101–110 of 366 posts
Isn’t $55 M little more than a rounding error for a company like Netflix ?
If somebody stole $55M from them, I'm sure Netflix would go after them hammer and tong.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hopefully that's 19 hours of LOTR with the 2-3 hours of the hobbit which was good.
In the "2-3 hours of the hobbit which was good" are you including the animated versions as well? I'd be hard pressed to find 2-3 hours from the travesty that Jackson made
Since we're discussing the economics of film/TV studios, and their weird decisions. I'd like to understand why the studios are still making Star Trek shows. Each one seems to be more poorly received than the last. That's costing studios far more than $55M. Picard alone cost ~$9M per episode according to Wikipedia.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
SciFi did a miniseries, just before or just after they changed their name. It wasn't bad. I think it was about 10 hours. The problem is that a lot of the payoff is at the end of book 3, and then book four tips the whole thing upside down with some deep religious and philosophical elements that I'm not sure everyone is ready for. I'm always a little surprised how few people have read Dune relative to Lord of the Rings…
I don't understand all the love for Dune. I read it, it was ok, and that was it. 3 underwhelming film adaptations is more than enough. Special effects don't make a movie anymore. What matters is plot (and music). For example, "Colossus the Forbin Project" is very good. Some other very good scifi movies: . Invaders from Mars . Flash Gordon (1980) . Terminator . Star Wars IV . Alien
Earlier quoted context omitted.
SciFi did a miniseries, just before or just after they changed their name. It wasn't bad. I think it was about 10 hours. The problem is that a lot of the payoff is at the end of book 3, and then book four tips the whole thing upside down with some deep religious and philosophical elements that I'm not sure everyone is ready for. I'm always a little surprised how few people have read Dune relative to Lord of the Rings…
I don't understand all the love for Dune. I read it, it was ok, and that was it. 3 underwhelming film adaptations is more than enough. Special effects don't make a movie anymore. What matters is plot (and music). For example, "Colossus the Forbin Project" is very good. Some other very good scifi movies: . Invaders from Mars . Flash Gordon (1980) . Terminator . Star Wars IV . Alien
Earlier quoted context omitted.
SciFi did a miniseries, just before or just after they changed their name. It wasn't bad. I think it was about 10 hours. The problem is that a lot of the payoff is at the end of book 3, and then book four tips the whole thing upside down with some deep religious and philosophical elements that I'm not sure everyone is ready for. I'm always a little surprised how few people have read Dune relative to Lord of the Rings…
I don't understand all the love for Dune. I read it, it was ok, and that was it. 3 underwhelming film adaptations is more than enough. Special effects don't make a movie anymore. What matters is plot (and music). For example, "Colossus the Forbin Project" is very good. Some other very good scifi movies: . Invaders from Mars . Flash Gordon (1980) . Terminator . Star Wars IV . Alien
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://deadline.com/2023/11/coyote-vs-acme-shelved-warner-b... tl;dr: If they never release it they can write off the "lost profits" which they can't do if they release or sell it.
Bullshit. You can't write off "lost profits". The US corporate income tax code contains no such provision. Don't believe anything you read in the entertainment press, it's mostly fake news or at least not fact checked. Go ask your own income tax accountant if you don't believe me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The US tax code is very clear on that point and is not open for debate. Anyone who has ever worked with an accountant knows this isn't true. The law is a series of gray areas at best. You can have three accountants do your taxes and get three results, because each applies different interpretations to the laws. And going in front of a judge won't get extra clarity -- three judges would give you three different opini…
>> The US tax code is very clear on that point and is not open for debate. > Anyone who has ever worked with an accountant knows this isn't true. The point being referred to here is that you can't take a deduction for profits you would have made in some hypothetical world where things had worked out better for you. It's not all gray areas, and this particular point is entirely un-gray. Nor does the article that you "…