website statistics
Jump to content

[OFF TOPIC] Movies & TV Series Thread


Totallympics
 Share

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, Monzanator said:

Utterly ridiculous. 'Ben Hur', 'Braveheart' or 'Titanic' would never win an Academy Award based on these criteria :lol:

To be honest, those don’t seem like ridiculous criteria.

“Sport has the power to change the world. It has the power to inspire. Sport can create hope where once there was only despair” - Nelson Mandela

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 08/09/2020 at 17:24, Olympian1010 said:

I think there’s a couple reasons.

 

Disney’s ridiculous business model. You have to pay for a streaming service, and then pay an additional large fee to see the movie.

 

The lead actress came out in support of the Hong Kong police a few months ago.

 

People also just hate Disney in general for versions social, political, and economic reasons.

 

At least here in Denmark that has been the way with movies that didn't go to the cinema due to covid

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Agger said:

 

At least here in Denmark that has been the way with movies that didn't go to the cinema due to covid

$30 + streaming platform fee seems a little excessive to me. Plus, if Netflix, Hulu, Amazon release a film it’s generally free (besides the streaming platform fees, which aren’t bad).

“Sport has the power to change the world. It has the power to inspire. Sport can create hope where once there was only despair” - Nelson Mandela

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Olympian1010 said:

$30 + streaming platform fee seems a little excessive to me. Plus, if Netflix, Hulu, Amazon release a film it’s generally free (besides the streaming platform fees, which aren’t bad).

I believe that's pretty close to the movies that came out while the cinemas were closed here in Denmark.
Sure it's something else than movies originally considered for streaming services and I don't quite agree with the idea, but it's just not exclusive to Disney.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Olympian1010 said:

$30 + streaming platform fee seems a little excessive to me. Plus, if Netflix, Hulu, Amazon release a film it’s generally free (besides the streaming platform fees, which aren’t bad).

Well it is a lot of money for a movie, I admit it. But... First of all you get the movie the same day it's in cinema. Second you can watch it as many times as you want and with as many people as you want. It is like you get tickets (not one) to the cinema plus Blu-ray/DVD in one price. It's not a good deal for single person, especially if he or she won't like the movie but for families or group of friends? It's even better (unless they really enjoy cinemas but in this case they can just go there, right?).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Col_Frost said:

Well it is a lot of money for a movie, I admit it. But... First of all you get the movie the same day it's in cinema. Second you can watch it as many times as you want and with as many people as you want. It is like you get tickets (not one) to the cinema plus Blu-ray/DVD in one price. It's not a good deal for single person, especially if he or she won't like the movie but for families or group of friends? It's even better (unless they really enjoy cinemas but in this case they can just go there, right?).

Right, but Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, Apple, and HBO have all released movies directly to their platforms for free*
 

*besides the streaming platform monthly/yearly fee

“Sport has the power to change the world. It has the power to inspire. Sport can create hope where once there was only despair” - Nelson Mandela

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Olympian1010 said:

Right, but Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, Apple, and HBO have all released movies directly to their platforms for free*

Not for free but for subscriptions. And there is another small difference because none of this platform released movies in the same time as cinemas and this movies are not necessarily available for ever. Besides I think comparing with another platforms is not accurate because Disney is making something new here. First time ever they give people a choice. Do you want go to the cinema or you prefer watch a movie at home? It's really a big thing. One step (probably) forward in movies distribution. I'm really curious what will be results of this move. Shall it be a new trend or will we forget about it quicker than we learned? But back to discusion. What is the difference between this payment and VOD? Do you boycott all VOD movies or PPV broadcasts? Besides nobody forces you to spend this 30$. We can discuss if price is right but market will answer this question. If it's too much people will not buy it. You don't have persuade them to boycott. 

 

And I'm sure that after Blu-ray/DVD premiere this movie will be available at Disney platform, as you said it, for free.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Monzanator said:

Utterly ridiculous. 'Ben Hur', 'Braveheart' or 'Titanic' would never win an Academy Award based on these criteria :lol:

 

Actually they all would have. Someone on twitter researched all the Best Picture nominees in history and you would have to go pretty far into the past to find a film that would be disqualified based on these criteria. Remember that only 2 of the standards must be met, and most films would "pass" based on the Women standards alone - most films have female costume designers/makeup artists/hairstylists etc.

 

For me this is more a gesture towards new opportunities for underrepresented groups in the areas of apprenticeship/internship and marketing/publicity.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Latest Posts around Totallympics

    • As a Montreal Canadien fan, I am in agreement. However, he is struggling recently and is demoted to the 4th line this week. Hoping he can turn it around. 
    • I read now that Valentina Rodini will be in the new team of Tizzano + Galtarossa and Martini. I was probably in such an information bubble on Instagram that I thought that only Abbagnale was running a campaign and had a team of people around him. That's why I was surprised by his defeat + the fact that, for example, Rodini supports his rival. But as I wrote, for me the change in the general coach position is a plus. We need a new opening and a new impulse: Cattaneo had his best results in Tokyo and then he only explained that his rowers were running away abroad to the USA to study and that's why he had worse results. Ok, except that it's the same in Romania and Greece but they results are comparable or better. It's obvious that no one here will make the UK or the Netherlands, because we don't have such resources and money but I think we can repeat the Romanian results (2 gold - 3 silver in Paris) and that will be a much better result than the 2 silver in this year.
    • Abbagnale boasted that he had 80 per cent a few days before the vote (I still have the screen) and ran again as a result of a power deal. Not a great loss.   I have doubts about the new technical director though, you can't announce him during the congress, brandishing the scalp of the Abbagnale era technical staff (who then, were Crispi's men). Let's hope there are no rifts between the new staff and the athletes, it had to be handled better.
    • I was surprised by Abbagnale's defeat. I thought he was a sure of victory, since he decided to run - I read some source that he didn't know if he would start before Paris 2024. What do you think about it?
    • Rugby Sevens WR SVNS 2024 - 2025   Multi-Stage Event - 30 November 2024 - 4 May 2025     Official Website Programme Results System Facebook Page Discussion Thread
    • Cattaneo was good but his peak was in Tokyo 2021. Then there was such stabilization - stagnation. In Paris the result was in line with expectations but without the wow effect. They threw everything that was best into the quadruple sculls and it was enough for a only silver. Now without the lightweight sculls in LA I think that radical changes are needed to remain competitive. Previously there was a 3-year Olympic cycle due to Covid, so big changes weren`t good but now I think the time is right. Although of course more funds are needed for this sport in Italy, because even the best coach will not overcome this vel our men`s alpine skiing sector
    • @Gianlu33 we posted the same (great) news at the same time  
    • Davide Tizzano (1996 Olympic Champion, men's double sculls) is the new President of the Italian Federation, as he defeated the (now former) President Giuseppe Abbagnale by a very small margin (52% to 48%) in last week's federal elections   and he's already at work to make up for the last 8 disappointing years (at least in terms of Olympic success): his first move is bringing back home  Antonio Colamonaci  who made  great in the past 8 years   https://www.oasport.it/2024/11/canottaggio-cambia-la-direzione-tecnica-dellitalia-arriva-il-guru-che-ha-reso-grande-la-romania/   let's see if he can make  great again, now 
    • Big news   https://www.oasport.it/2024/11/canottaggio-cambia-la-direzione-tecnica-dellitalia-arriva-il-guru-che-ha-reso-grande-la-romania/
    • Weekly update about the podiums in the 24/25 winter season     This week we'll have a grand total of 49 (!) events in 10 sports.
×
×
  • Create New...