What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

TV 19 - Simpsons Did It

Status
Not open for further replies.
So hbo, which has been known for some high quality content over last few decades, has been called hbo

cinemax not so much known for same high quality content.

hbo max is now branding themselves to be “max”

interesting choice
 
They also just announced they’re doing a Harry Potter tv series planned to run ten years. I don’t see it making the full length, especially with Rowling on as a producer.
 
Spartanforlife4 said:
They also just announced they’re doing a Harry Potter tv series planned to run ten years. I don’t see it making the full length, especially with Rowling on as a producer.
Click to expand...

I think it could. Very easily. Despite her politics, Harry Potter sales and popularity haven't changed much. I am actually listening to a podcast called The Witch Trials of JK Rowling and I highly recommend it for understanding her politics and understanding Transgender politics in general. It's very well done.
 
JK is a turd, but the kids certainly don't care and I don't think most fully grown, first gen Potterheads do either. My wife and I have discussed not giving her empire anymore money, but I firmly believe we're in the minority.
 
FadeToBlack&Gold said:
JK is a turd, but the kids certainly don't care and I don't think most fully grown, first gen Potterheads do either. My wife and I have discussed not giving her empire anymore money, but I firmly believe we're in the minority.
Click to expand...
Yeah, look at how well the video game sold despite pleas from the LGBTQ community not too.
 
FadeToBlack&Gold said:
JK is a turd, but the kids certainly don't care and I don't think most fully grown, first gen Potterheads do either. My wife and I have discussed not giving her empire anymore money, but I firmly believe we're in the minority.
Click to expand...

The podcast changed me. I think it would change anyone who listens to it.
 
Deutsche Gopher Fan said:
So hbo, which has been known for some high quality content over last few decades, has been called hbo

cinemax not so much known for same high quality content.

hbo max is now branding themselves to be “max”

interesting choice
Click to expand...

Most people don't even associate the "Max" with Cinemax. I get weird looks when I tell people that is where it comes from.

Max is just to make the name smaller and because it has more content than just HBO. Because AT&T botched the launch there was a lot of brand confusion where people thought it was just HBO streaming not all WB. Plus I think it has something to do with international.

Also at some point it will add Discovery Plus to it which will make my gf happy as she pays for that. (I pay for Max)
 
ScoobyDoo said:
The podcast changed me. I think it would change anyone who listens to it.
Click to expand...

Not likely. Do you still listen to Michael Jackson? Watch Woody Allen films? Enjoy Kang the Conqueror in upcoming Marvel films? People separate the artist from the art all the time and they will with her as well.
 
Handyman said:
Not likely. Do you still listen to Michael Jackson? Watch Woody Allen films? Enjoy Kang the Conqueror in upcoming Marvel films? People separate the artist from the art all the time and they will with her as well.
Click to expand...

Rarely.
I was a huge (yes, huge) Woody Allen fan for a long time. I don't have any desire to watch any of them again.
I never enjoyed Kang the Conqueror.

But, that's not really the point. The transformation for me was more of an understanding of both sides of the story. I have a more enlightened view of what it means to be Transgender because of that podcast and I have a better understanding of Rowling.

I will watch the Harry Potter series.
 
ScoobyDoo said:
The podcast changed me. I think it would change anyone who listens to it.
Click to expand...

Changed in what manner? Like being more receptive of her POV? know a big talking point of hers is that she feels creating more inclusive language (ex: pregnant people, uterus-haver) is erasing women and hurting the feminist movement. However, that’s a separate discussion than just being anti-trans, which she’s become pushing the former.
 
Spartanforlife4 said:
Changed in what manner? Like being more receptive of her POV? know a big talking point of hers is that she feels creating more inclusive language (ex: pregnant people, uterus-haver) is erasing women and hurting the feminist movement. However, that’s a separate discussion than just being anti-trans, which she’s become pushing the former.
Click to expand...

No. Being more receptive of BOTH points of view. I think episode 6 was the best because it was an interview with two Transgender people, their stories, and their reaction to Rowling. I think Rowling has handled this horribly but I do not think she is irredeemable.

The problem again appears to be that all the oxygen is on the extremes of both sides.
 
I should have expanded on my first post more. It sounds like I’m saying it would fail because of Rowling, but she was just an additional reason. The other reasons would be that if this does become a hit, ten years is a long time to lock in for TV, especially in the streaming age. Unless you lock the actors in early for a contract, that’s going to be an insanely expensive show by the end. This coming from HBO Max which has not only been deleting stuff from its library to cut costs, but has also literally filmed a whole season of a show and then just didn’t release it to save costs.

On top of that it’ll be hard to come close to the chemistry of the original cast. They nailed every character the first time around. If they manage to bat 1.000 and create another worldwide phenomenon from the same content again, good for them, but it wasn’t just the content from the books that made the movies so popular.
 
Spartanforlife4 said:
I should have expanded on my first post more. It sounds like I’m saying it would fail because of Rowling, but she was just an additional reason. The other reasons would be that if this does become a hit, ten years is a long time to lock in for TV, especially in the streaming age. Unless you lock the actors in early for a contract, that’s going to be an insanely expensive show by the end. This coming from HBO Max which has not only been deleting stuff from its library to cut costs, but has also literally filmed a whole season of a show and then just didn’t release it to save costs.

On top of that it’ll be hard to come close to the chemistry of the original cast. They nailed every character the first time around. If they manage to bat 1.000 and create another worldwide phenomenon from the same content again, good for them, but it wasn’t just the content from the books that made the movies so popular.
Click to expand...

I guess it depends on what they plan on doing.

No reason to redo Harry Potter. Maybe they do something new? The video game was from the late 1800's. The Fantastic Beasts series (not the greatest) was from the early mid 1900's. They maybe could expand on the video game era. Who knows?

Or, maybe they want to redo the entire original movie series again and add all the things they had to cut for the movies. Hard to say.
 
ScoobyDoo said:
I guess it depends on what they plan on doing.

No reason to redo Harry Potter. Maybe they do something new? The video game was from the late 1800's. The Fantastic Beasts series (not the greatest) was from the early mid 1900's. They maybe could expand on the video game era. Who knows?

Or, maybe they want to redo the entire original movie series again and add all the things they had to cut for the movies. Hard to say.
Click to expand...

It’s redoing all the books. I wouldn’t be surprised if there were spin-offs with all new stories if it’s successful enough.
 
dxmnkd316 said:
And if Kieran Culkin doesn't win the Emmy this year, that award loses all meaning. He probably should have won it last year too. It's one of the best acted characters I've ever seen.
Click to expand...

Well, if it's lead actor, he's going to lose to Pascal. He shouldn't, but that's in the bag.

IMO the best actor from last season was Matthew Macfadyen. The season before it was Jeremy Strong, and the season before that was Brian Cox. So one show ought to have had 4 consecutive different best actors. Nobody has ever done that before.

Of course what it really means is it isn't the actors, it's the writer.
 
Last edited:
ScoobyDoo said:
No. Being more receptive of BOTH points of view. I think episode 6 was the best because it was an interview with two Transgender people, their stories, and their reaction to Rowling. I think Rowling has handled this horribly but I do not think she is irredeemable.

The problem again appears to be that all the oxygen is on the extremes of both sides.
Click to expand...

The problem is she won't shut up just like Chappelle. They don't like all the people disagreeing with them so they fight way harder than need be in response. If she just stopped talking about it it would blow over but no the ego freak needs to stir the pot so she can make herself a spectical.

She isn't as bad as she makes herself out to be. Even if she was though no one would stop watching or buying her stuff. And I am fine with that.
 
Last edited:
Matthew Macfayden is good in pretty much everything he’s in. I think seeing him in other things makes his performance as Tom all the more impressive. I also enjoy Nicholas Braun’s Greg. :^D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top