Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I’m also having a hard time seeing how the pro-corporation adjustments like the ones Iger and Zaslav are implementing are good for anyone—creators and consumers alike. But instead of relishing in the notion that a random show I might not like 100% got the boot from the service, I’m horrified by how this affects residuals, especially for those lower-paid worker bees who have tighter budgets that count on their contractual entitlements.

So now companies are pushing the narrative that they can break or change contracts if a show doesn’t perform, just as long as that show isn’t out in the wild making money for them? Wut? 

I would call that underhanded, myself.

Posted
17 hours ago, Big s said:

I heard it was leaving the other day, and still a bit thrown off that they would just remove one of the few original shows they have, even if it sucked.

Chalk that up to residuals.  Disney is crunching the numbers on viewership and finding that is show is not pulling in enough eyeballs to justify the show staying on.

It really should be residuals based on viewings but I'm guessing (just guessing) that there is no trust left for anyone to agree to the viewership figures for that to be possible.

Posted
6 minutes ago, Dynaman said:

Chalk that up to residuals.  Disney is crunching the numbers on viewership and finding that is show is not pulling in enough eyeballs to justify the show staying on.

It really should be residuals based on viewings but I'm guessing (just guessing) that there is no trust left for anyone to agree to the viewership figures for that to be possible.

I guess it’s just me trying to wrap my head around a service that barely has content cutting content, even if it wasn’t good

Posted
4 hours ago, technoblue said:

So now companies are pushing the narrative that they can break or change contracts if a show doesn’t perform, just as long as that show isn’t out in the wild making money for them? Wut? 

That's nothing new for the Mouse. Even when flush with money, they stiff everyone they can get away with.

  • Thom changed the title to Willow, the movie - deleted scenes
Posted

So, I watched Willow the Movie again, for a fun nostalgic romp, and then looked on-line about it and found out about the deleted scenes. Don't judge me, but that was the first time I ever even thought about that! And though the few that they showed on YouTube were the kind that you could take or leave, the entire subplot with Sorsha would have made it so much better!

Though I love the movie, Sorsha's turning against her mother always came across as a little flighty, but when you learn there was a subplot about her missing father, she starts to get much-needed depth. If they ever make a director's cut, I would hope they would add that in there.

There are a couple of other scenes too, such as with 'fish boy,' but they could do without that.

 

Posted
3 hours ago, Thom said:

So, I watched Willow the Movie again, for a fun nostalgic romp, and then looked on-line about it and found out about the deleted scenes. Don't judge me, but that was the first time I ever even thought about that! And though the few that they showed on YouTube were the kind that you could take or leave, the entire subplot with Sorsha would have made it so much better!

Though I love the movie, Sorsha's turning against her mother always came across as a little flighty, but when you learn there was a subplot about her missing father, she starts to get much-needed depth. If they ever make a director's cut, I would hope they would add that in there.

There are a couple of other scenes too, such as with 'fish boy,' but they could do without that.

 

After what happened with the series, I kinda doubt a director’s cut would happen, but I wouldn’t mind being wrong 

Posted
3 hours ago, Big s said:

After what happened with the series, I kinda doubt a director’s cut would happen, but I wouldn’t mind being wrong 

I think a Director's Cut would go a long way to reminding people just how great the movie is, and go a long way to push away what the series was. TBS, I was liking it despite its flaws and it appeared to be getting its footing near the end.... but...

In fact, there was a fan-edit that was done for the series, though I don't know if it ever came out. I would like to see that.

Posted
1 hour ago, Thom said:

I think a Director's Cut would go a long way to reminding people just how great the movie is, and go a long way to push away what the series was. TBS, I was liking it despite its flaws and it appeared to be getting its footing near the end.... but...

In fact, there was a fan-edit that was done for the series, though I don't know if it ever came out. I would like to see that.

Yeah, it was picking up a little, but a little too late. That show got shelved ultra fast

Posted

It wasn't the best, certainly, but I don't see why they took it off. There are worse shows that are left out there to take up bandwidth.

Posted
1 hour ago, Thom said:

It wasn't the best, certainly, but I don't see why they took it off. There are worse shows that are left out there to take up bandwidth.

(cough)Discovery(cough)

Posted
2 hours ago, Thom said:

It wasn't the best, certainly, but I don't see why they took it off. There are worse shows that are left out there to take up bandwidth.

There were definitely worse that came up D+ that didn’t get removed like the Acolyte or Secret invasion, or She Hulk, or Ahsoka, or the Obi show. I’m not sure what the criteria is for them to remove a show. I’d choose Willowover those examples of bad D+ content even though Willow wasn’t good.

 

1 hour ago, pengbuzz said:

(cough)Discovery(cough)

An STD can be infectious, at least the kept that one to a streaming service nobody seems to have to limit its spread 

Posted

My guess is that Willow is a one off that did not pan out.  Taking out any of the Star Wars stuff could make a fan think all of the Star Wars stuff might be on the possible chopping block.  Same for the Marvel stuff.

Posted
8 hours ago, Dynaman said:

My guess is that Willow is a one off that did not pan out.  Taking out any of the Star Wars stuff could make a fan think all of the Star Wars stuff might be on the possible chopping block.  Same for the Marvel stuff.

I still don’t understand how the get a tax break from removing a show from streaming. I get that’s one of the biggest reasons they did it, but I don’t think they should be allowed to do that. 
As far as giving marvel and Star Wars a bad name, they really don’t have to look any further than themselves for not realizing they constantly make similar mistakes over and over again and they just  seem to have a hard time learning from them. Skeleton Crew so far may be the only good thing they’ve made for the service in two years, but even that show might end up being trash depending on how things go.

Posted
On 12/8/2024 at 6:06 PM, Big s said:

I still don’t understand how the get a tax break from removing a show from streaming. I get that’s one of the biggest reasons they did it, but I don’t think they should be allowed to do that. 
 

Streaming rights to actors appear to be based on the show being available to stream, at least partly.  Not available to stream = no royalties to pay out.  Personally I would have gone with a royalty per showing but with the distrust between studios and actors on those kinds of statistics I understand why that is not normal.

Posted
1 minute ago, Dynaman said:

Streaming rights to actors appear to be based on the show being available to stream, at least partly.  Not available to stream = no royalties to pay out.  Personally I would have gone with a royalty per showing but with the distrust between studios and actors on those kinds of statistics I understand why that is not normal.

I get the royalties, but not so much the tax break 

Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, Big s said:

I get the royalties, but not so much the tax break 

I don't have any idea what the tax break might be but the only thing more convoluted then royalties is the tax implications of Hollywood.  The ability to claim a loss (and thus a tax break) based on needing to pay fees to companies wholly owned as a subsidiary is possibly involved somewhere...

Edited by Dynaman
Posted
3 minutes ago, Dynaman said:

I don't have any idea what the tax break might be but the only thing more convoluted then royalties is the tax implications of Hollywood.  The ability to claim a loss (and thus a tax break) based on needing to pay fees to companies wholly owned as a subsidiary is possibly involved somewhere...

I know that wb did something similar with that cat woman thing that may never be seen despite being pretty much completed. All the news sources said they did it to wipe out their losses in a tax break, but didn’t explain how that works

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...