C. Grisso/McCain), Wednesday, 26 May 2021 13:18 (two years ago) link
Does this seem like an actually wise move, or just something Amazon did to prevent Apple or someone else from doing it first?
― Nhex, Wednesday, 26 May 2021 17:25 (two years ago) link
Didn’t something come out last year that Bezos pushed into expanding Amazon Video because he wanted to meet actresses?
― Joe Bombin (milo z), Wednesday, 26 May 2021 17:28 (two years ago) link
The pre-1980 MGM movies are owned by WB, right?
― wasdnuos (abanana), Wednesday, 26 May 2021 18:41 (two years ago) link
Up to the Mid-'80s, iirc.
MGM's catalogue is MGM films after that, United Artists, Orion, AIP, and Cannon (with exceptions in each library).
― blue whales on ambient (C. Grisso/McCain), Wednesday, 26 May 2021 18:46 (two years ago) link
― Fizzles, Wednesday, 26 May 2021 18:54 (two years ago) link
🧐 pic.twitter.com/47KH1dxMN8— cww (@cww_0) May 26, 2021
― bobo honkin' slobo babe (sic), Wednesday, 26 May 2021 22:24 (two years ago) link
lol
― Nhex, Thursday, 27 May 2021 00:20 (two years ago) link
Jeff Bezos on MGM Acquisition: Amazon Will ‘Reimagine’ Studio Franchises ‘for the 21st Century’
Amazon founder, chairman and CEO Jeff Bezos said the ecommerce giant’s $8.45 billion bid for MGM was driven by a desire to obtain the storied studio’s intellectual property — and create new offshoots based on that....He continued, “The acquisition’s thesis here is really very simple: MGM has a vast, deep catalog of much-loved intellectual property. With the talented people at MGM and Amazon Studios, we can reimagine and develop that IP for the 21s century… People who love stories are going to be the big beneficiaries.”In his remarks, Bezos cited MGM films and franchises including “James Bond,” “Thelma and Louise,” “Raging Bull,” “Robocop” and “Tomb Raider,” ...
...
He continued, “The acquisition’s thesis here is really very simple: MGM has a vast, deep catalog of much-loved intellectual property. With the talented people at MGM and Amazon Studios, we can reimagine and develop that IP for the 21s century… People who love stories are going to be the big beneficiaries.”
In his remarks, Bezos cited MGM films and franchises including “James Bond,” “Thelma and Louise,” “Raging Bull,” “Robocop” and “Tomb Raider,” ...
― bobo honkin' slobo babe (sic), Thursday, 27 May 2021 11:27 (two years ago) link
Story #1: People who love stories are going to be the big beneficiaries.
― clemenza, Thursday, 27 May 2021 12:18 (two years ago) link
Can't wait for the gritty & gory Moneypenny origin series.
― blue whales on ambient (C. Grisso/McCain), Thursday, 27 May 2021 12:25 (two years ago) link
Can't wait to find out what Thelma and Louise are up to on the 30th anniversary of their big weekend
― bobo honkin' slobo babe (sic), Thursday, 27 May 2021 12:27 (two years ago) link
thelma's a a sexy labradoodlelouise is her spaniel sidekicktogether they're making furry...... FUNNY
― Tracer Hand, Thursday, 27 May 2021 12:32 (two years ago) link
Hope they're able to remake the Robocop remake ASAP.
― Jerome Percival Jesus (Old Lunch), Thursday, 27 May 2021 12:53 (two years ago) link
Can't wait for the gritty & gory Moneypenny origin series
Actually, his name is Pennyworth.
― Andrew Farrell, Thursday, 27 May 2021 13:07 (two years ago) link
Crossover and spinoff in 3...2...1...
― Infanta Terrible (j.lu), Thursday, 27 May 2021 14:01 (two years ago) link
Moneypenny already rebooted as a badass spy in the comics btwhttps://comicvine.gamespot.com/james-bond-moneypenny-1/4000-617814/
― Draymond is "Mr Dumpy" (forksclovetofu), Thursday, 27 May 2021 16:37 (two years ago) link
Moneypenny vs. Pennyworth crossover event.
― soaring skrrrtpeggios (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Thursday, 27 May 2021 16:44 (two years ago) link
IN... Le Cheque Exchange
― Nhex, Thursday, 27 May 2021 17:01 (two years ago) link
Boom are now campaigning for Disney to pay freelancers properly
http://fleen.com/2021/05/25/the-irony-it-is-delicious/
― bobo honkin' slobo babe (sic), Saturday, 29 May 2021 05:28 (two years ago) link
This passion
Here's the new logo for Warner Bros. Discovery, per a press release that just went out. pic.twitter.com/3mbgFUvQb5— Alex Weprin (@alexweprin) June 1, 2021
― Ned Raggett, Tuesday, 1 June 2021 18:30 (two years ago) link
BROS.
― Draymond is "Mr Dumpy" (forksclovetofu), Tuesday, 1 June 2021 20:02 (two years ago) link
I bet the Discovery name gets chucked in a few years, just like with AOL.
― wasdnuos (abanana), Tuesday, 1 June 2021 20:45 (two years ago) link
That is a goddamned horrible logo. Fitting, I suppose.
― Jerome Percival Jesus (Old Lunch), Tuesday, 1 June 2021 22:38 (two years ago) link
pic.twitter.com/G80fZ9gamy— masonReloaded 🐛 (@masonreloaded) June 1, 2021
― Draymond is "Mr Dumpy" (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 2 June 2021 22:59 (two years ago) link
lolYeah, it looks like the intro screen to a mid-'90s educational CD-ROM.
― Jerome Percival Jesus (Old Lunch), Wednesday, 2 June 2021 23:13 (two years ago) link
where dreams are made of
― Tracer Hand, Thursday, 3 June 2021 13:20 (two years ago) link
where wings take dream
― buzza, Thursday, 3 June 2021 13:34 (two years ago) link