Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The $55M saga of a Netflix series nobody will ever see

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 366 posts

Re: The $55M saga of a Netflix series nobody will ever see

#211

Post by JohnBooty »

WalterBright wrote: post #184
jonhohle wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s so much good dialog in Aliens that I’m always amazed was written in the mid 80s and would play just as well if it were new today (mostly spoken by Hudson): “Game over, man!”, “yeah, but it’s a dry heat”, “ Somebody said "alien" she thought they said ‘illegal alien’ and signed up!”

Aliens is more of a vanilla monster movie than scifi. I don't recall any science in it, other than the setting. Alien was based on a short story in "Voyage of the Space Beagle", though the implementation of it was fresh. The discovery and exploration of the alien's life cycle was good scifi.

    I don't recall any science in it
Can't agree with you there. I think even Cameron would be the first to say that Aliens is primarily a thrill ride. But it is also objectively true that at least two hard scifi elements provide the scaffolding for the events of the movie.

Two of the most central themes of the movie were fairly hard sci-fi... although admittedly one of them was nearly entirely deleted from the theatrical cut.

One: What would a person experience after decades of hibernation? In many ways the film revolves around or is set in motion by Ripley's extended cryosleep after Alien. She is now alone in a strange world where her skills are no longer relevant or current. This primes her for manipulation by Burke. She has also missed out on her deceased daughter's entire life, which primes her to think of Newt as a surrogate daughter and protect her with a mother's ferocity. (Unfortunately, the exposition about her daughter was removed from the theatrical cut. Huge miss.)

Two: How would mankind react to alien contact? Would we treat it with ontological reverence or would it be business as usual for warmongering corporations? The second half of the movie is set in motion by Burke doing the latter on behalf of Weyland-Yutani.

The terraforming stuff.... yeah I agree it's just a setting.

Re: The $55M saga of a Netflix series nobody will ever see

#212

Post by WalterBright »

edgyquant wrote: post #208
WalterBright wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aliens is more of a vanilla monster movie than scifi. I don't recall any science in it, other than the setting. Alien was based on a short story in "Voyage of the Space Beagle", though the implementation of it was fresh. The discovery and exploration of the alien's life cycle was good scifi.

Science fiction doesn’t imply science being in it. >fiction based on imagined future scientific or technological advances and major social or environmental changes, frequently portraying space or time travel and life on other planets.

Aliens isn't much more than NYC with monsters in the sewers, with a different backdrop. It was ok and I didn't feel like it was a waste of time, but that's about it.

I definitely expect more from scifi to be scifi.

Re: The $55M saga of a Netflix series nobody will ever see

#213

Post by WalterBright »

WalterBright wrote: post #85
hinkley wrote: post #55

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

Oh, I forgot to add:

. The Man from Earth

No special effects, no action, just talk. A great movie.

Re: The $55M saga of a Netflix series nobody will ever see

#214

Post by MarkSweep »

nradov wrote: post #82
jedberg wrote: post #76

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.

While I do think it is unlikely that you can deduct “lost profits” by not releasing film, there are some interesting ways expenses of a film can be depreciated. See this form:

https://www.irs.gov/forms-pubs/about-form-8866

It is the only thing on the IRS website I could find about this and it does not tell the whole picture of the special depreciation method for films. The fact that this form can have you pay interest to the IRS if you incorrectly predict income reinforces the idea that you can’t deduct “lost profits”.

Re: The $55M saga of a Netflix series nobody will ever see

#215

Post by hinkley »

WalterBright wrote: post #85
hinkley wrote: post #55

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

Have you tried to show Flash Gordon to anyone?

It has not gone well for me. I think it's just our special little thing.

Re: The $55M saga of a Netflix series nobody will ever see

#217

Post by WalterBright »

hinkley wrote: post #215
WalterBright wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Have you tried to show Flash Gordon to anyone? It has not gone well for me. I think it's just our special little thing.

FG laid an egg when it first came out. Over time, FG seems to have gained quite a following and is now a classic.

The usual criticism is it's too over the top, too campy. But they miss the point - it was supposed to be over the top and campy.

The dialog is still funny after 40+ years:

    Klytus: Bring me... the bore worms!
    Princess Aura: No! Not the bore worms!
The movie is just crammed with gems like that. It should have won an Oscar for best screenplay.

Re: The $55M saga of a Netflix series nobody will ever see

#218

Post by logicchains »

Jochim wrote: post #151
w10-1 wrote: post #122

Sorry, but what's the actual corporate structure here? For software companies, investments are nominal in the sense that they come with responsible CFO's, budgeting and reporting structures that would prevent the money from being vacuumed into personal accounts for investment gambling. Is it really the case that a Netflix would just wire $11M based on a promise? Or that they would tolerate the kind of hostaging that…

Competency is a myth put in place to explain why they pay themselves more than most of us.

> Competency is a myth put in place to explain why they pay themselves more than most of us.

If it was a myth then everybody would be in a place to pay themselves as much as they're paying themselves.

Re: The $55M saga of a Netflix series nobody will ever see

#219

Post by WalterBright »

JohnBooty wrote: post #211
WalterBright wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aliens is more of a vanilla monster movie than scifi. I don't recall any science in it, other than the setting. Alien was based on a short story in "Voyage of the Space Beagle", though the implementation of it was fresh. The discovery and exploration of the alien's life cycle was good scifi.

I don't recall any science in it Can't agree with you there. I think even Cameron would be the first to say that Aliens is primarily a thrill ride. But it is also objectively true that at least two hard scifi elements provide the scaffolding for the events of the movie. Two of the most central themes of the movie were fairly hard sci-fi... although admittedly one of them was nearly entirely deleted from the theatrica…

You do raise some good points. I never thought those issues were the central theme of the movie - just a setup for, for lack of a better term, a bug hunt.

Re: The $55M saga of a Netflix series nobody will ever see

#220

Post by WalterBright »

jonhohle wrote: post #179
matwood wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alien(s) - FTFY ;)

There’s so much good dialog in Aliens that I’m always amazed was written in the mid 80s and would play just as well if it were new today (mostly spoken by Hudson): “Game over, man!”, “yeah, but it’s a dry heat”, “ Somebody said "alien" she thought they said ‘illegal alien’ and signed up!”

Agreed, the dialog had some good laughs. When Paxton asks Gomez "did anyone ever think you were a man?" and she replied "no, did anyone think that of you?" A comeback worthy of Winston Churchill.
Post reply on HN