There are 55 comments.

1. Coolidge
   Gazpacho Grande'

   @ChrisCampion

   1:08 PM EDT ⋅ May 2, 2023

   Hartmann von Aue (View Comment):

   Saint Augustine (View Comment):

   David C. Broussard (View Comment):

   How about making good adaptations of books into movies. Villenueve has done a good job with Dune as one example. I’d love to see the Dragonriders of Pern if it’s done to that level. The problem us that Hollywood can’t tell the story as it was written. It’s why LotR was so good, it was left to the story (mostly) and it’s a heck if a story.

   I’ve been enjoying the Yellowstone-verse because they tell long form stories in a compelling way. I’d love to see Sheridan tackle The Time It Never Rained or The Man Who Rode Midnight by Elmer Kelton.

   But, you do have a point about reading books. They enrich more than a movie or TV show does. I enjoy both. TV stimulates different aspects of my brain and imagination than reading does. Both have value.

   Yes, and that’s a salient point on Dune. I haven’t seen it myself–it’s a priority for me on an upcoming Turkish Airlines flight–and I probably won’t make a point of re-reading the book soon. But I get the impression that they respect the source material. Good for them. Movies that do that will sell. LOTR–with mistakes. Harry Potter. One Narnia movie from Hollywood.

    

   The Villeneuve Dune is a masterpiece and I don´t say that lightly. It even has the first movie soundtrack since LoTR that I would listen to by itself. Hans Zimmer outdoes his own previous work in film music there.

   Everything Denis touches is gold.

2. Member
   Pagodan

   @MatthewBaylot

   1:11 PM EDT ⋅ May 2, 2023

   Hartmann von Aue (View Comment):

   Saint Augustine (View Comment):

   David C. Broussard (View Comment):

   How about making good adaptations of books into movies. Villenueve has done a good job with Dune as one example. I’d love to see the Dragonriders of Pern if it’s done to that level. The problem us that Hollywood can’t tell the story as it was written. It’s why LotR was so good, it was left to the story (mostly) and it’s a heck if a story.

   I’ve been enjoying the Yellowstone-verse because they tell long form stories in a compelling way. I’d love to see Sheridan tackle The Time It Never Rained or The Man Who Rode Midnight by Elmer Kelton.

   But, you do have a point about reading books. They enrich more than a movie or TV show does. I enjoy both. TV stimulates different aspects of my brain and imagination than reading does. Both have value.

   Yes, and that’s a salient point on Dune. I haven’t seen it myself–it’s a priority for me on an upcoming Turkish Airlines flight–and I probably won’t make a point of re-reading the book soon. But I get the impression that they respect the source material. Good for them. Movies that do that will sell. LOTR–with mistakes. Harry Potter. One Narnia movie from Hollywood.

    

   The Villeneuve Dune is a masterpiece and I don´t say that lightly. It even has the first movie soundtrack since LoTR that I would listen to by itself. Hans Zimmer outdoes his own previous work in film music there.

   Villeneuve has amassed a pretty impressive record in the past 10 years. Each movie seems to top the one before it, except maybe Sicario (which IMHO is his masterpeice.)  As to film scores, I prefer Zimmer’s score for Nolan’s Inception. Interesting trivia fact, Villeneuve’s go-to composer passed away before he started production on Dune, which led to an opening for Zimmer. Nolan wanted Zimmer for Tenet, but Zimmer couldn’t pass up the opportunity to score Dune (who would?)

   It’s movies like the ones Villeneuve, Nolan, etc. do that keep me going to movies, even making an effort to get out to the theater more often instead of just waiting for streaming. They are not making a movie like Dune for a streamer. Maybe they are getting further and farther between, but there are still movies out there keeping the magic alive, that deserve an in theater audience. 

   PS… While the movie Babylon may not be most member’s cup of tea, you should give the score a listen. I’m not generally a jazz guy, but the score was on repeat for a month after I saw the movie. 

3. Member
   Misthiocracy has never

   @Misthiocracy

   

   2:06 PM EDT ⋅ May 2, 2023

   The commercial motion picture industry is now 128 years old, and with the digital revolution virtually every movie ever made is available for on-demand viewing at home. Since the vast majority of those movies were (arguably) sequels, remakes, adaptations, and/or “inspired by” previous movies anyways, there is almost no commercial reason for any new movies to be made.

   New movies made for artistic (and/or propagandistic) reasons? Sure, maybe. But that kind of movie doesn’t support an entire industry of Hollywood’s size. And even then, what grand artistic message hasn’t already been said by at least one film of the past?  What great new artistic idea is any motion picture artist actually going to produce?

   In the past the only way to see a movie was in the theatre, and there had to be new movies to keep movie theatres supplied.  Today I can watch virtually anything produced in the last 128 years in the comfort of my home.

   The same goes for novels and music, really.  There’s nothing new under the sun, so why not just stick to the old stuff that costs way less? Virtually everything published before 1923 is public domain and available at gutenberg.org, and stuff published after 1923 is easily acquired at low cost.  Virtually every song ever recorded is available on Spotify if you don’t wanna bother hosting it locally on your computer.  Almost all new music is just remixes and rehashes and remakes of old music.  Even with the minority of cases where the new stuff is kinda good, there’s almost no reason to buy any of it when the artists make it available for free on YouTube!

   Once the rate-of-improvement in the quality and complexity of video games hits a final plateau, this rant will apply to them as well.  Already there are precious few new video games that are significantly superior to the games released in previous generations.  When I’ve got a hankering for a new game I usually just download a total conversion mod of some game that I already own (usually Half-Life 2), or else I download an old game that I never played before and run it via an emulator. The last game I played and finished was Phantasy Star IV, and I’ve never actually owned a physical Sega Genesis.

   This wasn’t really possible when games were only available on physical media, but now it’s easy-peasy so why would I bother forking out for the latest “AAA” game when it’s virtually identical to last year’s “AAA” game?

   Of course, there are exceptions to this rule for every form of media entertainment, but they are vanishingly rare.

4. Member
   DrewInWisconsin, Oaf

   @DrewInWisconsin

   2:18 PM EDT ⋅ May 2, 2023

   Misthiocracy has never (View Comment):

   The commercial motion picture industry is now 128 years old, and with the digital revolution virtually every movie ever made is available for on-demand viewing at home. Since the vast majority of those movies were (arguably) sequels, remakes, adaptations, and/or “inspired by” previous movies anyways, there is almost no commercial reason for any new movies to be made.

   New movies made for artistic (and/or propagandistic) reasons? Sure, maybe. But that kind of movie doesn’t support an entire industry of Hollywood’s size. And even then, what grand artistic message hasn’t already been said by at least one film of the past? What great new artistic idea is any motion picture artist actually going to produce?

   In the past the only way to see a movie was in the theatre, and there had to be new movies to keep movie theatres supplied. Today I can watch virtually anything produced in the last 128 years in the comfort of my home.

   The same goes for novels and music, really. There’s nothing new under the sun, so why not just stick to the old stuff that costs way less? Virtually everything published before 1923 is public domain and available at gutenberg.org, and stuff published after 1923 is easily acquired at low cost. Virtually every song ever recorded is available on Spotify if you don’t wanna bother hosting it locally on your computer. Almost all new music is just remixes and rehashes and remakes of old music. Even with the minority of cases where the new stuff is kinda good, there’s almost no reason to buy any of it when the artists make it available for free on YouTube!

   Once the rate-of-improvement in the quality and complexity of video games hits a final plateau, this rant will apply to them as well. Already there are precious few new video games that are significantly superior to the games released in previous generations. When I’ve got a hankering for a new game I usually just download a total conversion mod of some game that I already own (usually Half-Life 2), or else I download an old game that I never played before and run it via an emulator (the last game I played and finished was Phantasy Star IV).

   This wasn’t really possible when games were only available on physical media, but now it’s easy-peasy so why would I bother forking out for the latest “AAA” game when it’s virtually identical to last year’s “AAA” game?

   Of course, there are exceptions to this rule for every form of media entertainment, but they are vanishingly rare.

   I don’t even know what to do with this.

   It reminds me of Bernie Sanders’ “how many kinds of deodorant do you really need?”

5. Coolidge
   DaveSchmidt

   @DaveSchmidt

   2:52 PM EDT ⋅ May 2, 2023

   DrewInWisconsin, Oaf (View Comment):

   Misthiocracy has never (View Comment):

   The commercial motion picture industry is now 128 years old, and with the digital revolution virtually every movie ever made is available for on-demand viewing at home. Since the vast majority of those movies were (arguably) sequels, remakes, adaptations, and/or “inspired by” previous movies anyways, there is almost no commercial reason for any new movies to be made.

   New movies made for artistic (and/or propagandistic) reasons? Sure, maybe. But that kind of movie doesn’t support an entire industry of Hollywood’s size. And even then, what grand artistic message hasn’t already been said by at least one film of the past? What great new artistic idea is any motion picture artist actually going to produce?

   In the past the only way to see a movie was in the theatre, and there had to be new movies to keep movie theatres supplied. Today I can watch virtually anything produced in the last 128 years in the comfort of my home.

   The same goes for novels and music, really. There’s nothing new under the sun, so why not just stick to the old stuff that costs way less? Virtually everything published before 1923 is public domain and available at gutenberg.org, and stuff published after 1923 is easily acquired at low cost. Virtually every song ever recorded is available on Spotify if you don’t wanna bother hosting it locally on your computer. Almost all new music is just remixes and rehashes and remakes of old music. Even with the minority of cases where the new stuff is kinda good, there’s almost no reason to buy any of it when the artists make it available for free on YouTube!

   Once the rate-of-improvement in the quality and complexity of video games hits a final plateau, this rant will apply to them as well. Already there are precious few new video games that are significantly superior to the games released in previous generations. When I’ve got a hankering for a new game I usually just download a total conversion mod of some game that I already own (usually Half-Life 2), or else I download an old game that I never played before and run it via an emulator (the last game I played and finished was Phantasy Star IV).

   This wasn’t really possible when games were only available on physical media, but now it’s easy-peasy so why would I bother forking out for the latest “AAA” game when it’s virtually identical to last year’s “AAA” game?

   Of course, there are exceptions to this rule for every form of media entertainment, but they are vanishingly rare.

   I don’t even know what to do with this.

   It reminds me of Bernie Sanders’ “how many kinds of deodorant do you really need?”

   I think of it more like breakfast cereals. 

6. Member
   Misthiocracy has never

   @Misthiocracy

   

   4:24 PM EDT ⋅ May 2, 2023

   DrewInWisconsin, Oaf (View Comment):

   I don’t even know what to do with this.

   It reminds me of Bernie Sanders’ “how many kinds of deodorant do you really need?”

   Totally different paradigm.  Deodorant cannot be endlessly reproduced digitally.

   I’m not arguing that we need fewer movies. I’m saying we don’t need very many new movies. We already have 128 years worth of movies.  Unlike deodorant, they don’t go away once they’ve been used.

   I’m also not advocating for a ban on new movies.  I’m just saying that Hollywood’s decline doesn’t bother me much because we’ve got a 128 year long back catalogue of movies that we can peruse as film consumers.

7. Member
   Zafar

   @Zafar

   4:40 PM EDT ⋅ May 2, 2023

   DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

   Marjorie Reynolds (View Comment):
   eljibity

   

   For the Indo speakers among us:

   Apa itu LGBT?

   Apa itu orientasi non-heteroseksual?

   Bagaimana bisa seorang anak tertarik sesama jenis?

   Bagaimana proses seorang bisa melakukan seks sesama jenis?

   Apa yang harus orangtua lakukan agar si buah hati tidak menjadi LGBT?

   Masih banyak pertanyaan serupa di atas dibahas di dalam buku ini. Pembaca tidak hanya disuguhi mulai dari definisi istilah dunia non-heteroseksual tetapi juga cikal bakal tindakan tindakan seks sesama jenis, sejarah, dan pro kontra LGBT, pengasuhan agar anak tidak masuk dunia homoseksual hingga pendampingan ala Peduli Sahabat jika salah satu saudara seiman kita tertarik sesama jenis dan ingin tetap hidup di jalan Allah.

   Or as they might have said on Bugis Street

   Salamat datang, bodos!

8. Coolidge
   CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill

   @CarolJoy

   4:41 PM EDT ⋅ May 2, 2023

   Misthiocracy has never (View Comment):

   DrewInWisconsin, Oaf (View Comment):

   I don’t even know what to do with this.

   It reminds me of Bernie Sanders’ “how many kinds of deodorant do you really need?”

   Totally different paradigm. Deodorant cannot be endlessly reproduced digitally.

   I’m not arguing that we need fewer movies. I’m saying we don’t need very many new movies. We already have 128 years worth of movies. Unlike deodorant, they don’t go away once they’ve been used.

   I’m also not advocating for a ban on new movies. I’m just saying that Hollywood’s decline doesn’t bother me much because we’ve got a 128 year long back catalogue of movies that we can peruse as film consumers.

   So true.

   Whenever we can’t figure out what series to binge watch on  streaming services, we peruse the newly released movies on YouTube and find some real gems.

   One was this film, “A Good Woman,” whose cast included Scarlet Johansson, Tom Wilkinson, Helen Hunt, with the trailer here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azZhnM0SX1A&t=2s

   Another was the early 1980’s film “Rehearsal for Murder” whose cast includes Robert Preston, Lynn Redgrave, and a very young Jeff Goldblum, with the full movie starting here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DsoLABh80LQ

   New releases in 2023 on youtube include the movie “Terminal” “MI5” “Marrowbone” “Mud” and  six others, listed here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uA8iKuO7bM

9. Member
   DrewInWisconsin, Oaf

   @DrewInWisconsin

   5:08 PM EDT ⋅ May 2, 2023

   Misthiocracy has never (View Comment):

   I’m not arguing that we need fewer movies. I’m saying we don’t need very many new movies. We already have 128 years worth of movies.  Unlike deodorant, they don’t go away once they’ve been used.

   I’m also not advocating for a ban on new movies.  I’m just saying that Hollywood’s decline doesn’t bother me much because we’ve got a 128 year long back catalogue of movies that we can peruse as film consumers.

   Well, to be fair, a lot of movies are NOT readily available to consumers. Either they’re not streaming, or they’re not on disc or . . .whatever.

   So . . . in some cases once they’re “used” they DO go away.

   Which is infuriating. But there it is.

10. Member
    Zafar

    @Zafar

    5:22 PM EDT ⋅ May 2, 2023

    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf (View Comment):

    Misthiocracy has never (View Comment):

    I’m not arguing that we need fewer movies. I’m saying we don’t need very many new movies. We already have 128 years worth of movies. Unlike deodorant, they don’t go away once they’ve been used.

    I’m also not advocating for a ban on new movies. I’m just saying that Hollywood’s decline doesn’t bother me much because we’ve got a 128 year long back catalogue of movies that we can peruse as film consumers.

    Well, to be fair, a lot of movies are NOT readily available to consumers. Either they’re not streaming, or they’re not on disc or . . .whatever.

    So . . . in some cases once they’re “used” they DO go away.

    Which is infuriating. But there it is.

    Hollywood is not the only place making movies.  Arguably there are fewer movies of a certain type being made, but that’s because they’re making less money than they used to, because you aren’t watching them.

    ??

11. Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf

    @DrewInWisconsin

    5:24 PM EDT ⋅ May 2, 2023

    Zafar (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf (View Comment):

    Misthiocracy has never (View Comment):

    I’m not arguing that we need fewer movies. I’m saying we don’t need very many new movies. We already have 128 years worth of movies. Unlike deodorant, they don’t go away once they’ve been used.

    I’m also not advocating for a ban on new movies. I’m just saying that Hollywood’s decline doesn’t bother me much because we’ve got a 128 year long back catalogue of movies that we can peruse as film consumers.

    Well, to be fair, a lot of movies are NOT readily available to consumers. Either they’re not streaming, or they’re not on disc or . . .whatever.

    So . . . in some cases once they’re “used” they DO go away.

    Which is infuriating. But there it is.

    Hollywood is not the only place making movies. Arguably there are fewer movies of a certain type being made, but that’s because they’re making less money than they used to, because you aren’t watching them.

    ??

    Not sure how that applies to the fact that in spite of the assertion of 128 years of movies all being available, I submit that there are a whole bunch that are NOT available. To say nothing of TV shows that are not available. That is, not streaming, not released on home video . . . not available.

    So . . . yes, movies and tv shows DO go away.

12. Member
    Zafar

    @Zafar

    5:31 PM EDT ⋅ May 2, 2023

    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf (View Comment):

    Not sure how that applies to the fact that in spite of the assertion of 128 years of movies all being available, I submit that there are a whole bunch that are NOT available. To say nothing of TV shows that are not available. That is, not streaming, not released on home video . . . not available.

    So . . . yes, movies and tv shows DO go away.

    Oh I agree, I guess I missed your point entirely.

    But they could come back, right?  Because copyright is a joke in India there are sites which have literally hundreds of old films that you can view.

    I wonder if there isn’t a market for a pay per view repository of all the old stuff, like er….the 1950s Lucy Show?

13. Coolidge
    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill

    @CarolJoy

    6:12 PM EDT ⋅ May 2, 2023

    Zafar (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf (View Comment):

    Not sure how that applies to the fact that in spite of the assertion of 128 years of movies all being available, I submit that there are a whole bunch that are NOT available. To say nothing of TV shows that are not available. That is, not streaming, not released on home video . . . not available.

    So . . . yes, movies and tv shows DO go away.

    Oh I agree, I guess I missed your point entirely.

    But they could come back, right? Because copyright is a joke in India there are sites which have literally hundreds of old films that you can view.

    I wonder if there isn’t a market for a pay per view repository of all the old stuff, like er….the 1950s Lucy Show?

    Here in the states there  was a cable channel that did nothing but run play old re-runs of old 1950’s TV shows. The drawback being that the channel played about 15 mins of commercials for each half hour of show, so actual content was edited away from the re-run programs.

14. Contributor
    Gary McVey

    @GaryMcVey

    6:20 PM EDT ⋅ May 2, 2023

    The vast majority of old stuff is available. Thing is, people want new stuff because they want to see their favorite (new) actors, and most audiences want to see some topicality even in historical films. (“Gosh, they had flirtation and crushes even, like, hundreds of years ago!”) Sure, they could look up a movie with Burt Lancaster, but they’d rather see Robert Pattinson. They could watch Audrey Hepburn if they wanted to. But they’d like to see what Olivia Culpo would do with the role. 

    (Crawling along the sand, shaking an angry fist at God, and evil Fate) “The fools! The damned crazy fools!”

15. Member
    Misthiocracy has never

    @Misthiocracy

    

    6:26 PM EDT ⋅ May 2, 2023

    Zafar (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf (View Comment):

    Not sure how that applies to the fact that in spite of the assertion of 128 years of movies all being available, I submit that there are a whole bunch that are NOT available. To say nothing of TV shows that are not available. That is, not streaming, not released on home video . . . not available.

    So . . . yes, movies and tv shows DO go away.

    Oh I agree, I guess I missed your point entirely.

    But they could come back, right? Because copyright is a joke in India there are sites which have literally hundreds of old films that you can view.

    I wonder if there isn’t a market for a pay per view repository of all the old stuff, like er….the 1950s Lucy Show?

    I Love Lucy is available for free at Pluto.tv

16. Member
    Saint Augustine

    @SaintAugustine

    Post author

    6:58 PM EDT ⋅ May 2, 2023

    Misthiocracy has never (View Comment):

    Even with the minority of cases where the new stuff is kinda good, there’s almost no reason to buy any of it when the artists make it available for free on YouTube!

    And watching for free on YouTube is a small way to support the independent artists who do great work on YouTube. Piano Guys.  Lindsey Stirling.

17. Member
    Saint Augustine

    @SaintAugustine

    Post author

    7:03 PM EDT ⋅ May 2, 2023

    Zafar (View Comment):
    Hollywood is not the only place making movies.

    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill (View Comment):

    Whenever we can’t figure out what series to binge watch on  streaming services, we peruse the newly released movies on YouTube and find some real gems.

    It’s impressive how many independent films are available on YouTube.  Some of them are just awful artistically, which can be part of the fun for some viewers.  Like that movie I never finished about zombie dinosaurs.

    Some are actually pretty good artistically, like maybe 1/5 of the ridiculously Hallmarkish Christmas romances I’ve watched with my wife.

18. Member
    Saint Augustine

    @SaintAugustine

    Post author

    7:05 PM EDT ⋅ May 2, 2023

    Zafar (View Comment):

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    Marjorie Reynolds (View Comment):
    eljibity

    

    For the Indo speakers among us:

    Apa itu LGBT?

    Apa itu orientasi non-heteroseksual?

    Bagaimana bisa seorang anak tertarik sesama jenis?

    Bagaimana proses seorang bisa melakukan seks sesama jenis?

    Apa yang harus orangtua lakukan agar si buah hati tidak menjadi LGBT?

    Masih banyak pertanyaan serupa di atas dibahas di dalam buku ini. Pembaca tidak hanya disuguhi mulai dari definisi istilah dunia non-heteroseksual tetapi juga cikal bakal tindakan tindakan seks sesama jenis, sejarah, dan pro kontra LGBT, pengasuhan agar anak tidak masuk dunia homoseksual hingga pendampingan ala Peduli Sahabat jika salah satu saudara seiman kita tertarik sesama jenis dan ingin tetap hidup di jalan Allah.

    Or as they might have said on Bugis Street

    Salamat datang, bodos!

    Thank you. I Google-translated it.  What fun.

19. Thatcher
    Percival

    @Percival

    

    9:17 PM EDT ⋅ May 2, 2023

    Gary McVey (View Comment):

    The vast majority of old stuff is available. Thing is, people want new stuff because they want to see their favorite (new) actors, and most audiences want to see some topicality even in historical films. (“Gosh, they had flirtation and crushes even, like, hundreds of years ago!”) Sure, they could look up a movie with Burt Lancaster, but they’d rather see Robert Pattinson. They could watch Audrey Hepburn if they wanted to. But they’d like to see what Olivia Culpo would do with the role.

    (Crawling along the sand, shaking an angry fist at God, and evil Fate) “The fools! The damned crazy fools!”

    I don’t have any favorite new actors.

20. Member
    Pagodan

    @MatthewBaylot

    9:25 PM EDT ⋅ May 2, 2023

    Gary McVey (View Comment):

    The vast majority of old stuff is available. Thing is, people want new stuff because they want to see their favorite (new) actors, and most audiences want to see some topicality even in historical films. (“Gosh, they had flirtation and crushes even, like, hundreds of years ago!”) Sure, they could look up a movie with Burt Lancaster, but they’d rather see Robert Pattinson. They could watch Audrey Hepburn if they wanted to. But they’d like to see what Olivia Culpo would do with the role.

    (Crawling along the sand, shaking an angry fist at God, and evil Fate) “The fools! The damned crazy fools!”

    I think people who love movies want both. I have no problem looking up a classic starring Lancaster, Mitchum, Hepburn, etc. I even have a subscription to the Criterion Channel. But I still want to see new movies. I want to see what Nolan is going to put up on the screen, I want to see Tom Cruise strap a bunch of actors into figher jets and film it…and then see him cling to the side of a C130 in flight. Sure it was a book, and then a David Lynch studio debacle, but I want to see how Villeneuve’s vision of Dune comes out. Babylon was a retelling of Singing In the Rain, and yeah I want to see what Pitt, Robbie and Damien Chazelle do with that story. 

    People want new stuff, because there are always new stories that can be told. New ways to tell, them, different perspectives. Even different tropes, or riffs on old tropes. Maybe tech, decline, ennui will eventually win out and kill the movie off entirely, and all we’ll have is the past, but I hope (wish) that’s not the case. 

21. Member
    Pagodan

    @MatthewBaylot

    12:33 PM EDT ⋅ May 3, 2023

    Percival (View Comment):

    Gary McVey (View Comment):

    The vast majority of old stuff is available. Thing is, people want new stuff because they want to see their favorite (new) actors, and most audiences want to see some topicality even in historical films. (“Gosh, they had flirtation and crushes even, like, hundreds of years ago!”) Sure, they could look up a movie with Burt Lancaster, but they’d rather see Robert Pattinson. They could watch Audrey Hepburn if they wanted to. But they’d like to see what Olivia Culpo would do with the role.

    (Crawling along the sand, shaking an angry fist at God, and evil Fate) “The fools! The damned crazy fools!”

    I don’t have any favorite new actors.

    Thanks for the update?

22. Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens

    @BryanGStephens

    

    4:53 PM EDT ⋅ May 3, 2023

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    Misthiocracy has never (View Comment):

    Even with the minority of cases where the new stuff is kinda good, there’s almost no reason to buy any of it when the artists make it available for free on YouTube!

    And watching for free on YouTube is a small way to support the independent artists who do great work on YouTube. Piano Guys. Lindsey Stirling.

    Neebs Gaming!!

23. Contributor
    Internet's Hank

    @HankRhody

    1:39 PM EDT ⋅ May 7, 2023

    AMD Texas (View Comment):

    Zafar (View Comment):

    Saint Augustine: On the one hand, taking a good superhero story and retelling it again and again may seem kind of silly. I can think of four different faces of live-action Batman in my adult life.

    And none of them was as good as the 1960s TV series.

    As much as I loved and still love the campy craziness of Adam West’s Batman, he is outclassed by the Dark Knight Trilogy with Bale and the the first two Keaton turns as the Caped Crusader.

    There is no Batman but Adam West.

24. Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf

    @DrewInWisconsin

    3:28 PM EDT ⋅ May 7, 2023

    Internet's Hank (View Comment):

    AMD Texas (View Comment):

    Zafar (View Comment):

    Saint Augustine: On the one hand, taking a good superhero story and retelling it again and again may seem kind of silly. I can think of four different faces of live-action Batman in my adult life.

    And none of them was as good as the 1960s TV series.

    As much as I loved and still love the campy craziness of Adam West’s Batman, he is outclassed by the Dark Knight Trilogy with Bale and the the first two Keaton turns as the Caped Crusader.

    There is no Batman but Adam West.

    And Robin is his prophet.

25. Member
    Sisyphus

    @Sisyphus

    

    3:52 PM EDT ⋅ May 7, 2023

    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf (View Comment):

    Internet’s Hank (View Comment):

    AMD Texas (View Comment):

    Zafar (View Comment):

    Saint Augustine: On the one hand, taking a good superhero story and retelling it again and again may seem kind of silly. I can think of four different faces of live-action Batman in my adult life.

    And none of them was as good as the 1960s TV series.

    As much as I loved and still love the campy craziness of Adam West’s Batman, he is outclassed by the Dark Knight Trilogy with Bale and the the first two Keaton turns as the Caped Crusader.

    There is no Batman but Adam West.

    And Robin is his prophet.

    Holy prophet, Batman!!! Says the boy in the tights.