heh. selling a $4 billion asset to cover a $154 million debt.
Was always a questionable acquisition and it's likely AT&T will eventually sell the WarnerMedia or split it's content business with its telecom business.
Selling WB Games, along with all its IP, would seem to devalue the WarnerMedia portfolio.
...ah, but what do I know. I'm not paid enough money to make reckless mergers and acquisitions.
My guess has always been $549 for disc version. $499 for digital.
If pricing was under $500 Sony would have announced it already. I speculate Sony is probably wrestling between $549 and $599 for the disc console. Obviously any company would prefer to price higher. They are waiting on MS to reveal if they have Series X priced at $549 or $599. MS is probably waiting for the same indication.
@cajunstrike: I'm going to offer a defense of Scorsese, which seems to be an unpopular take around these parts - Martin isn't saying superhero movies as a genre is less of cinema than other genres, he is particularly pointing out Marvel films as having very little cinematic value or rather at all compared to "real" cinema. However you define 'cinema' is rather a moot point, I think, since the substantive argument Scorsese is offering (per his NY Times article) is that Marvel films (and other similar kinds of blockbuster films in general) have lost their artistic value and are more akin to a "product". He calls out specifically the lack of (artistic) 'risk' they take, and more generally, have been 'focused-grouped' ad nauseam to create the most mass marketable product the film can be. He even acknowledges the craftsmanship that goes into these films, nevertheless, the overall production process is like a factory producing consumable goods. I'm fairly confident if someone were to ask how he felt about Joker as compared to the other Marvel films, he wouldn't have the same criticism. Not because of tone or story or style, but because intrinsically and substantively Joker's production was a result of auteurship and less factory-like formula.
Furthermore I think fans should be honest about Marvel films in this regard. I go and watch most of the Marvel films out there, but I'm honest enough to admit that Marvel films engage absolutely no part of my brain that is remotely critical. It's all thrills and emotions (like how Scorsese compares it to an amusement park ride) but at the end I do not go away analyzing any cinematic merits of the film. It doesn't mean I don't like Marvel films - certainly I like it enough to pay and watch most of them - but it's just not cinema in the artistic sense, and not certainly compared to all the other worthwhile films out there every year that becomes overshadowed by Marvel movies.
You have to monetize F2P on mobile somehow...but this...this is crazy aggressive. On the top of my mind I can't think of another mobile game that is priced like this.
@willowvale75: Nowhere is it mentioned nor implied that he thinks he owns the genre, merely that it takes multiple (successful) games for a genre to be established. It is also mentioned in the article that he fully admits he doesn't quite have a grasp on what the genre is... he is still exploring it through this game.
As skeptical as you may be about Kojima's comments, remember that it was Metal Gear that established all of the conventions for the stealth action genre. Likewise, the stealth action became a genre after Metal Gear and it's successors.. In the history of video games that will be told whether you agree or not, the OG Metal Gear will always be considered the pivotal game in creating stealth action genre. It may not be the 'first' game to implement stealth elements, but it is certainly the most important.
@GambreGoemon: ...except the best Spidey film and likewise the best "Marvel" film to have come out in the past decade happens to be largely produced by Sony and their animation studio - obviously referring to Into the Spiderverse.
Sony hasn't been doing a good job on the live action front with Marvel IP, but the MCU films have honestly become mind-numbingly uninspired and stylisticly formulaic.
I don't understand any of the criticism people are making here about the decision not to follow source material. It's not even a real criticism - it's superficial and low hanging fruit analysis that has nothing to say about the quality of a film.
Different comic book authors often retcon the backstories of beloved characters to fit their own narrative and purpose, or construct entirely different storylines altogether. Somehow there is no problem when graphic novelist do this, but filmmakers and screenwriters can't? Dumb. How many versions of batman and spiderman are there, and different alternative narratives that break continuity of their original source? That's one of the strengths of the genre that has given these characters the endurance and legacy to have remained interesting for generations - these films are simply adding to the diversity of that storytelling.
Joker, like all other comic book figures, is already familiar to the audience. This is a filmaker's chance to add to the multiple narratives there already exists for this character. This is most likely a character-study film, so why wouldn't Joker present a perfect subject to fill out an interesting backstory for his motivations?
This also presents a perfect chance to explore a tragedy. We all know what Joker eventually becomes and a hallmark of great tragedies is that the audience has foreknowledge of what's to come. The interest arises as those tragic elements push the character to that final end. I imagine that is how the film will probably play out - and I'm pretty excited for it.
Don't go ahead and conflate silly preferences for a film with genuine criticism. It's sad people is unable to differentiate between the two.
@vesuviusjr: If I remember correctly that's always been the design for FE entries. Every time your character performs a battle action you earn exp. It's not really that intrusive, and is part of the gameplay.
Oogazi's comments