Wolf314159

So what? How does that matter? It's not as if that's how generations work.

It's kind of funny to see all the hate for a company built on rebooting old stories for a modern audience getting flack for continuing to reboot old stories for a new generation. Are y'all just angry that it's "your" childhood nostalgia that's no longer profitable or popular with the literal kids these days?

Disney's not even the only one to do it, people tend to love that shit and examples abound of your favorite nostalgia IP not being the original telling of a story. No denying that Disney's choices here are entirely profit driven. But pretending like this is a new thing Disney is only doing to your generation's nostalgia is disingenuous at best. Maybe just judge the reboots the way we judge cover songs or genre "standards". Whose going to fault Johnny Cash for covering NIN? Or Nina Simone performing a song also sung by Billie Holiday, Sarah Vaughn, and countless others? Do they add something? Do they re-work it into their own style? Reevaluate elements? Re-frame perspectives? Adapt problematic historical culture pastiches and norms for a modern moral perspective? Maybe they just fix the pacing of a story for a new audience or a new medium. The Lord of the Rings trilogy was by no means original, not even the first movie to be made made on the story, but nobody faults it for that. Same with Dune. Same with literally and stage production before the invention of motion pictures.

DISCLAIMER: This statement is in no way meant to be, nor should it be interpreted as, an endorsement of any of Disney's business practices past, present, or future. This new movie might be shit, but it won't be because it's a story that's been told before.

Why do you think this is about drinking coffee that tastes bad? I hate flavored coffee. I love coffee that has its own strong flavors (and I love a variety of those flavors from beans grown in different places and in different preparations). I also hate bitter poorly prepared coffees. Coffee should taste good, but it can also rock my mornings like only Grace Jones in a leather loincloth can.

Performative declarations that things people enjoy are cringe is also cringe.

Random other worms aside, I'm actually surprised at how accurate the Dune poster is, relative to the other Ghanaian movie posters I've seen. I mean, some of those characters may be from a different version of the movie, but at least they are actual characters in the story. And there's very little gratuitous blood and random gunplay as well. On the whole, pretty accurate for a movie poster from Ghana.

This is pretty close to the premise of Good Omens if I'm remembering correctly.

Anybody know what those tubular things the soldiers are carrying across their shoulders are? (Not the rifles, obviously.)

Wow, if the demo was too much for the developers to maintain that doesn't inspire confidence in my patience to maintain it on my machine.

No denying that I often interpret things in a comically literal way. No offense taken. Farts are funny.

This comic wasn't particularly funny to me to begin with. The above dissection is why. This toad was dead on arrival.

The punchline implies that assumption or parallel processing. It must because it's inconsistent with the common rules of the myth. Wishes are commonly executed in series, not in parallel, which is impicit in the syntax of the first, second, and third wish. So that assumption of parallel wish processing isn't even consistent with most of the language of the comic or with the final panel.

Which one, 1944 (staring Cary Grant) or 1969 (with Bob Crane in the same role)?