From: moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
Subject: Re: The Cloverfield Paradox
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin3!goblin.stu.neva.ru!news.roellig-ltd.de!open-news-network.org!border2.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!peer02.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer02.am4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!post02.iad!fx42.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
Subject: Re: The Cloverfield Paradox
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films
References: <qSWdC.4239$YR7.3667@fx34.iad>
<e0061754-3f9e-4ecc-8272-c3e836b5df02@googlegroups.com>
<2gjeC.5841$YR7.3959@fx34.iad> <p5cglr$97f$1@dont-email.me>
<acneC.19974$s_2.7608@fx42.iad> <QOqeC.1499$nY2.295@fx28.iad>
<ZTqeC.15424$KA7.1736@fx05.iad> <vcBeC.23306$d03.10831@fx37.iad>
<9DDeC.27596$u94.5771@fx08.iad> <hjWeC.23766$d03.13499@fx37.iad>
From: moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/52.5.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <hjWeC.23766$d03.13499@fx37.iad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 59
Message-ID: <ImZeC.20402$s_2.17534@fx42.iad>
X-Complaints-To: http://abuse.usenetxs.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2018 14:43:52 UTC
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2018 09:43:49 -0500
X-Received-Body-CRC: 3663238926
X-Received-Bytes: 4148
X-Original-Bytes: 3965
Print Article
Forward Article
On 2/8/2018 6:15 AM, trotsky wrote:
> On 2/7/18 7:59 AM, moviePig wrote:
>> On 2/7/2018 6:14 AM, trotsky wrote:
>>> On 2/6/18 5:30 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>>> On 2/6/2018 6:24 PM, trotsky wrote:
>>>>> On 2/6/18 1:18 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> tCP now has 6.0 from  15,208.  Fwiw, I do think Netflix confers a 
>>>>>> small pro-bias -- e.g., an anti-establishment sticking it to The Man. 
>>>>>
>>>>> Anti-establishment?  What the fuck are you talking about?
>>>>
>>>> In the movie biz, Netflix is (still) the upstart, the renegade who 
>>>> delivers what the big studios won't risk.  We pull for Netflix.
>>>
>>> Here is my advice: you shitheads need to start doing the necessary 
>>> research when talking about any aspect of the business of selling 
>>> movies, because you look like fucking third graders.  Here's an example:
>>>
>>>
https://www.thestreet.com/story/14478005/1/disney-announces-earnings... 
>>>
>>> Disney Corp., one of the biggest entertainment conglomerates in the 
>>> history of the universe, has announced its "global streaming plan". 
>>> Guess what?  Netflix is a streaming video channel.  Hm, could it be 
>>> that Disney and others have recognized that streaming video is a new 
>>> paradigm in the release of its products and are acting accordingly? 
>>> Guess what else?  If Disney is doing it it's just the opposite of 
>>> "anti establishment".  Do you see your error yet?
>>
>> The future lies ahead.  The present, however, is a concern about 
>> whether THE CLOVERFIELD PARADOX's hundred minutes will prove rewarding 
>> (to me!). 
> 
> No, we're not talking about your bullshit ways of evaluating a movie 
> without seeing it, we're talking about your bullshit comment about a 
> hugely successful company called Netflix is a "renegade" because they 
> have become successful as an alternate distribution channel for movies. 
> If this shit is over your head you should probably just avoid the subject.

"Evaluating a movie" is *different* from "evaluating a movie as a good 
bet".  For instance, one of them requires *watching* the movie, while 
the other specifically *excludes* it.  I hope this now helps you put 
that perennial soapbox to better use -- say, as firewood.

Netflix, meanwhile, is afaics the outre darling of the viewing public -- 
specifically those who forever castigate the big, established players 
for never delivering anything new or outside the safety zone.  For 
example, Netflix claims not even to publish viewership numbers on its 
offerings, because it doesn't want artists to measure their own success 
that way.  Now, perhaps *you're* immune to that sort of corporate appeal 
(and wouldn't be accordingly drawn to perhaps *over*rate their 
problematic 'Cloverfield' pseudo-sequel), but I think many might.  And, 
if you'll remember, *that's* what we were talking about.

-- 

- - - - - - - -
   YOUR taste at work...
     http://www.moviepig.com