This user has mostly submitted to the following subverses (showing top 5):
11 submissions to books
1 submissions to movies
1 submissions to politics
1 submissions to Showerthoughts
This user has so far shared a total of 1 links, started a total of 13 discussions and submitted a total of 377 comments.
Submissions: This user has upvoted 43 and downvoted 0 submissions.
Comments: This user has upvoted 312 and downvoted 7 comments.
5 highest rated submissions:
Oliver Stone talks Snowden: "America is fed bullshit and we buy it.", submitted: 9/8/2016 4:35:07 AM, 84 points (+86|-2)
This isn't the first time the Left has wanted to reshape mountains, submitted: 8/16/2017 1:03:08 PM, 76 points (+77|-1)
I buy too many books. I decided to list the ones I haven't read yet in order to work through them one at a time., submitted: 7/22/2016 4:09:25 AM, 17 points (+18|-1)
[Book Review] Jack Kerouac, On The Road, submitted: 7/22/2016 8:16:24 AM, 8 points (+8|-0)
[Book Review] Robert Cialdini, Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion, submitted: 7/25/2016 2:00:26 AM, 4 points (+4|-0)
5 lowest rated submissions:
[Book Review] Joe Navarro, What Every Body Is Saying, submitted: 7/22/2016 7:23:10 AM, 1 points (+1|-0)
[Book Review] Paulo Coelho, The Zahir, submitted: 7/29/2016 3:20:22 AM, 2 points (+2|-0)
Has anyone actually gone to tell the Spartans?, submitted: 7/29/2016 6:50:05 AM, 2 points (+2|-0)
[Book Review] Aristotle, Poetics, submitted: 8/1/2016 7:31:12 AM, 2 points (+2|-0)
[Book Review] Gerry Spence, How to Argue and Win Every Time -and- Win Your Case, submitted: 7/29/2016 6:16:26 AM, 3 points (+3|-0)
3 highest rated comments:
Antipodes 0 points 34 points 34 points (+34|-0) ago
If the current thesaurus is inadequate, new words must be found. For the concepts Chelsea is describing I suggest the word "Clintonic".
Antipodes 1 points 17 points 18 points (+18|-1) ago
This sort of thing I call Single Study Science. Also see: psychology, gender theory, sociology, etc, etc...
Antipodes 2 points 17 points 19 points (+19|-2) ago
Let's do some thinking here, guys: why do you think this titbit of information has been released now, and why do you think Fox has allowed the story to get into the mainstream media? Remember your Last Psychiatrist: if you're reading it, the ad is for you.
Namely, notice the throw-in at the bottom that Deadpool is now out on Blu-ray, etc, etc. The primary idea of the ad is to get you to spend some more cash on the film. They do this by letting you sneer at the studio's supposed mendacity in not paying the writers to be around for the entire production ... but if you wind up supporting the film by buying more of it, you're actually justifying the studio's decision to be cheap because you add more money to the film's top line, i.e. you make Deadpool even more profitable than it already has been (Budget of 58 million vs. 782 million is a ROI of more than thirteen to one. Most studios are content with a return of 3 to 1. Most Wall Street
bullshit stocks don't have a return that good.)
And odds are on most of the key players -- maybe with the exception of Reynolds and the director -- didn't get percentages of the box office profit, they would have been paid out of the film's budget.
Thus, buy a copy of the DVD, and you are ultimately not bringing any extra love to the writers. You are feeding the same studio system that left the show in development hell for the better part of ten years and kept on tightening the garotte on the makers even while the movie was filming.
But let's think about it from the studio's perspective for a second. Deadpool didn't work as a PG-13 concept (and they certainly tried). Aside from that, the concept did not fit the profitable mould Fox knew could work: Deadpool is almost unique in the comic universe in that he's about the only one allowed to break the fourth wall repeatedly, he's a solo character (only Wolverine gets his own films), and the studio was accustomed to mobs of sweaty neckbeards turning up regularly again and again for the same old origin story and the same old soap-opera hijinks from the X-Men films. Christ, Fantastic Four made 168 million dollars and thus turned a technical profit despite it being a piece of shit, do you know how many idiot eyeballs that number represents?
And then here comes an actor who seems to be turning Deadpool into a personal vanity project with "leaked" test footage and a script that features everything from audience asides to fetus hands to the protagonist being fucked up his ass with a strap-on by his hooker girlfriend ... and this is meant to be a safe bet for a studio, something for them to spend above a hundred million on? No, I can completely understand why the studio would've said "Okay, you can make it as an R-rated movie, but you're only getting chump change to do it. We're not throwing good money after bad on this one." Somebody in this thread has said "the studio has zero accountability to the shareholders" -- bullshit, given what was being proposed I think the studio had every right if not a duty to keep the purse strings tight on this one. Deadpool was an enormously high risk idea. Just because it paid off does not mean you greenlight every film that features the protagonist being assfucked and Colossus vomiting.
As for "the writers being on set throughout the process, Ryan Reynolds was generous in paying them to be there", well, in that statement is a pro and a con. The pro is that this decision was most likely right. Screenwriters aren't used enough during the filmmaking process. There's a study out there that indicates the highest-ROI films ever made all had a writer/X, be it writer/director, writer/producer or so on. It's not the highest ROI film ever made, but Titanic is James Cameron writing/directing/producing. Star Wars -- which is one of the highest ROI films ever made -- is by writer/director George Lucas.
The con, though -- and it is a con -- is that Reynolds is not exactly short of a buck himself, and we don't know exactly how much these guys were paid while on set. Put it this way: Ryan ultimately didn't pay for these guys to be on set, you did. You did so when you watched Green Lantern, The Proposal, X-Men Origins: Wolverine, and Self/Less. Until Reynolds reveals whether he was paid with a percentage of Deadpool's box office take, what he did on this film is not selfless. It was simply money invested by him in what he thought would work.
3 lowest rated comments:
Antipodes 3 points -3 points 0 points (+0|-3) ago
She still has a big nose and looks Jewish to me. What am I missing?
Antipodes 2 points -2 points 0 points (+0|-2) ago
Huh, Zero Hedge spruiking gold again, who'd'a thunk it?
Seriously, the great worldwide money printing experiment is just about over. That said, the only thing that will end it is the promulgation of a currency more reliable or stable than the US dollar, which bitcoin ain't. Yet. Nobody seriously wants to go back to gold.