How do!

Just received an email from Disney+, as they’re adding a new channel called Star (not to be confused with Starz, I guess).

No additional subscription that I can see, and it will offer stuff like X-Files, Lost, Die Hard 2 etc. Allegedly, this will double available content for overseas subscribers. Such as myself.]

They may be putting the price up by a couple of quid (maybe just a quid? Can’t remember), but if Star has decent quality shows, hats off to them I say. Certainly rather pay a slightly higher sub, than have a separate subscription entirely, no?

I believe this is because Disney also now owns all of the 20th Century Fox movies/TV shows and weren't sure what to do with them?

So will also include the Terminator, Alien, Predator movies etc that didn't really fit on the channel as such.

Sounds like it might be quite cool and potentially stop people simply unsubbing after the Mando, lol.

I subbed purely for the Star Wars content but have now watched all of it so there's no real reason not to cancel my sub at this point but this might get me to hang around.

I imagine the Alien tv series they’re doing will be on Star. And it’s existence opens up a home for other, similar projects.

W00t I saw the email but didn't really read it. Even just getting the x files would make.me.happy

So, is there anything Disney does not own now?

 Easy E wrote:
So, is there anything Disney does not own now?

Games Workshop?

Then again perhaps its only a matter of time!

I've been following this Star thing for a while now, since we're in the same boat regarding Hulu as other countries outside the US. And while I own (sometimes multiple) hard copies of the good Alien, Terminator movies etc, I honestly don't know just how extensive the Disney megacorp library actually is, so I have no doubt it's going to have something I'll end up really excited about.

Still haven't gotten this e-mail, but I understand Canada's supposed to get it February 23rd.

 Easy E wrote:
So, is there anything Disney does not own now?

10% of my right hand hairy clockweight. That was a tough negotiation, I can tell you.

 Easy E wrote:
So, is there anything Disney does not own now?

I think just hasbro properties and warner bro properties

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
So, is there anything Disney does not own now?

10% of my right hand hairy clockweight. That was a tough negotiation, I can tell you.

Okay. Can't stop giggling at that one.

Funniest thing that I've heard all week and that's taking into account getting Romesh Ranganathan's latest book for Xmas!

Might drag me back in after a while, once we finished The Mandalorian I switched over to Now TV with Sky Cinema for three months. After that I might see about Amazon for a month or two

 Overread wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
So, is there anything Disney does not own now?

Games Workshop?

Then again perhaps its only a matter of time!

Games workshop isn't worth owning. They are so far beneath the notice of anything Disney has they may as well not exist.

Franchise wise... they don't own stargate. But MGM who owns them is supposedly selling all their stuff soon.

Disney knows what is and isn't worth buying. They are smart with acquisitions, they don't go out and buy anything.
Like I mentioned Hasbro. They could go out and buy Hasbro and get numerous popular IPs.
But, with hasbro being a primarily a toy manufacturer, it isn't worth it because Disney got their toy gak on lockdown.
Fox wasn't bought because of their properties, Disney wanted their sports coverage expanded

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Disney knows what is and isn't worth buying. They are smart with acquisitions, they don't go out and buy anything.
Like I mentioned Hasbro. They could go out and buy Hasbro and get numerous popular IPs.
But, with hasbro being a primarily a toy manufacturer, it isn't worth it because Disney got their toy gak on lockdown.
Fox wasn't bought because of their properties, Disney wanted their sports coverage expanded

Disney did not get any of their sports coverage. Fox kept their news and sports networks. Disney only acquired their movie and network entertainment divisions.

Disney bought Fox because not only did it come with a host of new IPs (see the 3 (3!) Alien tv series being developed + a new Alien ongoing series being made by Marvel instead of Dark Horse), but it got all their Marvel IP back. Marvel is one of if not their greatest cash cows and X-Men has always been one of their most popular franchises within Marvel. (X-Men #1 is the highest selling single issue of all time). They either bought all of Fox and got their gak back + extras or they risked whoever else got a hold of it tainting their IP in movies and TV going forward and potentially being bent over a barrel in negotiations with a complete unknown.

Was guessing that this would come sooner or later. There's just too much content that they own now that isn't appropriate material for Disney+.

Good to see. I've been happy with my Disney+ subscription so far (despite my long-time objection to paying for television services) but extra content is always welcome.

Disney didn't buy Fox to get Marvel properties back. That was a nice bonus.

Disney bought Fox because of Disney+, pure and simple.

 insaniak wrote:
Was guessing that this would come sooner or later. There's just too much content that they own now that isn't appropriate material for Disney+.

Good to see. I've been happy with my Disney+ subscription so far (despite my long-time objection to paying for television services) but extra content is always welcome.

Yep. I’m particularly chuffed in indeed impressed it’s not a separate subscription. Given the widely held fear that over time we’ll see lots and lots and lots of ever more specialised streaming services, Disney do seem intent on bucking that trend.

Compare to Amazon Prime. Now, I like Amazon Prime and I find it has solid content. But it also has lots of add-on subscriptions. Shudder, Arrow, MGM, HayU, Starz etc. All with their own monthly price.

Disney+ could’ve done that. And it probably would’ve worked. But instead, they’ve done something I think should be lauded.

Other opinions are of course available

Disney is smart at the very least. They know that people are getting annoyed by needing to get a bajillion subscriptions to get all the shows they want. Disney is then taking advantage of that by packaging all of their massively huge library together for cheaper than anybody else. It costs them almost nothing to stream their own content, so they can charge nice low prices and offer bundle deals with Hulu to get a lions share of the market.

Its all good for us too, because it will probably force the other content creators to start bundling their products together to compete and lower their prices.

That’s certainly true. The other edge to them having a truly massive library is they an likely spend more on new content.

Higher budgets, especially for Star Wars and MCU? Pretty much a good thing (though budget =/= quality necessarily).

That and the more Disney has under one account the more likely people are to just sit on that subscription. Right now I know a good few will hop subscriptions so they are only subscribed to one a month or as little as they can get away with. Basically subscribing to binge-watch a show then moving on. Of course each time you sign up and let go it likely costs the company in some processing fees and such plus its a hassle for balancing your numbers. Get a big show like Game of Thrones for a month and you've got a huge influx of uses- who all clear off at the end of the month.

Disney having it all under one cheap subscription ensures everyone just gets it and forgets about the cost and stays with them. Disney wins and the customer wins and it keeps going along steadily.

Indeed.

That’s where Amazon and BritBox win me over. They’ve both got stuff others don’t.

Amazon I can buy or rent specific films if needs suit. BritBox has lots of excellent British telly.

Netflix? Well, afraid I’m just not getting on with it anymore. Disco’s third season wasn’t worth the price of admission. Cobra Kai is pretty solid, but easily done in a day. The rest of it? Well, a load of old J Arthur to be honest. And they’re putting their prices up to add insult to injury.

In fact, I’ve literally just cancelled Netflix. If they maybe try a little harder, and don’t just put up crappy documentaries of dubious educational value? Maybe I’ll return. But until then, they can bog off.

Amazon is also handy for free post too, esp when family are now spread around the country and with lockdowns and such. Those £2 - 5 postage and packaging costs add up steadily over a year so a one lump sum for TV and free postage on most stuff is worth it in my view.

Yeah, Netflix has gotten steadily more unimpressive over the last year or two.

It seems that paid streaming services are the way to make more money than basic cable/network. Everyone with a fairly substantial library is collecting their content and setting up a service. I know plenty that were upset when The Office (US version) is being shifted off of Hulu & Netflix to now only be on the NBC Peacock service - the methods to make money always change...

Was just doing a post about my current subs, and realised I’ve not really been using my NowTV either. And with GoT done, and Walking Dead available to purchase on Prime?

Well let’s just say that’s £14 back in my pocket.

Reckon I might cancel WWE Network as well. Still like my Wrasslin’, but without the crowd it’s just not the same. Will decide once I’ve watched TLC 2020. If I’m gripped, it stays.

Anyways.

Yeah.

Well curated Streaming Services are clearly the future.

My main three (D+, Prime and BritBox) don’t particularly intersect, and I get all the entertainment I need month to month.

The thing now is owned content. Netflix has the problem of mostly still needing to pay people for the vast majority of it's content. Which then stays for a contracted time and then disappears.

Disney +, as stated, owns everything on it. They pay nobody to host it. It has no point in time when it will drop off the service. You have Disney + You have the Disney library which is currently VAST. Hulu has deals but they own almost nothing.

Something I learned with my contact in Warner Media is that even when the various content creators are all owned by the same parent company (Times Warner owns HBO, Warner Bros, DC, etc...) those companies are not sharing their content freely with each other. They are STILL working out contracts, exclusivity deals, payment etc etc...

So HBO Max has to pay Warner Bros and DC gets a cut for Batman: The Animated Series and there may be a time limitation to those streaming rights. It's a fething mess.

Disney just seems to have it's house in order like nobody else does.

It's likely because all those other firms, even if they are owned by a single parent firm; are all run individually. Which means you end up with them guarding their own income so if another "division" wants something they still have to pay for it even if the overarching parent is the same.

It's basically internal company politics and each firm doesn't want to appear a weak earner and earn the axe and chop from the higher ups.




Personally my view is two fold - first to keep my outgoings per month low and to also buy up bluerays of what I do like as well. I find that one trap is that you can end up spending a lot per month and per year for streaming services and at the end of it all you've nothing for your money if your cancel and a lot of TV is often "Background" tV with a few must watch series interspaced. So I'd rather put more money into things I "own" which aren't tied to accounts and such.

D+ is also yet to really hit its stride.

In its first year, for us Nerds it was really just The Mandalorian (two season thereof) and the final Clone Wars season (which was ace, but arguably stunt programming for attention).

This year?

Mando season 3.
Book of Boba Fett
WandaVision
Falcon and Winter Soldier
Loki
What If?

For me, that’s reason enough to stick with it. And there is of course far more promised for 2022.

Plus Rise of Skywalker and Endgame came out *surprisingly* quickly on Disney+, long before the DVD price drops even happened.

As shoddy as the initial launch of Disney+ was in the UK, I don't really intend on cancelling it anytime soon.

Ghost of Teddy Roosevelt still needs to kick Mickey in the nuts....

 Compel wrote:
Plus Rise of Skywalker and Endgame came out *surprisingly* quickly on Disney+, long before the DVD price drops even happened.

As shoddy as the initial launch of Disney+ was in the UK, I don't really intend on cancelling it anytime soon.

Fair point.

Typically, I bought Rise of Skywalker on Prime. Then perhaps two weeks later? Boom, Disney+ put it up.

Silly me. Just as well I like it, eh!

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
D+ is also yet to really hit its stride.

In its first year, for us Nerds it was really just The Mandalorian (two season thereof) and the final Clone Wars season (which was ace, but arguably stunt programming for attention).

This year?

Mando season 3.
Book of Boba Fett
WandaVision
Falcon and Winter Soldier
Loki
What If?

For me, that’s reason enough to stick with it. And there is of course far more promised for 2022.

I suspect Disney'll be staggering things to so as one of these shows ends another is due to come up. that's 6 shows or so, assuming each contains as many episodes as the Mandalorian, of approx 8 episodes a season with 1 episode a week. that means those 6 shows taken together would EASILY be something that could span an entire year's worth of viewing. which would ensure a CONSTANT stream of subscribers. Which is IMHO disney is being a LOT smarter then net flix which dumps an entire season of TV at once, don't get me wrong I LOVE to binge that but Disney's approuch is proably the smarter from a "keeping folks attention" POV.

It's fascinating to hear other ppls opinions about this stuff. Disney+ has easily been the service I use the least in the last year. I've only ever used it to binge the MCU. I loathe the ST and the Mandalorian so there just hasn't been anything on the service to hook me. Netflix, on the other hand, continues to be my most used platform. They consistently put out great docuseries (Trial 4, How to Fix a Drug Scandal, Killer Inside, Filthy Rich, etc) and other original programs (The Crown, Queens Gambit, Stranger Things, Narcos just to name a few). Like I genuinely do not understand the appeal behind Disney+ at all. How often are you gonna watch lion King or beauty and the beast?

You dont have kids do you

We can quite happily rewatch disney stuff on a daily basis in 9i4 house

Ah, yeah I suppose if you have little brats it would be a more attractive option.

Little brats dont deserve fun like disney+. If they are good, they get nice things...

 creeping-deth87 wrote:
It's fascinating to hear other ppls opinions about this stuff. Disney+ has easily been the service I use the least in the last year. I've only ever used it to binge the MCU. I loathe the ST and the Mandalorian so there just hasn't been anything on the service to hook me. Netflix, on the other hand, continues to be my most used platform. They consistently put out great docuseries (Trial 4, How to Fix a Drug Scandal, Killer Inside, Filthy Rich, etc) and other original programs (The Crown, Queens Gambit, Stranger Things, Narcos just to name a few). Like I genuinely do not understand the appeal behind Disney+ at all. How often are you gonna watch lion King or beauty and the beast?

Same for me, Disney+ is only kept for me for the occasional movie.
Netflix is used way for me.
Disney doesn't hsch much for a single/childless adult. It has some things, but netflix has more interesting shows for me.
Not to mention anime.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Flinty wrote:
You dont have kids do you

We can quite happily rewatch disney stuff on a daily basis in 9i4 house

But if you are ignoring a big market, like childless(which is a growing market) you risk losing money.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Not to mention anime.

It is always best to never mention anime.

The ‘Disney+ is great for kids’ thing is of course true. And it’s also true that right now, there’s not a huge amount for other demographics.

But that what Star is seeking to address. It’s explicitly Not For Kids (without being explicit I guess, this is Disney after all!). Plus, we’re getting 4 MCU shows and 2 Star Wars shows this year, which is significantly more than we’ve had thus far.

I’m struggling to find a full listing at the moment, but that doesn’t mean it’s not out there somewhere.

 Overread wrote:
Amazon is also handy for free post too, esp when family are now spread around the country and with lockdowns and such. Those £2 - 5 postage and packaging costs add up steadily over a year so a one lump sum for TV and free postage on most stuff is worth it in my view.

Yup, I have an Amazon Prime membership because it paid for itself with my first two international orders. The fact that it included a streaming service was just a nice bonus. Similarly, I wouldn't have paid for Netflix, because the content is just too inconsistent, and stuff disappears. So we only have Netflix because my brother lets me piggyback off his account. Disney+ was the first streaming service that actually seemed worth paying for, even though I already have a lot of the movie content on DVD.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dysartes wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Not to mention anime.

It is always best to never mention anime.

There's good anime and bad anime. My daughters would fight you if you try to say anything bad about My Neighbor Totoro.

 insaniak wrote:

 Overread wrote:
Amazon is also handy for free post too, esp when family are now spread around the country and with lockdowns and such. Those £2 - 5 postage and packaging costs add up steadily over a year so a one lump sum for TV and free postage on most stuff is worth it in my view.

Yup, I have an Amazon Prime membership because it paid for itself with my first two international orders. The fact that it included a streaming service was just a nice bonus. Similarly, I wouldn't have paid for Netflix, because the content is just too inconsistent, and stuff disappears. So we only have Netflix because my brother lets me piggyback off his account. Disney+ was the first streaming service that actually seemed worth paying for, even though I already have a lot of the movie content on DVD.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dysartes wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Not to mention anime.

It is always best to never mention anime.

There's good anime and bad anime. My daughters would fight you if you try to say anything bad about My Neighbor Totoro.

Yeah. The Good Anime is a very short list.

1) Anything by Studio Ghibli
2) Cowboy Beebop
3) Akira

Thats it.

I finally started watching more of Studio Ghibli. My Neighbor Totoro, Kiki's Delivery Service, and Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind. All were enjoyable, Nausicaa was the best. I should probably watch Princess Monoke next. I like GitS (the film, not the series) more than Akira, but Akira had some beautiful sequences.

Outside of Cowboy Bebop and Carried by the Wind: Tsukikage Ran, I can't really say anything positive about Anime shows. I really like Dragon Ball as a fantasy/adventure series, but it's weighed down heavily by unnecessarily lewd content. Rurouni Kenshin has some interesting historical elements woven into it (the Meiji Restoration is a fascinating period of history), but it suffers from the typical Shonen issues...and the creator got busted for having a ton of CP...

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
The ‘Disney+ is great for kids’ thing is of course true. And it’s also true that right now, there’s not a huge amount for other demographics.
But that what Star is seeking to address. It’s explicitly Not For Kids (without being explicit I guess, this is Disney after all!).

Hollywood Pictures, Touchstone Pictures and Miraxmax would disagree. All of them were Disney divisions at one point or another (Miramax was acquired and sold off, but was under Disney for 17 years).
Touchstone and Hollywood were Disney creations, partially for 'adult' entertainment (Color of Night was the first Disney film to carry the NC-17 rating. Which, since its rare and weird even in the US, is basically 'no kids, but we mean it,' whereas R is 'no kids, unless parents watch with them, unless Billy at the ticket counter doesn't care')


Of course, some classic Disney films are straight up nightmare fuel for kids.

 trexmeyer wrote:
...and the creator got busted for having a ton of CP...

He was using too many Command Points? Disgraceful.

Voss wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
The ‘Disney+ is great for kids’ thing is of course true. And it’s also true that right now, there’s not a huge amount for other demographics.
But that what Star is seeking to address. It’s explicitly Not For Kids (without being explicit I guess, this is Disney after all!).

Hollywood Pictures, Touchstone Pictures and Miraxmax would disagree. All of them were Disney divisions at one point or another (Miramax was acquired and sold off, but was under Disney for 17 years).
Touchstone and Hollywood were Disney creations, partially for 'adult' entertainment (Color of Night was the first Disney film to carry the NC-17 rating. Which, since its rare and weird even in the US, is basically 'no kids, but we mean it,' whereas R is 'no kids, unless parents watch with them, unless Billy at the ticket counter doesn't care')


Of course, some classic Disney films are straight up nightmare fuel for kids.

Depending what they still own, such things could be put up on Star.

I really hope it’s got solid content. Whilst there’s stuff I’ll definitely watch, the value/crap ratio remains important.

I don't know about them growing up but the hand they want to stick in people's wallets sure keeps getting bigger.

That's a weird comment to make in a thread talking about how they're adding a whole extra channel of content onto existing subscriptions...

Another thing about the advantages of streaming services.

There’s less need for a given show to be a set length of time. This means each episode can vary, which we’ve particularly seen in The Mandalorian. Yes, the times are largely comparable, and the shorter ones can leave one feeling a bit short changed.

But, contrast and compare to the Netflix Marvel shows. So. Much. Filler. Especially for grown up action shows. Yes there does need to be time made for plot and exposition. But if you’re script can do that and the Acton in say, 32 minutes, then do that. Don’t pad it out to 45 or 50, just because that’s your time slot.

And whilst it’s still very early days, we’ve seen the same in Wandavison, with episode 1 being particularly short and to the point. Judgement on the effectiveness reserved until I’ve seen the whole of the thing of course.

Almost a disadvantage though is when documentaries come through designed for ad breaks every 5 minutes...

I was watching drain the oceans with my son and good grief the constant recaps get annoying...

Streaming is nothing but a cluster#$#@
I know a show that has 8 seasons on netflix, but for some inexplicable reason, s9 is on hulu.

 Flinty wrote:
Almost a disadvantage though is when documentaries come through designed for ad breaks every 5 minutes...

I was watching drain the oceans with my son and good grief the constant recaps get annoying...

A lot of documentaries today seem to fit one of two patterns - constant repetition of the same points or constant subject hopping. Both I find annoying; the constant repetition goes beyond the need for repetition to improve learning; as you say sometimes its designed around ads, but often its so repeated that it more sounds like its the only handful of facts they've got. The subject hopping can be neat at times, but I get annoyed because often as not they never or rarely go into any depth before they are jumping to the next scene/animal/event/fact.

It's also not even needed; a lot of classic TV shows were made with gaps and spots for ads, such as the old Frost TV series. The only real thing is a play of the saxophone and a dramatic moment or key moment and then it all ends and starts up again. They don't have to repeat the last 5 mins of the show and continue on again. If they do repeat information then its blended into the story and thus subtle rather than an overt recap.


Sometimes they say things like "modern people only have short attention spans" which I think gets pushed through to show producers not just as a theory or idea but as a mantra and suddenly you get a studio producing a lot of programs all built around the concept into the extreme.

This was one thing that really bugged me when I tried watching the National Geographic programmes on Disney+. I think I got 15 minutes into it before I went 'nope, can't deal with this'.

"Coming next, coming soon, coming up. Soon... Up next...."

It's like frikking clickbait in television form. Give me Sir David Attenborough any day of the week compared to that.

Yeah, you’ll never touch Attenborough when it comes to nature docs.

His gentle voice, and clear enthusiasm for it. Stick your metal riff shark attack overly dramatic nonsense. Just, do what David does. Show me nature, and let it’s inherent majesty wow me on its own two feet.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Yeah, you’ll never touch Attenborough when it comes to nature docs.

His gentle voice, and clear enthusiasm for it. Stick your metal riff shark attack overly dramatic nonsense. Just, do what David does. Show me nature, and let it’s inherent majesty wow me on its own two feet.

Once you realise how contrived many documentaries are so that they can tell a story with the material they have* the "heavy action" ones feel even more fake. Sometimes you can even spot when the animal they are following is clearly a different animal or scenes are shown out of order to tell a story. In good documentaries they do it to show behaviour that's authentic, just near impossible to record in sequence; in more dramatic ones its done purely to create a sense of danger and hype and often aggression.

That said there's a big difference between many USA ones and many BBC uk - the USA ones go for a much bigger injection of drama and dramatic music. Heck you even get it on other shows, compare Kitchen Nightmares UK to USA and almost every moment in the USA version is amped up with powerful music to make things feel far worse/edgy. I think its a different attitude in that UK documentaries go for that more information angle whilst US ones are often going for a purely entertainment value angle and thus hype things up.

* with exceptions of course, eg I believe many of the "bigcat diaries and such" were mostly authentic

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Streaming is nothing but a cluster#$#@
I know a show that has 8 seasons on netflix, but for some inexplicable reason, s9 is on hulu.

Yeah, that's one of the things that made me give up on the Arrowverse, outside of Arrow... Down here, Arrow and Punisher were on Netflix, but The Flash and Legends were on Stan.

 trexmeyer wrote:
I finally started watching more of Studio Ghibli. My Neighbor Totoro, Kiki's Delivery Service, and Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind. All were enjoyable, Nausicaa was the best. I should probably watch Princess Monoke next. I like GitS (the film, not the series) more than Akira, but Akira had some beautiful sequences.

Outside of Cowboy Bebop and Carried by the Wind: Tsukikage Ran, I can't really say anything positive about Anime shows. I really like Dragon Ball as a fantasy/adventure series, but it's weighed down heavily by unnecessarily lewd content. Rurouni Kenshin has some interesting historical elements woven into it (the Meiji Restoration is a fascinating period of history), but it suffers from the typical Shonen issues...and the creator got busted for having a ton of CP...

There's such a broad spectrum of anime fans that you do end up with many things you won't like in most shows. And even more often than normal shows, there's a tendency for series to overstay their welcome. That being said, if you, or a loved one is thinking about watching Dragonball in any of its forms (especially if your kids are going through THAT phase) then subscribing to Funimation until it passes is WAY cheaper than buying the whole series. Those things are monolithic!

Just received an email from Disney+ about my annual subscription. Long and short? No price increase for me, as they’ll bill me £59.99 for the year at the end of March.

Though as I’ve got a new debit card, best get that sorted as my payment type. For technical reasons I won’t go into because they’re very dull I shouldn’t need to, but worth saving the trouble now.

I just got my email, too; working out at £5 a month is still nice.

Whilst I would love to cancel the subscription on account of recent managerial decisions, having two small children in the house means that I'm stuck with being subbed for the foreseeable future. Case in point, the end credits of Frozen are currently playing on the TV...

What was the change? I only Just signed up this week at $6.99 a month.

It’s going up £2, but we are getting Star as of Tuesday.

As I pay annually, that’s me not paying extra until next year at the earliest.

 AduroT wrote:
What was the change? I only Just signed up this week at $6.99 a month.

It doesn't affect the US.

Here's a spotty summary:
https://www.cnet.com/news/disney-plus-reveals-full-lineup-star-movies-and-shows-with-more-to-come/


It doesn't go into detail on the 'why not US?,' but it seems to be existing agreements. They mention that some of the stuff is currently on Hulu or ABC, and I'd guess from the context that other stuff is currently tied up on other platforms.

Another attempt to simplify the (overly complicated) regional breakdown:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_(Disney%2B)

Basically since Hulu already exists (and there's some sort of bundle deal with Disney+, Hulu and I think ESPN?) and the other stuff is coming from various TV networks, we just... aren't getting it, and have to scrounge around the current clusterfeth of streaming services.

In other Disney+ news - all 5 seasons of the Muppet Show are now available!

It's missing two episodes from season 5 (Brooke Shields, likely because of licensing issues with the song from the Wizard of Oz, and the episode that featured a Muppet Show staff writer who was later convicted of child sex offenses...) and a few episodes have a song trimmed out here and there, but given that the Season 4 and 5 DVDs wound up languishing in licensing limbo (Season 3 was released in 2008) the fact that they've managed to get so much of it up on Disney+ is damned impressive.

Now I can finally show my girls the Star Wars episode from Season 4...

 insaniak wrote:
In other Disney+ news - all 5 seasons of the Muppet Show are now available!

It's missing two episodes from season 5 (Brooke Shields, likely because of licensing issues with the song from the Wizard of Oz, and the episode that featured a Muppet Show staff writer who was later convicted of child sex offenses...) and a few episodes have a song trimmed out here and there, but given that the Season 4 and 5 DVDs wound up languishing in licensing limbo (Season 3 was released in 2008) the fact that they've managed to get so much of it up on Disney+ is damned impressive.

Now I can finally show my girls the Star Wars episode from Season 4...

And now I know the next series I’m going to make The Boy watch. Thanks for the head’s up.

If nothing else, it's an interesting historical 'Who's who'... I think I'm about half and half, over the show's full run, between 'Hey, I know this person!' and 'Who the hell is this?'

 insaniak wrote:
If nothing else, it's an interesting historical 'Who's who'... I think I'm about half and half, over the show's full run, between 'Hey, I know this person!' and 'Who the hell is this?'

I remember getting them on disk from Netflix a long while ago and watching them with The Boy when he was much younger. There is also the issue about not just who’s who, but the callbacks to an earlier era of entertainment. Like vaudeville era. Which is generations removed from kids these days. Classic songs from the 40s? Musical theater and opera references? Variety shows in general. I’m old enough to get where the references are pointing to, even if I miss them.

But then, I’m old enough that I watched the muppets when they were on originally...

 Nevelon wrote:

 insaniak wrote:
If nothing else, it's an interesting historical 'Who's who'... I think I'm about half and half, over the show's full run, between 'Hey, I know this person!' and 'Who the hell is this?'

I remember getting them on disk from Netflix a long while ago and watching them with The Boy when he was much younger. There is also the issue about not just who’s who, but the callbacks to an earlier era of entertainment. Like vaudeville era. Which is generations removed from kids these days. Classic songs from the 40s? Musical theater and opera references? Variety shows in general. I’m old enough to get where the references are pointing to, even if I miss them.

But then, I’m old enough that I watched the muppets when they were on originally...

We just watched 2 episodes - I had to google Rita Moreno and Sandy Duncan. But yep it's sold old fashioned. We've got some old Laugh-in's on DVD and I was struck by the similarities - short, one gag sketches; glimpses of behind the scenes; awareness of being second-rate.... definitely a different era.

Also - Sandy Duncan's 'big number' was about a woman being drunk in a 24 hour bar.... what's the target demographic for this show again?

MarkNorfolk wrote:


We just watched 2 episodes - I had to google Rita Moreno and Sandy Duncan. But yep it's sold old fashioned. We've got some old Laugh-in's on DVD and I was struck by the similarities - short, one gag sketches; glimpses of behind the scenes; awareness of being second-rate.... definitely a different era.

Also - Sandy Duncan's 'big number' was about a woman being drunk in a 24 hour bar.... what's the target demographic for this show again?

I think the target demographic was “everyone”. One advantage of the shotgun of content, is that there is something there for everyone. The kids might start to tune out over the aging star’s musical number, but right after that there is a muppet with boomerang fish. Some of the jokes are going to go over the kid’s heads, but the parent’s will laugh, so everyone can watch it together.

Quality family entertainment.

For anyone interested in how the muppets came about a youtube channel called Defunctland has the most comprehensive 3 part documentary about Jim Henson Ive ever seen. Just search Defunct TV Jim Henson. HIGHLY recommended if you want to understand where the vast sprawl of his sometimes very adult humour came from.

the most important question for will be which version of Buffy will be available
the "decent" EU DvD version or the horrible remastered one

 kodos wrote:
the most important question for will be which version of Buffy will be available
the "decent" EU DvD version or the horrible remastered one

I'm still amazed that when they re-did Angel they cut it for widescreen. There's one or two scenes in it where you see the cameramen and staff working around the actors. It's immensely jarring and looks really unprofessional. Thing was when it was originally cut for square TVs that part of the captured film wasn't visible. The staff at the time had no need to worry about being that close. It's only one or two scenes but its really obvious.

Saw the advert for this today.

Meh.

Nothing I would want to watch, 99.9% of it appears to be old stuff that I've already seen or have no interest in, and I'm not paying for a service that "might" "in the future" have something I do want to watch.

It's the same with all TV services - a ton of rubbish watched by a minority subsidised by the majority of subs and so "steering the market", and you have to have multiple services just to be able to view the few programmes you want.

Give me a pay per programme service (and no TV tax), with actual stuff I like, at a reasonable price per programme, and I'd sign up.

But then I'm on a fixed income and have to be frugal with my money, so I guess I'm more sensible like that...

I mean uh... That's just Google Play Movies and Prime Video.

Ultimately, this is what convinced me to stop my sky subscription. - I got a letter today offering me to return to sky for an introductory rate of £16 a month, increasing to £26 a month.

I realised the typical HD price per season on Google play movies of most shows is £15. So, a season a month plus a couple of more reasonably priced streaming services (Which includes Disney+ for me), that still ends up cheaper than Sky's normal rate, and it's probably WAY more TV than I have time for.

 Compel wrote:
I mean uh... That's just Google Play Movies and Prime Video.

Hmm yeah. Not to take this off on a tangent but even Amazon and Google services aren't acceptable to me. Prices are a bit too high imo and like other services they don't have what I want.

Recently I wanted to watch a UK tv show called Time Team, used to be on Channel 4, Channel 4's own on demand service (All4) did have the entirety of the series, however recently they've culled the series down to a handful of episodes for some unknown reason.

Apart from dodgy youtube channels (and one seemingly legit one that has a handful), I don't know anywhere that hosts all of the episodes currently.

I know this is gonna sound snobby, and maybe even a bit Hipster, but the ads put me off All4.

Just not used to them.

Time Team is a great show, rewatched it all on All4 when my wife moved to the UK, because she’d never seen it (obviously). Shame that it’s gone from there; guessing it’s probably one of the things they’ve stuck on Britbox?

Just browsing Star.

Surprised to see, and in no particular order....

Brave heart, Conan the Barbarian, Starship Troopers, Idiocracy, Office Space, even Horror Films!

This should keep my busy for a while.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I know this is gonna sound snobby, and maybe even a bit Hipster, but the ads put me off All4.

Just not used to them.

We binged Buffy in Lockdown 1 and we're currently chugging through The West Wing and Scrubs. There's not as many ads on all4 but god, I despise with all my being the concept of the sponsor advert. The same ad over and over. Sheesh.

Mix'n'match Scrubs and TWW must be a weird tonal whiplash.

[EDIT]: The version of Aliens is the theatrical cut.

Their thumbnail for the X-Files has Robert Patrick front and center.

Also, they have the X-Files!

They’ve got Independence Day and it’s sequel.

Yay?

ID4 is great. Shame they never made a sequel.

just browsed a little bit thru the suggestions

some good stuff there, things I always wanted to see as well as some old time favourites I re-watch on a regular bases (so finally can lay the DvD's to rest)

American Dad is nice, Master & Commander as well as The Grand Budapest Hotel are great
and Predator for the memes

Interestingly there are other non-child films etc showing up that aren’t tagged under the “Star” channel. Unless David Cronenberg’s “The Fly” is now considered family friendly viewing?!

Once you have unlocked Star, that content is mixed in with the other content on the front page.

Too bad America isnt going to get Star.
First you guys get all the good netflix stuff, and now this.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also anyone else feel like, atleast on pc and ps4, their App/ layout is absolute garbage?
1: it doesnt take off movies/shows you have finished from "Continue watching" if there are still a few minutes left
2: is you start a show on "Continue series" and try to go back, it takes you to the front page instead of episodes
3: There is no "Next Episode Button"
4: To get to the next episode, without hitting "back" you have to sit through the whole credits
5: Did i mention no "Next Episode Button" because i feel like i should
6: No way to customize subtitles on ps4
Honestly, i regret everytime clicking the app because i know it will act up SOMEHOW

 insaniak wrote:
Once you have unlocked Star, that content is mixed in with the other content on the front page.

That’s my point, I didn’t see it under Star at all (or Tombstone, which appeared on the front page too), so if you just go into the Star channel, you may not actually be seeing all of their “adult” content.

The stuff shown on the Star page is just highlights. It's not remotely everything on the service.

Indeed. Probably d+ biggest weakness in my book.

Currently watching League of Extraordinary Gentlemen.

this is the case with all channels, direct under the channel you get recomanded content and highlights

but there is much more if you go into the categories from the front page

and the front page will show different things depending on the age set

Seems my Smart TV is smarter than wot I r, as it refuses to play League of Extraordinary Gentlemen.

Happy to report that Family Guy is still humourless guff relying on crap non-sequiturs and lazy stereotypes.

Ssssss... aaaaah... sssssssss.... aaaaaaaah... sssssssssss... aaaaaaaaaah

Do.....do we need to call an ambulance for you?

Mentioning "Family Guy" may have instilled in him an intense pain response, as is the case for most people.

Oohhhhhhh. Yes.

Another of Family Guy’s “what else are we meant to do, come up with 20 minute plots?” Jokes.

I love Family Guy. It probably makes me a bad person, but the surrealist segues, 4th wall breaking, long rambling comedic discussions and random switches in subject really appeal to me.

I wouldn't worry Flinty, that someone whose comic frame of reference might actually be the only thing Y2K actually fethed over is criticising Family Guy probably puts you in the right side of history.

 Flinty wrote:
I love Family Guy. It probably makes me a bad person, but the surrealist segues, 4th wall breaking, long rambling comedic discussions and random switches in subject really appeal to me.

I like it more than The Simpsons, that's for sure.

OOOH its got Deep Rising!!!

Havent seen that film for years since my vhs player finally died on me Guess I know what this weekend movie is gonna be

There is a whole bunch of stuff on there that I'm looking forward to catching up on. Currently halfway through Terminator: Dark Fate, which doesn't entirely suck. So far, it's kind of like T2 with most of the one-liners removed.

Some of the best de-aging I've seen to date, though, right at the start.

I started watching Dark Fate. I got through the old footage of Sarah screaming about Judgement Day and then suddenly remembered how the movie begins.

So I stopped watching and went to Starship Troopers, which I do own on DVD, but the DVD is so old it's one of the ones you have to take out and flip over halfway through the movie.

I saw League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, aka the film that made Sean Connery quit, under the "Cult classics" heading. Clearly Disney and I have a different definition of "cult".

Could I get a catch-up on why everyone's ripping on League of Extraordinary Gentlemen? I watched it a couple years back and don't remember much. I thought it was rather average, to be frank, although Captain Nemo was entertaining enough. Is it because it was a poor adaptation of the comic or something?

Well, it's very ordinary, at best, like you say.

But as AGP alluded to, it is literally the movie that made Sean Connery say "feth it, I'm done" to Hollywood and never come back because he hates the production so much. So it deserves everything it gets.

It's in the 'So bad it's good' category for my wife and I. Not one we would put on voluntarily, but ok to giggle at over a few drinks if it happens to show up on TV.

It definitely has a weird "pre-avengers" vibe to it with a rather nonsensical plot and villain, which is a shame considering you have all the relatively interesting premise of having all these fictional characters in the same universe and making them one note caricatures.

it was a good Steampunk Action Movie, something we don't get very often

it just had nothing to do with the source material and just don't start thinking about the plot

but than it is not only the movie that made Connery quit but also Alan Moore refused to let his name be used for any further adaptation

After how much I enjoyed Mandalorian and now Wandavision, I went ahead and signed up to + to give them my support. Scrolling thru looking for something to watch yesterday and came across Treasure Island. Have been meaning to watch that for awhile because I’ve heard it’s a good underrated movie. So yeah, I finally give Disney money and the first thing I do is watch a movie about pirates.

 kodos wrote:
it was a good Steampunk Action Movie, something we don't get very often

it just had nothing to do with the source material and just don't start thinking about the plot

but than it is not only the movie that made Connery quit but also Alan Moore refused to let his name be used for any further adaptation

I enjoyed it up to a point, not being familiar with the source material until after the movie. But the car was dumb, the inclusion of an adult Tom Sawyer felt forced, and Dorian Grey was wasted.

princeyg wrote:
OOOH its got Deep Rising!!!

Havent seen that film for years since my vhs player finally died on me Guess I know what this weekend movie is gonna be

Oh man, so many good parts in that movie. For what is basically a B action/horror movie, it’s full of win.

And so many good quotable lines.

Darn you lot - I rather liked League of Extortionary Gentlemen. Honestly all it is is a steam punk/fantasy action flick. I think it loses points trying to have so many characters in key roles so fast - unlike Avengers which has a history (for fans) behind many of the characters, League tries and has to do it all in one film. Yet its still superior to films like, say, Suicide Girls

The thing I remember most about League is nearly dying of social anxiety in the theater. I don’t like theaters in general, and only go to them with friends. We make plans to meet up. I get there first and get my ticket and get in and grab seats. So I’m sitting in decently prime area, not the Best, but not the worst. Holding four open seats, two to either side, for those friends coming. People keep asking about the spots and I’m like nope, reserved. Movie starts and they never show. Turns out it sold out before they got there. I must have looked like the biggest arse sitting there alone in my five seat wide zone.

For me, LoEG is just ... bland. I suppose there was no chance we’d get a film anything like the comics, but it’s the poor portrayal of Mina Harker that was the main problem. In the comic, she’s not a superhero, unlike all the men around her, but she’s clearly the one in charge, because she’s not as much of a wreck as they all are. Part of the comic is the theme of being past your glory days, and having to cope with that. Instead, in the film, Shir Allan gets over that five minutes in and Mina can now turn into bats because the filmmakers were lazy.

Maybe if I’d watched it first it’d have been OK, but it was a big letdown for me.

And maybe the characters chosen weren’t as well known to the film audience as they were to the comic audience.

 AndrewGPaul wrote:


And maybe the characters chosen weren’t as well known to the film audience as they were to the comic audience.

Yep because I'm sitting here going "Wait there's a comic?"

Only character I wasn’t familiar with was Dorian Grey to be fair.

I don’t think the film is quite as bad as it’s reputation (a certain amount will be snobbish distaste for comic adaptations), but it’s certainly far from a great film.

I put it in with Van Helsing and Cowboys and Aiens, Conan, Red Sonja and such. Action films where I don't have to engage the brain and the film isn't trying to be anything but an action adventure.

Sure there's a few plot holes if you go hunting for them (what story hasn't got a few?) but, to me, they aren't glaring me in the face.

Heck with its twists and turns Van Helsing actually covers quite a lot of ground in one film.

 Overread wrote:
I put it in with Van Helsing and Cowboys and Aiens, Conan, Red Sonja and such. Action films where I don't have to engage the brain and the film isn't trying to be anything but an action adventure.

Sure there's a few plot holes if you go hunting for them (what story hasn't got a few?) but, to me, they aren't glaring me in the face.

Heck with its twists and turns Van Helsing actually covers quite a lot of ground in one film.

Van Helsing was meant to be a pilot movie that fell through, so that makes sense. Still quite good fun, especially if you're a Solomon Kane fan (similar vibes.)

 Overread wrote:
I put it in with Van Helsing and Cowboys and Aiens, Conan, Red Sonja and such. Action films where I don't have to engage the brain and the film isn't trying to be anything but an action adventure.

Sure there's a few plot holes if you go hunting for them (what story hasn't got a few?) but, to me, they aren't glaring me in the face.

Heck with its twists and turns Van Helsing actually covers quite a lot of ground in one film.

Well, that's where its plot holes come from. Its trying to do way to much and just takes flying leaps over storytelling to squeeze in more.

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
And maybe the characters chosen weren’t as well known to the film audience as they were to the comic audience.

watched in cinema during the army time, we were ~10 random people from the platoon, and while I was discussing with 2 others the uncommon take on Mr Hyde the rest just complained that the super powers of those characters did not make sense and why those superheroes were chosen instead of other ones

There's a lot of good stuff added - so far, watched Deadpool 2 (which I hadn't seen, and is decent) and Grosse Point Blank which is still utterly marvellous.

UK doesn't seem to get Alien movies, yet, and apparently some other regions have Zardoz which I was quite looking forward to. It has all the Die Hards except the first one, which is odd. Must be some peculiar rights based thing.

Yeah, you can probably blame Sky for that, they were largely responsible for the delay in release of the whole service last year too. (By blame, I mean perfectly reasonably held Disney to a contract signed before Disney had aspirations of a streaming service or owned the relevant rights holder.)

There's a lot more promised before the end of 2021 though, so I expect the missing bits will appear in due course.

Coincidentally enough, I just saw a Star add on YouTube that mentioned having 'all the Die Hards'... So yeah, that would likely be a rights issue with the first movie in the UK specifically.


I'm on a bit of a 'face' kick here... I've gone from Dark Fate, with the aforementioned fantastic de-aging, to Alita, with whatever the hell Cameron was aiming for by giving her an anime face, to Prometheus, with some of the worst old-man makeup I've seen in several decades...



Edit - Bahahaha... and a repainted Rubiks cube. No expense spared, here...

I had to stop watching the live action Alita because darn it I'm not through the Manga yet (despite getting a KS of the digital and almost all the series published up to that point) and it seemed that he was dead set to put her entire story into 1 film. Which ended up mangling loads of the early parts of the her story and the characters around her.

The anime is far superior and at least aims to take a sensible bite out of the story rather than try to do it all.

I still don't get how the writers let alone director ever think to fit so much into such a short span of time; or that trying to tell such a huge story in so little time is worth. It's like trying to squish Lord of the Rings into 1 hour. You just can't do it and do any justice to the actors or characters in the film, let alone the source material.

/rant off

Oh, right, it has Alita. I want to see that.

Its a good lesson on how NOT to grasp the source material, and then advertise that ignorance to the world.

 AduroT wrote:
After how much I enjoyed Mandalorian and now Wandavision, I went ahead and signed up to + to give them my support. Scrolling thru looking for something to watch yesterday and came across Treasure Island. Have been meaning to watch that for awhile because I’ve heard it’s a good underrated movie. So yeah, I finally give Disney money and the first thing I do is watch a movie about pirates.

Very good choice. That film, and specifically Robert Newton's west country accent, basically shaped what the modern stereotype of a pirate's voice was in popular culture. And Newton's performance as Silver could carry the whole film on one leg if it needed to, but luckily it has some other great performances alongside it.

I'll have to check out the new stuff they've added with Star. Though at the moment I'm working my way through The Muppet Show since they recently added all of the original series, after I binged all their newer stuff over christmas

 Graphite wrote:
There's a lot of good stuff added - so far, watched Deadpool 2 (which I hadn't seen, and is decent) and Grosse Point Blank which is still utterly marvellous.

UK doesn't seem to get Alien movies, yet, and apparently some other regions have Zardoz which I was quite looking forward to. It has all the Die Hards except the first one, which is odd. Must be some peculiar rights based thing.

Maybe they're just waiting for Christmas season to add the original back to the service