Classic Conversation Thread

[Plain Old Tele]

2 hours ago, filmlover said:

HBO announced the other week Lovecraft Country wouldn't return for a second season and now here it is with almost 20 nominations. That might've been a premature announcement heh.

Not enough of a franchise, I guess. TV trying hard to turn into the movies and be nothing but IP franchises. 😵

[CJohn]

Henry Ian Cusick hasn't showed up in like 10 episodes but his name is still on the opening credits. That was one great paycheck. Meanwhile Sawyer was living the fucking DREAM (LaFleur lmao) and in one day Sayid, Jack, Kate and Hugo fucked everything up. 

[grim22]

46 minutes ago, CJohn said:

The Handmaid's Tale is utter garbage how in the hell it is still getting nominated fucking lmao.

The Emmys run on inertia. Which is why the same shows keep on getting nominated once they get their first nomination.

[Porthos]

 

Thank fucking god.  I understood the need to protect pitchers last year with next to no spring training when baseball resumed last year, and I understood the hesitancy this year given no one really knew how well teams would apply COVID protocols (plus ramping up from a 60 game season back to a 162 one). So while I didn't like it I understood the seven inning double header rules.

 

But the runner on second "ghost runner" rule was a gawd-damn abomination from the start and the sooner it is consigned to the dustheap of history, the better.  It just warped baseball waaaaaaay too much and pretty much did the opposite of what baseball claims it wants (more action, more balls in play).

 

I can speak from personal frustration at the ghost runner rule as one of the Giants best relievers (and arguably one of the best relievers in the National League) really can't pitch in extra inning games since he is a pitch-to-contact pitcher who relies on ground balls for many of his outs. Two balls in play to the right side of the infield, and he would have a loss if the Giants hadn't scored in the top of a frame.  Maddening.  Instead it incentivized strike out pitchers and those who induce weak contact even more than current trends were establishing.

 

So, if this is followed up on, a rare win for the sport of baseball from the commissioner's office.

 

@Plain Old Tele @Webslinger @Menor @TwoMisfits @4815162342 @MrPink and anyone else who is part of BOT Baseball that I am currently forgetting.

[4815162342]

1 hour ago, CJohn said:

Henry Ian Cusick hasn't showed up in like 10 episodes but his name is still on the opening credits. That was one great paycheck. Meanwhile Sawyer was living the fucking DREAM (LaFleur lmao) and in one day Sayid, Jack, Kate and Hugo fucked everything up. 

 

Network TV in those days, once you were a series regular you were in the credits regardless of whether you appeared

 

And yep Sawyer and Juliet found a decent life and then it was all ruined

Edited July 13, 2021 by 4815162342

[Menor the Destroyer]

8 minutes ago, Porthos said:

 

Thank fucking god.  I understood the need to protect pitchers last year with next to no spring training when baseball resumed last year, and I understood the hesitancy this year given no one really knew how well teams would apply COVID protocols (plus ramping up from a 60 game season back to a 162 one). So while I didn't like it I understood the seven inning double header rules.

 

But the runner on second "ghost runner" rule was a gawd-damn abomination from the start and the sooner it is consigned to the dustheap of history, the better.  It just warped baseball waaaaaaay too much and pretty much did the opposite of what baseball claims it wants (more action, more balls in play).

 

I can speak from personal frustration at the ghost runner rule as one of the Giants best relievers (and arguably one of the best relievers in the National League) really can't pitch in extra inning games since he is a pitch-to-contact pitcher who relies on ground balls for many of his outs. Two balls in play to the right side of the infield, and he would have a loss if the Giants hadn't scored in the top of a frame.  Maddening.  Instead it incentivized strike out pitchers and those who induce weak contact even more than current trends were establishing.

 

So, if this is followed up on, a rare win for the sport of baseball from the commissioner's office.

 

@Plain Old Tele @Webslinger @Menor @TwoMisfits @4815162342 @MrPink and anyone else who is part of BOT Baseball that I am currently forgetting.

Good. There was never any need for it anyway. Extra innings were fine like they were. 

[Plain Old Tele]

58 minutes ago, Porthos said:

 

Thank fucking god.  I understood the need to protect pitchers last year with next to no spring training when baseball resumed last year, and I understood the hesitancy this year given no one really knew how well teams would apply COVID protocols (plus ramping up from a 60 game season back to a 162 one). So while I didn't like it I understood the seven inning double header rules.

 

But the runner on second "ghost runner" rule was a gawd-damn abomination from the start and the sooner it is consigned to the dustheap of history, the better.  It just warped baseball waaaaaaay too much and pretty much did the opposite of what baseball claims it wants (more action, more balls in play).

 

I can speak from personal frustration at the ghost runner rule as one of the Giants best relievers (and arguably one of the best relievers in the National League) really can't pitch in extra inning games since he is a pitch-to-contact pitcher who relies on ground balls for many of his outs. Two balls in play to the right side of the infield, and he would have a loss if the Giants hadn't scored in the top of a frame.  Maddening.  Instead it incentivized strike out pitchers and those who induce weak contact even more than current trends were establishing.

 

So, if this is followed up on, a rare win for the sport of baseball from the commissioner's office.

 

@Plain Old Tele @Webslinger @Menor @TwoMisfits @4815162342 @MrPink and anyone else who is part of BOT Baseball that I am currently forgetting.

But as always, fuck Manfred. 

[Last Man Standing]

Well that's depressing.

[lorddemaxus]

1 minute ago, Last Man Standing said:

Well that's depressing.

Well, good news is I don't see any company buying them for that price (even $1 billion feels too much). I doubt A24's getting sold anytime soon.

[Plain Old Tele]

45 minutes ago, lorddemaxus said:

Well, good news is I don't see any company buying them for that price (even $1 billion feels too much). I doubt A24's getting sold anytime soon.

Nah, Apple will probably buy them and happily overpay by a billion or so. The consolidation will continue. 

[lorddemaxus]

25 minutes ago, Plain Old Tele said:

Nah, Apple will probably buy them and happily overpay by a billion or so. The consolidation will continue. 

Although Apple is partnering with them atm on a couple of projects, they've supposedly also refused to distribute a bunch of their other films. I don't think they really would overpay that much for such a niche company that they already are refusing to work with on some projects.

 

And overpaying for this studio means they're going to have to continue overpaying for future acquisitions, which they can likely still afford, but it probably won't be a good look for them.

Edited July 13, 2021 by lorddemaxus

[Jamiem]

I actually think Netflix getting A24 might be the best synergy, Netflix would be seen as getting better quality movies even if it's only a small % in reality. Uncut Gems also did well for them if I remember correctly. 

 

Can't see Netflix ponying up anywhere near $3B though. 

[Plain Old Tele]

3 minutes ago, lorddemaxus said:

Although Apple is partnering with them atm on a couple of projects, they've supposedly also refused to distribute a bunch of their other films. I don't think they really would overpay that much for such a niche company that they already are refusing to work with on some projects.

 

And overpaying for this studio means they're going to have to continue overpaying for future acquisitions, which they can likely still afford, but it probably won't be a good look for them.

Distribution is very different from outright owning a title. It’s possible the distribution fees were unreasonable (from Apple’s POV at least). And why would Apple care about a “good look” anymore than Amazon did (or Disney, for that matter)? They want to build their library (or at least libraries they can control), and acquiring other companies is the fastest way to do it. It’s possible they end up buying some other indie or mid-major studio, but if they don’t buy A24, I assume someone else will, within a couple of years or so. 

[lorddemaxus]

14 minutes ago, Plain Old Tele said:

Distribution is very different from outright owning a title. It’s possible the distribution fees were unreasonable (from Apple’s POV at least). And why would Apple care about a “good look” anymore than Amazon did (or Disney, for that matter)? They want to build their library (or at least libraries they can control), and acquiring other companies is the fastest way to do it. It’s possible they end up buying some other indie or mid-major studio, but if they don’t buy A24, I assume someone else will, within a couple of years or so. 

Although something like MGM was definitely overvalued, they still have major hits and franchises that's easy for streaming companies to exploit. I just don't see any studio thinking A24 is worth anywhere close to that, when they got much bigger fish to fry (eg. A studio like lionsgate). I don't think A24 is adding much value since it mainly attracts a niche group of people (most of whom are more likely to pirate the movies than subscribe to another streaming service too). I see studios like A24, IFC, and Neon getting bought last at this point. They'll be the kind of studios that these streaming companies will want to buy when there's nothing else left and there's small gaps in their library for those niche groups of cinephiles.

Edited July 13, 2021 by lorddemaxus

[Plain Old Tele]

47 minutes ago, lorddemaxus said:

Although something like MGM was definitely overvalued, they still have major hits and franchises that's easy for streaming companies to exploit. I just don't see any studio thinking A24 is worth anywhere close to that, when they got much bigger fish to fry (eg. A studio like lionsgate). I don't think A24 is adding much value since it mainly attracts a niche group of people (most of whom are more likely to pirate the movies than subscribe to another streaming service too). I see studios like A24, IFC, and Neon getting bought last at this point. They'll be the kind of studios that these streaming companies will want to buy when there's nothing else left and there's small gaps in their library for those niche groups of cinephiles.

Sure. On the other hand, they’re easy pickings if wanted. Nothing really stopping one of the big guys from buying a bunch of them. 

[Porthos]

Let's not forget that Apple also sits on a literal pile of money.  We aren't in the days anymore where Apple could literally buy out Disney with its cash on hand, but it'd go a long way:

 

Apple Cash On Hand:  Approx 196b

Disney Market Cap:     Approx 335b

 

Dropping a couple of b's on A24, while maybe not the most money-wise investment out there is something they could digest VERY easily.

Edited July 14, 2021 by Porthos

[filmlover]

8 hours ago, Plain Old Tele said:

Not enough of a franchise, I guess. TV trying hard to turn into the movies and be nothing but IP franchises. 😵

 

If I had to guess though, considering the first season wrapped in October (and it was announced it wouldn't be coming back not even two weeks ago) and the first season apparently adapted the whole book, who knows what the ultimate reason was why they decided not to go forward with more. Maybe they were worried about another case of diminishing returns after Big Little Lies but submitted it in Drama instead of Limited to keep all options open (BLL waited to announce it would be coming back months after that Emmy ceremony passed). Ultimately walking away creatively seems like a better option than being swiftly cancelled, especially in this day and age where networks have zero patience for stuff that clearly isn't catching on and giving said nonstarters the axe within even a mere couple of days after premiering.

[Plain Old Tele]

12 minutes ago, filmlover said:

 

If I had to guess though, considering the first season wrapped in October (and it was announced it wouldn't be coming back not even two weeks ago) and the first season apparently adapted the whole book, who knows what the ultimate reason was why they decided not to go forward with more. Maybe they were worried about another case of diminishing returns after Big Little Lies but submitted it in Drama instead of Limited to keep all options open (BLL waited to announce it would be coming back months after that Emmy ceremony passed). Ultimately walking away creatively seems like a better option than being swiftly cancelled, especially in this day and age where networks have zero patience for stuff that clearly isn't catching on and giving said nonstarters the axe within even a mere couple of days after premiering.

The folks doing the cancelling or not cancelling are one and the same. (To be clear, I have no idea why HBO chose not to move forward.)

 

But also, TV seems to be rapidly chasing the feature landscape (and being readily rewarded for it) so I’ll assume in five years it’ll basically be non-stop IP stuff. 

[filmlover]

9 minutes ago, Plain Old Tele said:

The folks doing the cancelling or not cancelling are one and the same. (To be clear, I have no idea why HBO chose not to move forward.)

 

But also, TV seems to be rapidly chasing the feature landscape (and being readily rewarded for it) so I’ll assume in five years it’ll basically be non-stop IP stuff. 

tbh the whole "big franchises moving to TV" era we're living in is still a novelty so it's impossible to say how fresh this genre will be in five years and how much they'll go for it. I'm 100% sure none of the MCU shows in the pipeline will make the same kind of impact as WandaVision, which was not only the first but also practically Emmy catnip with how much it paid homage to iconic sitcoms (most of which were actual Emmy-winning shows themselves) across several decades.

Edited July 14, 2021 by filmlover

[Plain Old Tele]

2 minutes ago, filmlover said:

tbh the whole "big franchises moving to TV" era we're living in is still a novelty so it's impossible to say how fresh this genre will be in five years and how much they'll go for it. I'm 100% sure none of the MCU shows in the pipeline will make the same kind of impact as WandaVision, which was not only the first but also practically Emmy catnip with how much it paid homage to iconic sitcoms (most of which were actual Emmy-winning shows themselves) across several decades.

Don’t get me started on WV. But I don’t see why Disney would stop or why others won’t try to imitate. And Emmy voters clearly only watch about a half-dozen shows so the big hitters (formerly prestige-y stuff, now popular tentpole-y stuff) will continue to suck the air out of the room.