ParadoxLost

This is a new thing in terms of when it became public and when charges were made. It happened in May.

I don't disbelieve the refocus on theatrical releases and purchase accounting as a reason but I think the Flash is one of the reasons for the cancellation that they will not admit to. I don't think the will shelve the Flash but I think they will be overhauling it pretty extensively at a minimum. We know that they are reshooting on Aquaman 2 with the admitted reason being that they needed to swap Batmans because it didn't make sense now that Aquaman 2 releases before The Flash due to EM. But how much does a June (Flash) vs March(Aquaman) date really help minimize the problems with Miller if they aren't going to do anything with the movie. Not much. So reversing the orders and reshooting parts of Aquaman points to adjusting something with The Flash. And that is also true of Batgirl. The Flash was supposed to set up and lead directly into Batgirl on HBOMax. So that makes it more complex to do damage control with The Flash if they have to worry about how it ties into Batgirl, expecially if the worry is EM Flash being tied to this Batgirl movie damages the potential of the Batgirl IP or how they monetize Keaton's return. Because they just cancelled a movie that Michael Keaton was reprising Batman in (and cut hime out of another). This makes no sense in a post Spiderman No Way Home World. But maybe there was enough Aquaman and Batgirl in the Flash that cutting that along with some reshoots allow them to do something about the movie. Like relegate EM to the background and put Keaton more front and center or introduce a brand new Flash, etc. I suspect that this decision was made for other reasons and the accounting/strategy pushed it into the justifiable side of the column.

I was just listening to a podcast from a couple weeks ago where Terry Crews was talking about #MeToo, why he came foward about being groped at a Hollywood party, and Ari Emmanuel and his agencies handling and behavior of that situation which led to a lawsuit. What a bunch of hypocritical scumbags. I know, old news. But I had never heard what went beyond behind the scenes with that. Actually, a bit of perusing of articles and wikipedia seems like there was some protecting of movers and shakers in Hollywood with the reporting of that, as usual.

I hearby cite the false accusation of Ricky Martin in response to the accusations against Ricky Martin. I wish more people took this approach

Yes they absolutely did and I still don't believe it. Frankly the accusations being made about JLo could also be made about Jennifer Garner. And I think they have been and were denied. But Garner announced her split with Foley in Mar-03, her reps announced she was dating Vartan by Aug-2003. And in 2004 she both broke up with Vartan and had her divorce to Foley finalized and went public with her/Affleck relationship. And Daredevil was being filmedwhile she was with Foley and Affleck was with JLo. There is no reason to assume that JLo or Garner was any less or more at fault in their relationships ending than the other. But if passage of time is factored in. I think Garner has her head on straight and her priorities right now that she's out of the relationship with Affleck. I worry that JLo is chasing a do over or something but hope that things work out for her. But I don't like Affleck much. I'm not particularly convinced that his boozing, gambling, or cheating is behind him. And I did not like that interview he did last year on Stern that he had to attempt to, badly, clean up on Kimmel. And he has done a few interviews while "happy" with Garner that made me think he's a narrcisist who views his relationships in terms of how it helps his career and ego. In one he was directly equating JLo with his career slump and Garner with a career resurrgence. I think he and JLo are probably ok until there is another box office or critical bomb he can blame JLo for because its his relationship's fault. Then he'll start acting out until his partner ends it.

So no charges because they weren't asked by their escort to leave, Their staff escorts didn't ask them to leave because their staff escorts left them unattended despite both the staff escorts and the group being told they could not be unescorted. I wonder if Colbert's crew got some people fired over this.

That would be a Quantum Leap reboot I'd perfer. Doctor Beckett finds himself leaping from television show to television show,striving to put right what once went wrong and hoping each time that his next leap...will be the leap that fixes Game of Thrones.

Out of curiousity is that something you know for cetain or is it generally held assumption regarding the reason there would be the cushion. I ask because there was one time I ran out of gas. I had 9 miles left and a gas station 2 miles away. What I learned is 9 miles isn't 9 miiles on a hill. It stalled going down the hill and restarted at the bottom when the car was flat again. So I would have guessed that the extra would have been to cover zero at all inclines a driver could theoretically be driving on.

Thanks for the clarification. I understood that part. I was reacting to the misgendering of tbe trial judge in second part of your post. I just assumed you didn't know the judge was a woman vs talking about some theoretical trial judge or something like that.

It must be misogyny! The judge is a woman. The trial lawyers is Heard's third legal team on this case. There comes a point when what the client wants to do is probably the problem.

Snark. Its a thing. But seriously. Why the outrage over Depp writing a song about Heard? She was abusive. IMO, much more abusive than Depp has been shown to be. So why can't he have feelings about that and sing about them if that is what he decided to do. Heard went on Dateline to put her side out there after the trial. And I don't want to hear but "he sued her so he doesn't really just want to get away from anything to do with her". Heard really left him no choice on that at every single step since the divorce.

You know, you are right. Taylor is much worse than Johnny Depp. Taylor is writing songs about exes who are innocent relartive to Heard. She didn't have to drag any of them to court for defamation and none of them were found to defame her with malicious intent. Kind of awful of her to work out her issues with innocent third parties publically. I also used to feel pretty bad for Gwen Stefani's ex. You know the one. The guitar player ex who she wrote a lot of No Doubt's major hits about and then dragged around the country on tour to play them. I remember seeing an Inside the Music type show once where he was talking about how difficult that tour was and she was gushing about it.

I say this as a single, childless woman who is at a pretty high level in my chosen career... At what point are women allowed to choose how they want to live their life without it being assumed to be some childhood trauma related to daddy issues. I get it, Arnold, but.... My mother and sister in law made the choice to raise kids and do career later in life and our female role models within the family include famous abolitionist, famous actress that popularized women wearing pants, business owners, WWII nurse, assistant (not secretary) to Einstein. And also not religious. We've known that women had choices for a really long time (like the 1800s) and that has been passed down to each subsequent generation. Katherine Schwarzenegger has wealth and choices. She made one. That is her prerogative. We don't really know anything about her to assume that a women in her 30s doesn't know her own mind and is operating on unresolved childhood issues.

Agree with all that but I was actually referring to the video of EM choking a female fan thing that came out in 2020.

They've also had like six years to rethink Ezra Miller being the Flash and there have been a variety of reasons to rethink it before all of this. I don't think they will completly reshoot the movie or leave it as is. I think they'll take advantage of the film being about the multiverse to give it "The Expanse" treatment. EM will be in most of the movie, but there will be a moment of jeopardy that EM's Flash survived in the original edit that they will manipulate editting to have him killed. And then they'll reshoot just enough to carry on with a dead EM Flash and to introduce a replacement Flash through the rest of the movie. I think the problem they are going to have is that the fans of the Expanse were happy with and supportive enough of the show that they didn't stir up outrage and expect something that was not financially viable. But DCEU fans are salty enough about the whole treatment of DC and all the prior scandals/issues/crappy movies that they aren't as likely to give WB a break.

Hollywood makes nothing new because the audience's reaction to anything original is no idea what its about, haven't heard about it.

In the most recent movie being filmed the dwarves are missing because Peter Dinklage spoke out on a podcast about his displeasure of how the dwarves are presented in Snow White. and the Seven Dwarves so they've been replaced by CGI magical creatutes. So i imagine that is what is going on in recent stories.

I think the problem is that the movie is supposed to set up all the films that follow it. So just taking the financial hit doesn't actually fix the problem. From what I hear EM is in basically in every scene so that is not that easy. Speculation is that EM would have to sign off on that. They can't just CGI someone else on EMs face. I think they have no idea what they are going to do about this and they are going to stay silent until they figure out something to say.

I'm not a lawyer. I don't know. But I would tend to think that they fact that they were kicked out for lack of credentials and then came back to be arrested probably means it is. I have zero confidence that will have any bearing on anything though.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10928949/Robert-Smigel-arrested-alongside-Colbert-staff-members-House-Representatives.html Reports that nine Colbert staffers, including Robert Smigel (voice of Triumph the insult Comic Dog), arrested for illegal entry to congressional offices in the Capitol.

So what's the deal with reports of nine Colbert staffers, including Robert Smigel, being arrested for illegal entry to congressional offices in the Capitol yesterday.

https://people.com/movies/ezra-miller-deactivates-instagram-as-child-is-granted-court-protection-over-uncomfortable-encounter/ Another accusation against Ezra Miller. A harrassment prevention order was given last night for a 12 year old child and their mother over an incident with Miller in Feb.

Not in this article. It quite literally does not say this. At all. Anywhere.

I completely agree with this. But I tend to think the side that believes outside evidence is necessary also likely thinks this. I also think that anyone who comes down firmly on the side of either party, in any of these situatons, is not much different than Dr Spiegel, the dumpster fire of an expert witness who testified about Depp for Heard based on media and movies and depositions he saw, read, or was told about. I think this is absolutely the case before any public legal proceedings and sometimes even after. We do not know these people. We have an opinion and despite some in social media land seemingly thinking they are spouting objective facts, they are not. Its opinion formed on varying degrees and types of information. It makes me sad when people attack the other side with hate and disgust because they are certain that they know they are right. I'm disgutsted by the tendency to call out randoms on twitter and assign them deragotory sterotypes like its ok becasue its not done to them directly. We don't know the people behind the keyboard. We don't know who is reading and sees themselves reflected in the group being pilloried and are being hurt by it. And I wandered into...can't we all just get along. Back to Depp and Heard. This is my feeling on it. The jury got it right. Both on the verdict for Depp and the verdict for Heard. Do I know that is objectively true, no? But from the information I've seen both in the trial and from the UK trial and other stuff, the verdict makes sense to me. Seems to me that Heard both exagerated and in some cases lied about the abuse for whatever reason. From what actually made it into the trial, there is more evidence that Heard was physically violent (and yes, I know physical isn't the only type of abusive behavior) against Depp than the other way around.

From what I've read Heard, barring appeal being successful, cannot get out of paying Depp because the jury found that she acted with malice. She might be able to get out of paying what she owes her lawyers but that's about it. I'm sure she'll be as forthcoming in paying the judgement as she was in donating to the ACLU and Children's Hospital.