DrRexMorman

DrRexMorman t1_j5h2d37 wrote

>But is there a good way to know what's going to show up where down the line?

No, it depends on the movie, but:

Amazon owns Amazon studios and MGM+/Epix.

Netflix owns Netflix studios.

Comcast owns NBC/Universal, which owns Peacock and part of Hulu.

Disney owns Disney+ and the other part of Hulu.

Fox owns Tubi.

National Amusements owns CBS and Paramount, which own Paramount+, Showtime, and PlutoTV.

Lionsgate owns Starz.

Warner-Discovery owns HBO Max and Discovery+.

Apple owns AppleTV.

Google owns Youtube+.

AMC owns AMC+, IFC, Sundance, Shudder, and Acorn tv.

3

DrRexMorman t1_j2fjiy3 wrote

>But I don’t think this was ever a literary device

He turns into a bat in the novel:

>[Dracula] can transform himself to wolf, as we gather from the ship arrival in Whitby, when he tear open the dog; he can be as bat, as Madam Mina saw him on the window at Whitby, and as friend John saw him fly from this so near house, and as my friend Quincey saw him at the window of Miss Lucy.

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/345/345-h/345-h.htm

>the name of the movie

Dracula (1931):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2dz1LaQZE8

32

DrRexMorman t1_j2axiqp wrote

It’s a cool idea. Check out the Foreigner as a kind of elseworlds Bond film.

The catch is that the people who make Bond movies don’t have that kind of imaginative/generative wattage.

6

DrRexMorman t1_j29kccr wrote

>it's based

It was an adaptation of a comic book based on that conspiracy:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Men_in_Black_(comics)

>Sony ould do it on a much smaller budget and just make it a straight up horror film investigating alien claims and, etc.

I think it is unlikely that Sony will do anything with the concept after MiB International's failure.

You might be interested in Dark skies - which was greenlit by NBC after the X-Files' success. You can check out the pilot here:

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x6qh2

27

DrRexMorman t1_j22szce wrote

I don't especially enjoy Jason Segel or Jessie Eisenberg; but I really enjoyed them in End of the tour - which is about a series of conversations between David Foster Wallace and a journalist who is interviewing him right as he becomes David Foster Wallace.

This:

>The plots tend to consist of a lot of backstory and setup leading to or centered around one event

is a pretty basic scheme for understanding all narrative, so - triangulating from this:

>Coen Bros and Martin McDonagh

You might like the Hesses (Napoleon Dynnamite, Nacho libre, Gentlemen broncos, Austenland), pre-MCU Taikka Waiti (Eagle vs Shark, Boy), early Wes Anderson (Rushmore, Royal Tenenbaums), and Steve Conrad (the Promotion and Patriot).

Also, I'm not sure I see DFW in his tv work, but you might also consier that Michael Schur (co-created the Office, Parks and Rec, the Good place, etc) is a huge DFW fan.

1

DrRexMorman t1_j1xwhtd wrote

>we can't figure out why some of the character models look completely different to the first film.

  1. The films' costumes and effects were designed by two different teams working ~50 years apart.

  2. Return to Oz wasn't pitched or sold as a sequel to the original film. It was specifically conceived as an entirely distinct story to dodge MGM's copyrights:

https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=3900AAAAIBAJ&pg=PA147&dq=return+to+oz&pg=4091,1500411&hl=en

  1. If we ignore Disney's posturing and decide that the films are connected, we have to remember that Oz's material and social quality reflects Dorothy's life experiences. Oz was lovely and (mostly) friendly during her first visit because she was innocent, happy, and had support from people around her. Like - her biggest life challenge was a neighbor who was mad at her dog. Oz is a desolate wasteland when Dorothy returns because she's just escaped an institution where she was being tortured for expressing belief in it.
16