Amazon Acquires MGM Film Studios for $8.45 Billion

sleepeeg3 said:
Fair point. It made sense to recognize other cultures/ethnicities when they were being underrepresented. However, the difference between that and "wokeness" is that then, those characters were just part of the norm. They were treated as equals.
"Wokeness" goes too far. It beats people over the head that others are different, instead of just accepting who they are. It pushes racial division. It forces cast members that are intentionally more diverse than what is normal in society and recruits less talented people solely, because of their skin color. It pushes people to be guilty for who they are, for no fault of their own. That promotes segregation over equality.

One thing is for sure with this purchase, movies are only going to get worse!

So Amazon now owns part of Vegas, too?
Click to expand...
Respectfully, you're seeing the older stuff through a modern lens. It doesn't shock you to see Uhura on the bridge, but it was a big deal for its time. I'm sure many people at the time saw it as, to use your words, "beating people over the head" and "recruiting less talented people because of their skin color." I suspect the shows' creators would tell you that the only way to normalize underrepresented groups is to highlight them. Furthermore, what do you mean by "more diverse than what is normal society." How do you define "normal society?" The demographics are changing. My son is going to go to elementary school in a district with only 33% white kids. He'll be a minority. Why shouldn't he see on TV things that look like what will be, to him, "normal society?"

Think of it just from an analytic point of view. There are plenty of data that show that the credit system, the criminal justice system, and numerous other structures systematically disadvantage minorities. The whole "reverse racism" trope hinges on anecdotes. There are no data to support the idea that white guys like me face systematic oppression or are systematically disadvantaged.
 
sfsuphysics said:
Man I completely forgot about SGU, I remember there were a number of episodes I liked, but equally so it seemed a lot of very slow episodes I didn't like. But ultimately that's what shows become, effort into producing them... unless they don't get the ratings and then they go away regardless of how good they actually were, meanwhile "reality" shows that involve "talent" in some way just keep popping up that use the same formula. Which ultimately pushed me to the breaking point of realizing I am not the target demographic for the majority of what it is pushed hard for on TV, and cut the proverbial cable.

And don't get me wrong, I would not call SGU a "great" show by any stretch (or maybe even a "good" one, but it was better than what else that was out there so I did watch it. Ditto with that show Lucifer, I'm sure that one ruffled some feathers with the moral majority though.
Click to expand...

I very much enjoyed SGU. Mostly because I enjoy sci-fi that stands out as being a bit different. I also liked ST enterprise for the same reason.

But yeah SGU did have it's downsides. Like you said, it seemed to be drawn out at times. Felt kinda like they weren't sure where they were going with their story or at least needed a better editor.
 
MarkVI said:
Respectfully, you're seeing the older stuff through a modern lens. It doesn't shock you to see Uhura on the bridge, but it was a big deal for its time. I'm sure many people at the time saw it as, to use your words, "beating people over the head" and "recruiting less talented people because of their skin color." I suspect the shows' creators would tell you that the only way to normalize underrepresented groups is to highlight them. Furthermore, what do you mean by "more diverse than what is normal society." How do you define "normal society?" The demographics are changing. My son is going to go to elementary school in a district with only 33% white kids. He'll be a minority. Why shouldn't he see on TV things that look like what will be, to him, "normal society?"

Think of it just from an analytic point of view. There are plenty of data that show that the credit system, the criminal justice system, and numerous other structures systematically disadvantage minorities. The whole "reverse racism" trope hinges on anecdotes. There are no data to support the idea that white guys like me face systematic oppression or are systematically disadvantaged.
Click to expand...
Well-put. And people forget that representation matters a lot in media — people don't want to feel like certain roles only belong to some demographics. Discovery may be more than a little obvious with its casting, but I'll be happy if a Black girl or gay boy is inspired to take up science/programming/the military as a result of that show.

So while some shows do a better job of this than others... if an Amazon-owned MGM produces more shows that are both more culturally relevant and entertaining, more power to it!
 
MarkVI said:
Respectfully, you're seeing the older stuff through a modern lens. It doesn't shock you to see Uhura on the bridge, but it was a big deal for its time. I'm sure many people at the time saw it as, to use your words, "beating people over the head" and "recruiting less talented people because of their skin color." I suspect the shows' creators would tell you that the only way to normalize underrepresented groups is to highlight them. Furthermore, what do you mean by "more diverse than what is normal society." How do you define "normal society?" The demographics are changing. My son is going to go to elementary school in a district with only 33% white kids. He'll be a minority. Why shouldn't he see on TV things that look like what will be, to him, "normal society?"

Think of it just from an analytic point of view. There are plenty of data that show that the credit system, the criminal justice system, and numerous other structures systematically disadvantage minorities. The whole "reverse racism" trope hinges on anecdotes. There are no data to support the idea that white guys like me face systematic oppression or are systematically disadvantaged.
Click to expand...

While this is true (I recall hearing about a lot of people getting very angry about Uhura and especially the kiss later on) I think there's still something to be said about the approach then vs now. There is a lot of bad writing in modern popular sci-fi that does seem to be more interested in pushing the issue than crafting a compelling story around the message they want to tell. It probably doesn't help that a lot of the times the whole issue the show or episode is trying to tackle comes off as hollow or lifeless, feeling more like a 90s PSA. Take Black Panther or The Falcon and the Winter Solider for example. Both properties heavily push their issues and often beat the viewer over the head with them. However, both work and neither come off as feeling like you're being beaten over the head because the creative teams crafted a compelling and (mostly) well told story that fully incorporates their messages. Since Discovery is the thing being talked about mostly here I'll add to shit pile: In comparison, STD just feels lifeless and uninterested in anything except pushing whatever the creative team wants to say. Boring side characters, bad episode plots, terribly done villains, and some incredibly stupid decisions that make absolutely no sense from the supposed smart characters. When the most interesting thing in S1 is female space Hitler there's a serious problem with your show, even more so when the show then expects you to be happy that she was saved and the previous good guy was killed in an fucking out of nowhere villain turn. The writing being so painfully bad leaves it feeling like the show is just slapping you in the face with the issues it's addressing or the message it wants to tell.

Now, I've only watched S1 and read summaries of 2 and 3, so maybe it gets better but I have my doubts.
 
Does
Armenius said:
That's quite a lot of money to spend just so they can stream the James Bond movies when they hit theaters :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...
Does anybody care about James Bond anymore? I still hadn't seen the last film. Also TENET was a better James Bond movie too, lol.
 
The SG movie, SG-1 and Atlantis (watched them in chronological order), were all pretty fun and consistent. Never watched SGU but I too think the franchise has good potential to expand. Maybe Robocop can join in the crew and fight poltergeists on Planet P8X-663 or somethin...
 
Youn said:
The SG movie, SG-1 and Atlantis (watched them in chronological order), were all pretty fun and consistent. Never watched SGU but I too think the franchise has good potential to expand. Maybe Robocop can join in the crew and fight poltergeists on Planet P8X-663 or somethin...
Click to expand...

I never watched Atlantis, but SGU was very good. I liked it better than the original series.
 
KarsusTG said:
I never watched Atlantis, but SGU was very good. I liked it better than the original series.
Click to expand...
SGU was a huge mess. Bringing fat kid to your most secret offworld base? Staffing your most secret offworld base with the dregs of the military such as Col McUseless? Letting the politician bring his eye candy daughter to the most secret offworld base? Once they're stuck in the middle of nowhere with no path back and the only thing the people do is stab each other in the back constantly? And this from people supposedly trained to work together? Oh, don't forget about Lt BallsDeep screwing an enlisted in I think the first or one of the first scenes of the show as well as Col McUseless impregnating Medic Chick. The Stargate program was supposed to have the best of the best of the military but according to the characters of the show they had never left high school. And these were the people stationed at the most secret base Stargate Command had.

A group of people like that probably wouldn't have lasted a week without dying off. Hell, the only halfway decent and believable character was the mentally unstable Dr Rush. Every single character on that show was there for one reason and one reason only: to create stupid drama in order to be a replacement for the drama queeen Battlestar Galactica. Compared to the rest of the people on that show, Rush was a paragon of virtue and sanity.

I streamed the final season of the show in the past year or so when I was super bored since I had never bothered to watch it when it was originally aired. It took them until that last season to finally attempt to fix the idiocy they had built up previously but by then it was way too late. The show's design and plot ran off most Stargate fans and the setting was too different to pull in the young teen female audience it was obviously meant to cater to with the constant and nonsensical drama. There wasn't anyone left who cared to watch it by the time they tried to fix everything they screwed up.

Atlantis is a mixed bag. The first thing they screwed up was the space vampires. They were an extremely stupid foe made worse by how they were to be the main foe in the show. Beyond that they tried too much to copy the SG-1 team formula and it came off as a clone. That said, it was by no means bad other than the space vampires. Overall the characters were good. The stories and plots tended to be more vanilla, though. This is good and bad compared to SG-1. SG-1 had some really terrible episodes and plots but also had some really great ones. Atlantis was never able to reach the same highs of SG-1 but almost always stayed far away from the lows of SG-1.
 
sfsuphysics said:
Man I completely forgot about SGU, I remember there were a number of episodes I liked, but equally so it seemed a lot of very slow episodes I didn't like. But ultimately that's what shows become, effort into producing them... unless they don't get the ratings and then they go away regardless of how good they actually were, meanwhile "reality" shows that involve "talent" in some way just keep popping up that use the same formula. Which ultimately pushed me to the breaking point of realizing I am not the target demographic for the majority of what it is pushed hard for on TV, and cut the proverbial cable.

And don't get me wrong, I would not call SGU a "great" show by any stretch (or maybe even a "good" one, but it was better than what else that was out there so I did watch it. Ditto with that show Lucifer, I'm sure that one ruffled some feathers with the moral majority though.
Click to expand...
The last half of the probably last season of Lucifer drops on Netflix next week so I’m looking forward to that.
 
CVNet1 said:
Yes I too hope this, but only if Amazon funds it without inserting new social and political garbage into it for whatever the current hot topic is in society.

In other words let the creators who made the series a success originally do their thing again without interfering.
Click to expand...
I loved SG1, but had to ignore the leftist idiocy constantly injected into the show to do so. They tore a page directly out of Gene Rodenberry's book.
 
I loved SG-1 - didn't like SGA because it was too much of an SG-1 clone it just felt cheap and none of the characters grew on me (stopped season 3 I think) - SGU's biggest flaw IMO was it had to do the trope of every other episode ending in a 'you know this is serious feelings now guys' music montage - other than that it was good and different enough to feel fresh/new (even if they were just trying to turn SG into a BSG clone, admittedly by them), and I enjoyed it very much unlike SGA but also not as much as SG-1

Watchmen is a show that I thought came right up to the line of being eye-rolling 'SJW' garbage, but did it good enough/the rest was good enough I still enjoyed it and don't ever feel it crossed the 'garbage line' in the end IMO.

The problem is everyone is in a struggle nowadays to show how gOoD aNd RiGhtEoUs they are over their fellow man that they don't just create shit shows that handle issues we could even all agree exist or existed - even if we don't agree to how much/prevalent they exist today - that the shows could still work in theory - but you hire shit writers with shit agendas handled with the tact of a bull in a china shop - and again every studio has to pump out 5000x different versions of this shit a month otherwise someone might not think they care enough!

Falcon and the Winter Soldier - I didn't have a problem with it at any time

The scene in End Game where instead of trying to save the universe in the 'battle of all battles', literally all the prominent women were just looking for each other on the battlefield instead of.....fighting to save the universe......just so they could all line up together and do a girl power moment? Fucking kill me please. As subtle as a piano dropped from a 10 story building...... onto a bull in a china shop.

American Gods - started off great S1 - even with all its 'messaging' which I never had an issue with in S1 - S2 and 3? - it got wayyyy too high on its own supply, heavy-handed, and fell into the garbage tier.
 
Last edited:
Aurelius said:
The original Star Trek had an episode with characters that were literally half-black and half-white, while another had Uhuru and Kirk kiss despite the objections of network executives.
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter whether it was a politically motivated plot or not. The point was that it didn't condescend to its audience. New Trek does, and that's why it sucks.

The same can be said for any new-production media. If it condescends to its audience, it's bad media.

If Amazon/MGM reboots Quigley Down Under as a series about how dumb Australians are, and how they're always getting their babies eaten by wildlife, it's not going to be successful.

They gotta stick with making what their customers want. That's just business.
 
"whiny complaint"
"emotionally fueled speculation"
"witty, off-base retort"
"smug indifference"
"political biased jab"
"alarming pensiveness"
"thoughtful reply"
"dehumanizing response"
.
.
.
[H] turned into a dumpster fire by forum posters.
 
GoodBoy said:
"whiny complaint"
"emotionally fueled speculation"
"witty, off-base retort"
"smug indifference"
"political biased jab"
"alarming pensiveness"
"thoughtful reply"
"dehumanizing response"
.
.
.
[H] turned into a dumpster fire by forum posters.
Click to expand...
GoodBoy said:
"whiny complaint"
Click to expand...
and no not really.


i really hope amazon takes another run at SG-something. miss those shows....
 
TangledThornz said:
Does anybody care about James Bond anymore? I still hadn't seen the last film. Also TENET was a better James Bond movie too, lol.
Click to expand...
I lost interest in James Bond with Daniel Craig. I mean I'm sure I'm in the minority on this, but I want my James Bond as suave gentleman that makes a witty remark and panties drop, Craig was just too gruff and tough of a person for Bond, fine action star, but suave he was not. That said, TENET felt like a hot mess, Christopher Nolan going "I'm Christopher Nolan damnit and this is good!!!"


Lakados said:
The last half of the probably last season of Lucifer drops on Netflix next week so I’m looking forward to that.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I wasn't a huge fan on the direction they took the last season with his "twin brother" or some garbage, although when the big G dropped on the last episode I had a good laugh over that.
 
sfsuphysics said:
I lost interest in James Bond with Daniel Craig. I mean I'm sure I'm in the minority on this, but I want my James Bond as suave gentleman that makes a witty remark and panties drop, Craig was just too gruff and tough of a person for Bond, fine action star, but suave he was not.
Click to expand...

The Craig Bond trilogy anthology is the one I enjoy the most (simply because when it comes to Bond specifically - I could never bring myself to accept all the goofy gadgets - took me out of it - even if I would then turn around and watch a comic movie where an alien turns into a laser robot dinosaur or something) - but yeah I wish it had more of the 'classic' Bond (drinking, seduction) aspects myself even.
 
Last edited:
Axman said:
Doesn't matter whether it was a politically motivated plot or not. The point was that it didn't condescend to its audience. New Trek does, and that's why it sucks.

The same can be said for any new-production media. If it condescends to its audience, it's bad media.

If Amazon/MGM reboots Quigley Down Under as a series about how dumb Australians are, and how they're always getting their babies eaten by wildlife, it's not going to be successful.

They gotta stick with making what their customers want. That's just business.
Click to expand...
Grew up in the 60's, Me my family and friends all watched Star Trek, episodes first played time on TV and none of them were ever shocked or displayed any kind of disparity towards the story lines. More like relieved and joyous over the multi cultural and working together aspects, hope. This was also the time of some large changes predominantly supported by the public like Civil Rights. Star Trek was all inclusive, not just an additional race but many races showing mankind progress in the future working together. Anyways there was not friction story wise between the characters based on color, nationality etc. From black and others being scientists, Federation officers etc. was put together seamlessly. I am sure some didn't like that but that was not predominate from my experience. All Star Treks pretty much followed that formula. Yes, it never condescended to the audience because it just told a story, put across ideas and challenges for the audience to consider.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Axman
like this
noko said:
Grew up in the 60's, Me my family and friends all watched Star Trek, episodes first played time on TV and none of them were ever shocked or displayed any kind of disparity towards the story lines. More like relieved and joyous over the multi cultural and working together aspects, hope. This was also the time of some large changes predominantly supported by the public like Civil Rights. Star Trek was all inclusive, not just an additional race but many races showing mankind progress in the future working together. Anyways there was not friction story wise between the characters based on color, nationality etc. From black and others being scientists, Federation officers etc. was put together seamlessly. I am sure some didn't like that but that was not predominate from my experience. All Star Treks pretty much followed that formula. Yes, it never condescended to the audience because it just told a story, put across ideas and challenges for the audience to consider.
Click to expand...
Here's the successful formula for Star Trek: the characters treated each other like people. They didn't see skin color or nationality (other than the Chekov comedy which they eventually stopped.) They were people and part of a crew and ignored differences because they didn't matter. Differences weren't pointed out. Differences weren't celebrated. Differences didn't matter.

And that's what the woke crew can't understand. These characters were there because they were the best people for the job; not because they were different. They were always portrayed as competent and professional and that's what counted. Woke doesn't recognize that and instead only focus on differences and try to rewrite history in the process. They completely missed the message of older Star Trek which is why they don't understand why people don't like the in your face woke garbage that does nothing but focus on how different certain people are.
 
Valnar said:
Be prepared for an extra helping of wokeness in all movies now.
Click to expand...


This is why I buy physical copies of all my favorite media from the times when hollywood made entertainment ,instead of ham-fisted marxist/third wave feminist propaganda as they do now. No worry if the streaming service in Q takes away twelve angry men and replace it with twelve angry BLM women. F amazon.
 
Last edited:
Dan_D said:
It's also worth noting that in the world of Star Trek, the United Federation of Planets is essentially a utopia. It doesn't work the way our world does. Violence is less of an issue because an economic divide doesn't exist. Issues of poverty and hunger do not exist. Violence is less likely to even occur and when it does the stun setting on a phaser works most of the time. The track record of less lethal options in today's world is relatively poor. Because they have unlimited energy and replicators, everyone's basic needs are met. You don't have scarcity which would change the landscape of what life would be like. People are generally smart enough and well educated enough to not get involved in drugs or things like that. Although, different types of addictions are sometimes explored, like Barclay's holodeck addiction.

JJ Trek isn't like that as it has dozens and dozens of continuity errors and contradictions with established lore. Let's not forget the failures of logic and badly written characters. I can go on an on about this, but all you really need to do is look up any of my posts on modern Star Trek and you'll see what I mean. In a more general sense, none of these franchises are being handled by people who know and understand the subject matter. The people working on Cobra Kai are too young to have worked on the original Karate Kid films, but they understand the source material and treat it with respect and deference. Most fans of the films tend to like that show, where as fans of Predator, Alien, Robocop, Ghostbusters, Star Trek, and more can't stand their modern incarnations.
Click to expand...


Fully agree.

Do you also watch Midnights Edge on ytube?
 
sfsuphysics said:
Out of curiosity do you hate the conservative media for the exact same argument?
Click to expand...


I do,both sides have been useless since at least the late 1990s,imho. I use only alt media,for the most part. All corp msm is pure propaganda. The Corbett Report,The Duran, Global Research.ca and Activist Post are some good ones,but I could list dozens more. I check out the MSM on occasion once or twice a week to see what the propagandists are pushing on the slaves.
 
Last edited:
Seriously if I can get few stargate series out of it I will be happy with this deal lol. Too big of a hard core fan base and it will be great rebirth and I am sure amazon will get alot of people to stick around with that. So lets see!!! MGM needed this after Syfy couldn't afford to make the series anymore. Amazon will be the shot it needs to revisit the franchise.
 
Youn said:
The SG movie, SG-1 and Atlantis (watched them in chronological order), were all pretty fun and consistent. Never watched SGU but I too think the franchise has good potential to expand. Maybe Robocop can join in the crew and fight poltergeists on Planet P8X-663 or somethin...
Click to expand...

Syfy just coudn't keep up with cost it semed. SGU was really starting to look good and was building characters and they canceled it out of blue. I think it just had to do with cost as it did look pretty damn good when it came to special effects for its time.

I mean Stargate is a no brainer and a must I think. Just so much they can do with it and limitless possibilities with those series. MGM needed to be bought out because they were just dicking around with stargate and never wanted to spend too much it seemed. Hopefully amazon an reimagine some of the franchises like the mentioned in the statement.
 
NKD said:
Syfy just coudn't keep up with cost it semed. SGU was really starting to look good and was building characters and they canceled it out of blue. I think it just had to do with cost as it did look pretty damn good when it came to special effects for its time.

I mean Stargate is a no brainer and a must I think. Just so much they can do with it and limitless possibilities with those series. MGM needed to be bought out because they were just dicking around with stargate and never wanted to spend too much it seemed. Hopefully amazon an reimagine some of the franchises like the mentioned in the statement.
Click to expand...
The issue was that MGM couldn't fund the shows at that point. The cost wasn't strictly on Syfy.
 
8.45 Billion seems rather cheap for those assets. MGM must really be in the tank at this point.
 
noko said:
8.45 Billion seems rather cheap for those assets. MGM must really be in the tank at this point.
Click to expand...
That's just it, MGM has been in financial turmoil for about a decade now. Given that fact, the 8.45 billion dollar price tag seems a bit steep to me.
 
Dan_D said:
That's just it, MGM has been in financial turmoil for about a decade now. Given that fact, the 8.45 billion dollar price tag seems a bit steep to me.
Click to expand...
So Amazon is also buying their debt as well I take it. MGM owns a hell a lot of production companies besides rights to numerous movies and franchises. It is vast and wide. Interesting you think it is steep.
 
James Bond’s gotta be worth well over a billion on its own.

Just checked, it’s earned $14 billion.
 
Dan_D said:
The issue was that MGM couldn't fund the shows at that point. The cost wasn't strictly on Syfy.
Click to expand...
NKD said:
Could be I think it was two edged sword.
Click to expand...

Apple/iTunes was gonna continue Stargate (forget if existing series or new series) back in the day (way before Apple TV, back when Stargate SG-1 kinda was 'just' off the air IIRC) with MGM - but Syfy cock blocked it on some contractual non-compete or exclusive streaming rights bullshit or something or other even when they had already affirmed no plans to make more themselves for the foreseeable future (and then came SGU some years later, again IIRC)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top