Jump to content
Plain Old Tele

Fanboy Wars Thread: Personal Attacks not allowed | With Digital Fur Technology

Recommended Posts

37 minutes ago, HeadShot said:

To be fair no one expected the huge economic crash in 2008! 

Not true. These things are cyclical. Some use the rule of 9 but other factors can prolong a crash or depression a few years. They roughly are or have been 10-12 years apart regardless of politics. 

The 80s was a boom that saw an early 90s crash.

With a respite we then had the "Dot.com" or "Tech" Boom which was shorter and ended after Clinton left office/Bush W started. Bad policy had a Housing Boom but prognosticators warned how the Fannie/Freddie lending policies were headed for trouble but that was ignored---BOOM, 2008 out Bush/in Obama. (I lost my job in that one).

 

We've been without a serious Boom for some time due to the depressed nature for most of the Obama years but here we are 11 years since the 2008 and its very likely a Depression or full on Crash is coming. It's just a matter of trends and history.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Captain Craig said:

Not true. These things are cyclical. Some use the rule of 9 but other factors can prolong a crash or depression a few years. They roughly are or have been 10-12 years apart regardless of politics. 

The 80s was a boom that saw an early 90s crash.

With a respite we then had the "Dot.com" or "Tech" Boom which was shorter and ended after Clinton left office/Bush W started. Bad policy had a Housing Boom but prognosticators warned how the Fannie/Freddie lending policies were headed for trouble but that was ignored---BOOM, 2008 out Bush/in Obama. (I lost my job in that one).

 

We've been without a serious Boom for some time due to the depressed nature for most of the Obama years but here we are 11 years since the 2008 and its very likely a Depression or full on Crash is coming. It's just a matter of trends and history.

 

Except we never left the 2008 crash.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Captain Craig said:

Not true. These things are cyclical. Some use the rule of 9 but other factors can prolong a crash or depression a few years. They roughly are or have been 10-12 years apart regardless of politics. 

The 80s was a boom that saw an early 90s crash.

With a respite we then had the "Dot.com" or "Tech" Boom which was shorter and ended after Clinton left office/Bush W started. Bad policy had a Housing Boom but prognosticators warned how the Fannie/Freddie lending policies were headed for trouble but that was ignored---BOOM, 2008 out Bush/in Obama. (I lost my job in that one).

 

We've been without a serious Boom for some time due to the depressed nature for most of the Obama years but here we are 11 years since the 2008 and its very likely a Depression or full on Crash is coming. It's just a matter of trends and history.

 

Girl it ain't that serious. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't follow the economy that closely but I had some small savings and a friend told me it's a good idea to buy gold because it's a safe haven in an unpredictable and weak economy,  that was about a year ago and gold was $1200, now it's $1500. So for me it not only worked as a safe haven but made money of it too. And apparently it still has ways to go 

Edited by mikee11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Economist were expecting a recession in 2008, but the size of it took them by surprise.

They were expecting a normal size recession, but no the disaster that happened.

Edited by dudalb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, mikee11 said:

Don't follow the economy that closely but I had some small savings and a friend told me it's a good idea to buy gold because it's a safe haven in an unpredictable and weak economy,  that was about a year ago and gold was $1200, now it's $1500. So for me it not only worked as a safe haven but made money of it too. And apparently it still has ways to go 

But then the Goldbugs always oversell the worth of Gold as an investment. A solid blue chip stock in a company you know is not going anywere is better.

Unless we are in total economic collapse, in which case guns and canned foods are a better investment then Gold.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎10‎/‎14‎/‎2019 at 3:38 PM, Jake Gittes said:

Yeah that's why Dark Phoenix and MIB International were such big hits while Get Out and Crazy Rich Asians and Hustlers and OUATIH didn't fill up any theaters. Right.

 

Nowhere in his comments do I see Scorsese acting like The Irishman would have been a slam dunk with studio financing, I don't know where you're pulling that out of. But studios obviously are prejudiced, because they routinely lose money on IP-driven movies and still only keep doing more of them, but very rarely extend that courtesy to movies driven by individual voices. To complain about that is not only right but necessary. What's truly dispiriting is seeing ordinary audience members who ostensibly enjoy good cinema and want to see more of it respond to this by taking the POV of accountants rather than artists. 

I 1000% agree with you, but, sadly, the vast majority of people posting here would be satisfied with nothing but a diet of CBM's, action films, and other franchise films, with the occasion animated film thrown in.

Real problem is studios will not invest any large amount of money in a film that is not franchise material.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, mikee11 said:

Don't follow the economy that closely but I had some small savings and a friend told me it's a good idea to buy gold because it's a safe haven in an unpredictable and weak economy,  that was about a year ago and gold was $1200, now it's $1500. So for me it not only worked as a safe haven but made money of it too. And apparently it still has ways to go 

Gold track record in the last 50 year's as a source of investment for an individual (specially) if you are young has been really terrible:

 

1536602670694-goldinf.png

 

But being all time low could mean that it is not a bad time to buy if one would really want too, people that invested in it in the 70s to 1990 lost a fortune.

 

SP-500-Total-Return-Versus-Gold-Since-19

 

16 minutes ago, dudalb said:

A solid blue chip stock in a company you know is not going anywere is better.

 

I would say to simply go with low cost index fund / ETF

 

Edited by Barnack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/14/2019 at 6:38 PM, Jake Gittes said:

But studios obviously are prejudiced, because they routinely lose money on IP-driven movies and still only keep doing more of them, but very rarely extend that courtesy to movies driven by individual voices.

Not sure what you mean by that, the success right % is all that matter and it is still quite higher on IPs and sequels potential are more often there (Crazy Rich Asians is an IP-driven affair with the sequels already in place)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Barnack said:

Gold track record in the last 50 year's as a source of investment for an individual (specially) if you are young has been really terrible:

 

1536602670694-goldinf.png

 

But being all time low could mean that it is not a bad time to buy if one would really want too.

 

SP-500-Total-Return-Versus-Gold-Since-19

 

 

I would say to simply go with low cost index fund / ETF

 

Point is there are better economic shelters then gold.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/15/2019 at 10:24 AM, The Futurist said:

Except we never left the 2008 crash.

 

So the millenial complain with the extra easy life when they went about 100% of their adult life was lived in an literal economic crash at the same time ?

 

You need to keep the balance in the hot take's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something just occurred to me: For a few months, nothing  from Marvel/Disney at the fate of "The New Mutants".

Just adds to my opinion the thing, if it gets any kind of a threatical release, is going to be dumped.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"(Batman v Superman) may have been the most compelling superhero movie from a decade glutted with superhero movies."

 

https://mashable.com/article/unpopular-entertainment-we-loved-this-decade/

 

 

 

We've been saying this for more than 3 years. Everyone will eventually come to their senses and appreciate how great that movie was and will regret not standing behind the cinematic universe Zack Snyder was shaping up. 

 

The article also mentions another Zack Snyder masterpiece, Sucker Punch.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like BvS had a ton of potential but the motivation for Batman and Superman fighting is ridiculously thin, the "Martha" moment is forced, and it devolves into a really bad final battle against a really boring Doomsday. I don't see how any reevaluation is going to change that. That said I thought Justice League was a big step below BvS even, so that does make it look better in hindsight.

Edited by Menor
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, WittyUsername said:

I’ll at least take BvS over TASM2 or that godawful animated adaptation of The Killing Joke. 

That's not a hard bar to cross since both TASMW and the horrid Animated Killing Joke really sucked.

BvS just sucked slightly less then those 2.

But anyway, Napoleon's relentless blind worship of Zack Snyder and his relentless blind hatred of anything that comes from Marvel Studios is what  makes him pretty much of a joke around here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Menor said:

I feel like BvS had a ton of potential but the motivation for Batman and Superman fighting is ridiculously thin, the "Martha" moment is forced, and it devolves into a really bad final battle against a really boring Doomsday. I don't see how any reevaluation is going to change that. That said I thought Justice League was a big step below BvS even, so that does make it look better in hindsight.

Lots of movies have huge potential which is thrown away by inept handling.

And, yeah, the motivaton behind Batman's hatred of Superman is just ridiculous. Bruce Wayne blames Supes for the havoc in Metropolis instead of Zod and his followers? Makes him look like a total fool.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.


  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.