Press J to jump to the feed. Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts
View
Sort
Coming soon
2 points · 3 hours ago

I read your title too quickly and I thought you were suggesting they should reboot The Walking Dead but with dinosaurs. It was very confusing.

It doesn’t matter when he tweeted those things, it’s on social media now and it’s all been rediscovered by the public. So many tweets throwing around molestation and ass rape. It’s like if your manager found out you posted something really shitty on social media, they don’t want you working for them because that will hurt their reputation.

see more
0 points · 3 hours ago

Do you think a company like Disney doesn't vet all the high profile public figures that they hire for things like directing big tentpole marvel movies? There's no way Disney didn't know about those tweets. Dude worked at Troma. They let him put Lloyd fucking Kaufman in his movie. They didn't fire him because they suddenly realized the tweets existed, they fired him because they've set a precedent of not being associated with people who could bring them bad PR. But it's just going to enable people who deem others to be their enemies to go digging for dirt on those who have made comments that haven't aged well (spoiler alert: that's pretty much everyone on planet earth) because they know now that it's going to get them fired.

This is the exact same kind of bullshit that happened with GamerGate and that's happening again since the ArenaNet firings a couple of weeks ago. It's a bad precedent and it's totally unjustifiable.

Oh I'm sorry I didn't mean to imply that any sane person actually wrote that. Actually sane people don't spend time on r/politics.

There is a tangible difference between being a rapist, and making tasteless jokes. You're completely right. I don't want someone doing either making movies for children, and working with children. Especially in an area so known for sexual abuse such as Hollywood.

I like how you say that this is the result of an alt-right campaign to "take down an enemy". Like changing the director of a yearly superhero movie is some great victory in the political climate, get over yourself. There's not even any proof that some "alt-right" keyboard warrior did this. Why not just blame Russia for it? There's as much evidence that they did it as anyone else.

see more
8 points · 3 hours ago

There is a tangible difference between being a rapist, and making tasteless jokes. You're completely right. I don't want someone doing either making movies for children, and working with children. Especially in an area so known for sexual abuse such as Hollywood.

A lot of comedians were making tasteless jokes 10 years ago. To lump them all in with actual rapists is some flat out nonsense. People mature and evolve, and should be allowed to grow out of whatever compelled them to make those jokes in the first place.

I like how you say that this is the result of an alt-right campaign to "take down an enemy". Like changing the director of a yearly superhero movie is some great victory in the political climate, get over yourself.

Tell that to the people who orchestrated this. Getting a director fired in and of itself doesn't matter, but it continues a dangerous, precedent-setting trend of getting people fired over old, trivial bullshit because you disagree with them on something. This reeks of the same bullshit that's been going on in the video game industry since the whole ArenaNet fiasco a couple of weeks ago. People on that side are organized and they're realizing they can take people down fairly easily. It doesn't matter that each move doesn't have a material impact. Neither does throwing your keurig out the window, but they were doing that a while ago too.

There's not even any proof that some "alt-right" keyboard warrior did this. Why not just blame Russia for it? There's as much evidence that they did it as anyone else.

Do you think this stuff popped up out of thin air? James Gunn is one of the more ardent and prolific critics of trump on Twitter. Mike Cernovich has been tweeting about this shit since late last night (after Gunn went after Ben Shapiro the other day). Since then articles on Breitbart, The Daily Caller and all the other alt-right rags have popped up further propagating the smear. If you don't know who Mike Cernovich is (something tells me that you do), he was one of the big time peddlers of Pizzagate conspiracy theories, among other things. He's a known conspiracy theorist and peddler of fake news. Some cursory googling will show you more than enough "evidence".

Load more comments

27 points · 6 hours ago

He was actually saying "fuck Batman" after just having read Tom King's Batman #50.

please no. no offense, id rather KF diversify and add some color to their ranks for their next hires. (let the downvotes commence)

these kids did alright, snow bike mike needs to tone down the angry joe vibes, maybe have mini greg be the host and lead the charge for the show today.

see more
2 points · 6 hours ago

I'm as SJW lefty snowflake as they come but I don't really get your comment. They have Andy and Kevin on the team, as well as Andrea and Joey for the female perspective. The KF team is already pretty diverse.

After me and my friends were dissapointed by Skyscraper, we got to thinking....

What movies were widely successful where Dwayne Johnson is the sole star, and not in an ensamble piece? only a few.

He's not the next Arnold/Sly/Tom Cruise/Will Smith like he and others think he is.

see more
5 points · 7 hours ago

San Andreas and Rampage were both very successful. And both were pretty recent. I agree with the premise of the article that he needs to start picking better movies and maybe take some risks but the dude can sell a movie on his own. Maybe it's just this one that didn't work out.

-4 points · 6 hours ago

no he can't. those you mentioned made money because San Andreas was about something that people are intrigued about. earthquakes. Rampage was based on a video. nobody wants a see a movie about a Skyscraper being on fire simply because it has The Rock. that's why Jumanji made a lot of money. because of the nostalgia and also because that movie was just so damn good.

see more
7 points · 6 hours ago

Ah I get it, so when The Rock's movies make money it's in spite of The Rock and he and his brand don't contribute to their success at all. And when they fail it's entirely his fault.

Load more comments

202 points · 1 day ago · edited 1 day ago

Do you think you're ever gonna win a third acting Oscar, thereby tying with Daniel Day-Lewis, Jack Nicholson, and Walter Brennan for the most Oscars won by an actor and becoming one of the all-time greats?

Edit: I included Walter Brennan because he won three supporting actor Oscars. I clearly didn't do my research well enough...

see more
2 points · 7 hours ago

Late to this but he should have won for Fences.

Yeah, pedophiles and rape jokes are okay!

see more
46 points · 7 hours ago

They're obviously not, but Mike Cernovich doesn't give a shit about bad taste jokes. He only cares about taking down people he deems to be the enemies of the alt-right.

People make mistakes and humour changes. If we took down everyone who made a tasteless joke when they were younger and when the standards for comedy were different there wouldn't be anyone left to tell jokes.

105 points · 20 hours ago

His episode of Luke Cage was actually my favorite of the season. Great balance of action and lighthearted comedy. Finn Jones and Mike Colter have great chemistry together. I honestly wouldn't mind replacing season 2 of Defenders with a miniseries of Danny & Luke.

see more

Iron Fist & Power Man is already a team up thing in the comics, they'd be crazy not to do this eventually.

I wouldn't trust Canseco not to forget it's a work, and start shooting

see more
Original Poster11 points · 1 day ago

I wouldn’t trust Canseco in a shoot. That’s how he lost a finger

Seems like those that wish to destabilize the US are working all sides! Glad this failed. Not sure why you’d want to split up the 5th largest economy in the world.

see more
-5 points · 2 days ago

Why would splitting that economy into three be detrimental to any Californian or American as a whole? The aggregate of those three states would still be the same size theoretically, could possibly create more jobs (at the government level), And it all operates within the US. I suppose maybe looking at California as an entity on the world stage, splitting it in three would maybe dilute its voice where it may need to be heard, especially if specific industries wind up getting split.

But domestically, I suppose the idea is that one state that is larger than most countries isn't appropriately represented in national politics, especially when it comes to the Senate. Putting partisan politics and the potential for a form of gerrymandering aside, it kinda makes sense to me. It's a huge state with rampantly different industries and identities throughout it. Presuming a fairly even population split, all three new states would still be in the top 10 most populous states, all while giving a slightly bigger voice to every current californian in the way their government is run, but at a state and federal level.

I'm sure there are cons, but they're at least worth debating. People seem averse to radical political change, which, after everything we've gone through in recent years, seems nuts to me. A lot of things about the way the American government is currently run simply doesn't work. There need to be sweeping changes and no one's willing to even discuss the idea that maybe the way the system is currently set up is broken. I know that's kind of a different point, but dismissing this idea as radical without putting it through the ringer seems unfair to me,.

15 points · 2 days ago

What happens to the state's university system? What happens to the state's park system? What happens to the state's water rights system? What about the Colorado River Compact? What happens to the state's inmate population? Medi-Cal and Covered California? The Coastal Commission? What happens to existing lawsuits involving the AG? Emission reductions goals? Renewable energy portfolio standards? The Homeowner's Bill of Rights? The Cap and Trade program? CEQA? LCSF? ZEV? I think this is way more complicated than you're giving credit for.

Edit: That's not even touching on existing bond debts or pensions.

see more
-5 points · 1 day ago

I never said it wouldn’t be complicated. Of course it will be. That’s all stuff that would have to be figured out. But from a philosophical point, does that mean that we shouldn’t do things because they’re complicated?

52 points · 2 days ago

Says next week there will be interviews with U2 again! That's pretty cool. Wonder if Scott will keep his interview style of being basically all compliments.

see more
13 points · 2 days ago

Wonder if Scott will keep his interview style of being basically all compliments.

Is this another episode of "What's Your Interview Style?"

Would one need to watch both these eps to appreciate the podcast?

see more
2 points · 2 days ago

I know a little bit about the show tangentially since my sister was always a big fan of it. I didn't watch them ahead of time but gave it a listen and it was fine, they describe stuff from the show and made me curious to finally try and watch it maybe, after years of my sis harassing me about it.

I'd say you're fine.

3 points · 2 days ago

I know I'm probably in the minority as it pertains to the general floppy-buying public but a Kelly Thompson book is an instant pull for me at this point but I don't really collect digitally so I'll probably just wait for the TPB.

54 points · 2 days ago

“I don’t have a problem with thirteen episodes,” she says. “I felt that Luke Cage’s second season fit nicely into 13 hours.”

Luke Cage Season 2 could have ended after Episode 9. Then it just kept going for no reason. The finale didn't even have a villian in it, it was literally sixty minutes of setup for Season 3.

see more
37 points · 2 days ago

I love the way season 2 ends. I don't mind that it was mostly setup for the next season, I don't really see why that would be a problem. A lot of shows set up their next season in the finale.

Also it feels like you're sort of arbitrarily choosing episode 9. Episode 10 is probably the best of the season. I love the way they use spoiler and it gives me hope for where they might go with him in the future. Also the end of that episode is shocking and one of the darkest things these Marvel Netflix shows have yet done.

Could it have been a solid 10 episodes if they cut some stuff? Sure, I think you can say that about any show really. But this was the first time where it really didn't seem to drag, not nearly as much as the other shows have. That last arc in the four episodes you're dismissing almost stand on their own in a way.

Could it have been a solid 10 episodes if they cut some stuff? Sure, I think you can say that about any show really.

I think that would be hard; you'd basically be looking at 12-15 mins less for each episode. That's a fair bit of content. Like you could have cut out Bobby Fish for most of the series and save some room, but then the complaints would be,"Where's Bobby?". You could cut the the musical scenes, but I thought they were some of the best parts of he show; really set the mod especially the switch from the "proper" R&B/Jazz/Rock to Jamacian Reggae to the more "street" HipHop.

I'd say Season 2 for Luke Cage was one if not my favourite of the Nexflix Marvel shows so far.

see more
4 points · 2 days ago

I'd say Season 2 for Luke Cage was one if not my favourite of the Nexflix Marvel shows so far.

I'm with you, I loved it. But it's not like it was perfect, and my point was more of a generality about writing for TV. Many writers will tell you that the hardest thing they have to do is cut shit they really like, but it can also be really good for whatever they're writing. You can save stuff for down the line. Or you can do like Mike Schur does on The Good Place and just straight up skip stuff that would take up full seasons under other writers.

As for this particular season of TV, I dunno. Like I said I really liked it so I don't want to theorize about what they could have cut, especially since cutting a quarter of the story means that it would be a completely different story to begin with, but there are totally ways you can make a solid ten episode experience out of this even if most of it was good.

Load more comments

You'd think intelligence officials would figure out a way to hack his cable and stage Fox news in a way that appeals to him (bright lights, short easy to understand statements, pretty blondes, etc) and also gets some real info across to him.

see more
12 points · 2 days ago

Where's Max Headroom when you need him.

12 points · 2 days ago

I've read this thing several times now and I'm not sure what exactly he's filming. Anyone else have an idea?

44 points · 2 days ago

Seems a bit hypocritical for a dude who spends as much money and time as Jeff does on old video games and hardware to declare the act of collecting and enjoying vinyl “fucking stupid.”

see more
8 points · 2 days ago

You could literally replace the word vinyl with like several dozen things Jeff has called fucking stupid in that sentence.

Regarding Brad's defense of SF as just being like any other city- no. San Francisco is a whole special level of fucked up

see more
4 points · 2 days ago

Yeah I live in a big city and have been to other big cities and none of them are anywhere near what they seem to describe about SF. In most big cities you have pockets where you might maybe step into some hosed off feces or catch a bum straight jerking it in a Subway. Like, don't go down that alley past 11PM kind of deal. But an entire city where, you have a story like that for every week? Nah, that's all your city, pal.

7 points · 2 days ago

He raises some good points but of course people are going to lock in on one or two things out of context and get angry about it. The clickbait titles about this interview are already pretty wack. At this point there's probably no satisfying everyone no matter what they do. Unfortunately it's probably best if they just quietly shutter the character for good.

Comment deleted2 days ago

But they're not waiting... they've started production now.

Good thing he never actually said anything of the sort. And nice title change to pure clickbait garbage.

I have no idea how anyone could have read his actual comments and come to this conclusion. Illiteracy, I guess.

Here is a non hyperbolic, clickbait article about what he actually said, written by people who possess reading comprehension.

see more
3 points · 2 days ago

So I sort of agree that the backlash has been kind of hyperbolic, but I don't necessarily think that's a bad thing. If people like HBO the way it is, and don't want to to change for the worse, is it not better to raise their voices now, before changes happen, to show AT&T that becoming bigger and broader is not the right way to go about this, rather than be disappointed about what it's become after the fact? AT&T isn't exactly a great company, you can surely understand people being skeptical about their leadership with regards to a brand like HBO.

What's more, Stankey is media trained AF and most of what he says in front of the camera has to be taken with a grain of salt - meaning that he's not going to outright tell you he wants to turn HBO into a Netflix-style cash cow, you're going to have to read between the lines to figure that out. He may not have outright said he wants HBO to be like Netflix, but you can totally see that in the subtext. Like, you can't read a statement like this one and not get the idea that this is definitely what he's talking about:

The other thing I think that’s really important, and how I think about success — and Richard and I have had these conversations — I think the definition of success is how many hours a day are we getting engagement from a customer moving forward. And you’re a key part of that, but you’re not the only part of that.

*We need hours a day. It’s not hours a week, and it’s not hours a month. We need hours a day. You are competing with devices that sit in people’s hands that capture their attention every 15 minutes. *

This dynamic about people being addicted to certain applications, it’s not far from that. We know through studies that there’s endorphins released when people are getting vibrations and “Likes” from Facebook, and if that becomes the first place people check to figure out where they should go in the rest of their life, what they should consume, what they want to do, that’s not good for any of us in this room. And we need to think about, as an aggregate relationship with our customers, how many hours a day of engagement are we getting?

So why do I want to invest more? I want more hours of engagement. Why do we need other properties, have interesting ways for customers to navigate and get to them easily? Because I want more hours of engagement. Why are more hours of engagement important? Because you get more data and information about a customer that then allows you to do things like monetize through alternate models of advertising as well as subscription, which I think is very important to play in tomorrow’s world.

This is not the statement of a man who wants to run a prestige brand like HBO the way it's been run the last 20 years. This is the statement of a telecom exec who is used to his customers using his products on an hourly basis, and wanting to extrapolate that to his new acquisition. HBO's business model right now is basically producing one night of content a week that keeps people subscribed. He literally says he wants to monetize user data. That can be interpreted as some nefarious shit.

To tell people to relax and have a more measured response to something like this is akin to drinking the Kool-Aid. Dude's not in this to maintain brand integrity.

To tell people to relax and have a more measured response to something like this is akin to drinking the Kool-Aid. Dude's not in this to maintain brand integrity.

I'm not drinking the Kool-Aid, I just understand the intent of his words because I actually read them, unlike most of the authors of these clickbait articles. But to think he has no intention of maintaining any sort of brand integrity and is just going to gut HBO for "reasons" is ludicrous. He pretty clearly states his intention to maintain the integrity of HBO productions, he just wants some more content from them and is willing, by his own words, to throw piles more cash at them to get that done.

Plus, he also elaborated in followup comments that the "more hours, more engagement" could come via a number of different avenues; from either giving them more money to produce more originals, or via licensing existing content, like Netflix and HULU.

None of that implies, at least to me, that he wants to turn HBO into either, just that he actually understands how the industry is moving and is of the "adapt or perish" mentality. Borrowing successful ideas from your competitors in no way indicates you are about to become them.

The hyperbole surrounding this is ridiculous.

see more
2 points · 2 days ago

I just understand the intent of his words because I actually read them

Did you read the section of his words that I quoted in my response? Because I did, and they say that he wants drastically increase the amount of people who watch HBO by producing a lot more content so that he could monetize their data. That is antithetical to what HBO has been, and it doesn't simply equate throwing a bunch more money at HBO to make more top-level quality shows. He literally says he wants to make enough content for people to watch HBO every day. That would ostensibly involve increasing their output sevenfold.

Plus, he also elaborated in followup comments that the "more hours, more engagement" could come via a number of different avenues; from either giving them more money to produce more originals, or via licensing existing content, like Netflix and HULU.

That's not necessarily a good thing. There's probably a good reason HBO hasn't licensed much content over the course of the last 20 years. To change that may be antithetical to what HBO is as a brand. And merely giving them more money to make more content doesn't necessarily mean that it'll all be good. HBO struggles as it is to put high quality content on year round with just one-ish nights of regular scripted programming. Here & Now was a failure. Succession is supposedly good but it's not exactly rousing people. There was backlash to both Westworld and GOT this year. This shit's hard. Increasing their budget seven times isn't going to mean there's going to be 7 times the Emmy-worthy shows on. They're selective on purpose.

For someone who suggests that we need to read what this dude is saying you sure seem to be implying a lot about what he actually meant. I'll repeat that high profile executives at companies like AT&T go through metric fucktonnes of media training so they can assuage people like you into believing that their intentions are not as notorious as they sound. He doesn't give a shit about HBO's brand integrity as a standalone entity. He only cares about how that brand integrity can increase his company's margins. He's going to say whatever he can to reassure people that he's not going to mess with it, but history has proven that he most definitely will.

13 points · 2 days ago

V-Wars is a terrible title. It makes it sound like the title is Vagina Wars

394 points · 2 days ago

Whereabouts is this in Toronto? Looks almost like Tokyo or something :0

see more

Seeing this when first visiting Toronto is kind of jarring. Especially considering that if you walk like a few blocks north (I think north) from there it's basically the suburbs.

u/Prax150
Karma
291,481
Cake day
January 5, 2011
Moderator of these communities
r/television

14,814,735 subscribers

r/westworld

534,763 subscribers

r/arresteddevelopment

167,593 subscribers

Trophy Case (5)
Seven-Year Club

Alpha Tester

Team Periwinkle

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.