That app is shockingly bad. I do not pretend it’s easy to make an app, or expect that everyone’s app should be as slick as Netflix’s. But for a service that’s coming up on a decade old, it’s astonishing that I can’t even use it half the time on the most popular TV brand.
He could resolve it tomorrow by accepting the union’s reasonable demands. He could have resolved it weeks ago by accepting the union’s reasonable demands.
That’s true, he could. But I’ve seen no evidence that he’s actively fighting the union’s demands unlike Iger, Zaslav, and Sarandos. I’d love to see evidence to the contrary if it exists, though.
It is a complete reboot though isn’t it? The original show on Netflix isn’t part of the canon of this one? If so then I don’t really get their complaint.
A tonne of the same cast are returning. Bernthal is still the Punisher, D’Onofrio is still Kingpin… no, this is a calculated decision to pay the workers less.
Same actors != not a reboot. Iirc they’re going to have gal gadot as Wonder Woman again but are rebooting her character so the 2 previous movies are not canon, didn’t happen.
If they’re making a new series that has literally nothing to do with the previous one, zero connection to anything that happened in it, how is it not a reboot? Should they use different actors just to justify it being a reboot?
I am fully in agreement with you, although I can see why you and others didn’t take that from my initial comment. The calculated decision I referred to was Disney’s cynical claim that this is a reboot. They’re shafting workers, we can all see it.
Even if they wipe the continuity, which is still very unclear, is it really fair to call it a “complete reboot” when they’re using the same cast for the most prominent roles?
Both their New York and Vancouver studios have joined IATSE in the last few years - the Canadian studio was the first animation house in the country to join a union, ever.
So they think it’s better to get a tax write off of half the cost, and sell it to a streamer to cover the other half, than make money and profit with a global cinematic release?
Well, I’m not going to assume that every decision made by the senior decision-makers in a company is rational for the firm or for ‘maximizing shareholder wealth’ in the long term.
CEOs and executives may act in their own, or their firm’s short term interests, they can however also get complex decisions entirely wrong. Not to mention tax law can incentivize some sub rational behaviour.
There are enough historical cases of absolutely bad thinking running companies into the ground, with deceptive practices that leave lenders and subcontractors short.
The stock market’s reaction to act against bad management can be tardy.
(I’m setting aside corporations taking responsibility for larger societal benefits here because US SEC norms for publicly traded corporations don’t provide for that the way they are in Canadian or European law. In the other hand, there may be some arguments that some of these actions are anticompetitive, and worthy of antitrust investigation.)
I just wanted to point out how amazing it is that the Sistine Chapel was painted 541 years ago and is still emulated in art such as this thumbnail. That’s crazy!
deadline.com
Top