Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Will this be in theaters too? I would like to watch something like this in a movie theatre with a crowd. Seems like a crowd pleaser.
 
What are you talking about???
He’s known as an actor that never says no to any role.
As such, a LOT of his movies are absolute garbage. Like 4/10 type of horrendous trash. Unicorn Store? The Spirit? Formula 51?
Sorry, but “good ol, Samuel L.” being in a movie is decidedly NOT any indication of the quality.
Not saying this movie isn’t going to be good... just the fact that a single good actor (that will play in ANYTHING) is in a move is probably not the best way to prejudge a film.
They kinda had two separate statements in that original post. "Looks good" is a commentary on the movie the trailer is portraying. I agree, it does look good, though I don't trust the trailer any further than I trust any other trailer. "Ol' Samuel L. is always good" is a commentary on Jackson himself, not the movies he's in. I agree with that too. He has been in some fantastically terrible movies, no doubt. But he, himself, is always fun to watch even if the rest of the house is burning down around him.

At least that's how I read that comment. "This movie looks good, but even if it sucks at least Sam Jackson will be fun to watch."
 
I liked Elephant Queen and the Morning Show. Looking forward to all the new content.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ar40
Interesting to see something not Jennifer Aniston with regard to TV+.

On Saturday, Nov. 2, I signed up for my free year. Followed immediately by an alert to cancel on Nov. 1, 2020. While I'm open to the idea of TV+, this experience is going to really need to evolve, quickly, for me to commit to the monthly fee next fall.

I'm not a Tim is the devil, Apple is doomed kind of guy. Nor am I a blind lemming. Fully understand and expect Apple to continue evolving from that which they were 30-years ago - even when it doesn't;t make sense to me (aka: no longer their target audience). I've been struggling to see where Apple can make their mark in this incredibly crowded, established, industry that is stacked with some significant players that have a crap-ton of experience producing content for audiences. I know Apple have had success with that formal in the past (come in and redefine an established industry). But entertainment and meaningful content creation (anyone can create content - but does it resonate) feels way different than handhelds and ear buds (both hardware). I mean, Ping is one thing with which to dabble. Low risk. Try, fail, learn. I just struggle to see the path for which Apple is looking to traverse. It's just not making sense. To me. Yet. I suppose time will tell. I'm open to being surprised...
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlexGraphicD
What are you talking about???
He’s known as an actor that never says no to any role.
As such, a LOT of his movies are absolute garbage. Like 4/10 type of horrendous trash. Unicorn Store? The Spirit? Formula 51?
Sorry, but “good ol, Samuel L.” being in a movie is decidedly NOT any indication of the quality.
Not saying this movie isn’t going to be good... just the fact that a single good actor (that will play in ANYTHING) is in a move is probably not the best way to prejudge a film.

Jesus!!!! You really hate Samuel L Jackson! All the dude said was
“Good ol”. He didn’t say the man was one of the greatest to ever do it. You need to relax.
 
Don't mistake a "space" movie with sci-fi. Sci-Fi is "science fiction"... in other words, creative licensing on what is possible beyond our understanding and reality.

I don't think you appreciate where this show is going to go. The plan is for it to follow a space program that never stopped being a race… they're already in the 3rd episode talking about using the Moon as a Solar System staging ground, and projecting forward to Mars missions. Extrapolate that out, and where do you think that show is going to go when it reaches the 1980s, for example.
 
I do not like Apple's strategy with original programming. After watching all 3 episodes of The Morning Show and For all (Wo)Mankind and 1 episode of See... I must say, simply hiring A-List actors to carry a show lacking any style or quirk isn't enough. The Morning Show cliffhanger does pull you into the premise but it's hard to ignore the messaging deeply ingrained in all 3 shows.

The Morning Show: evil white males telling women what not to do but sexually harassing them in the process.
For All Mankind: soviets win space race= red moon, women come to save the day because all the stupid male astronauts are drunks who can't seem to do their jobs.
See: humans somehow survive without eyesight in a forest full of predatory animals without their one evolutionary advantage- their front facing eyes.
 
smh when is Apple gonna stop with these dramas and actually make movies with different genres? I really want a raunchy movie. And it’s 2019, the stories need to be about gay people with gay romance that supports feminist morale and their cause.

Apple TV+ is going to fail if Apple doesn’t cater to the main demographic.
 
Jesus!!!! You really hate Samuel L Jackson! All the dude said was
“Good ol”. He didn’t say the man was one of the greatest to ever do it. You need to relax.
Lol, interesting assumption.
I think he’s a great actor.... IF he has a script to work with! It’s obviously hit or miss. The movie where he had to pretend he had a lisp (one of the Kingsmen flicks) definitely was outside of his range. He didn’t sound like he had a lisp, just like he was pretending. I could scarcely hold that against him however, I’m sure that’s incredibly difficult.
When he has an excellently written part, he shines! I’d go as far as to refer to his portrayal as the hero/antihero/villain in Glass by the word “epic”. I was absolutely blown away. What a performance.
At any rate- I stand by what I said though... that is: automatically assuming a film w/ Samuel L. Jackson in it will be good is not NEARLY as solid a bet as with many other actors of his caliber... due to the fact that he seems to accept roles in some fairly subpar titles, making his oeuvre a peppering of equal standouts and stinkers!
 
  • Like
Reactions: TOGURO06
This looks decent but Apple is going to need a lot more good original content that keeps users hooked to keep up with services like Disney+, Prime Video, and Netflix in order to get a good market share in this highly competitive space.
If you removed all trash and woke bs from Netflix there isn’t that much either. Not to mention all the stuff they licence and did not produce themselves.
 
What are you talking about???
He’s known as an actor that never says no to any role.
As such, a LOT of his movies are absolute garbage. Like 4/10 type of horrendous trash. Unicorn Store? The Spirit? Formula 51?
Sorry, but “good ol, Samuel L.” being in a movie is decidedly NOT any indication of the quality.
Not saying this movie isn’t going to be good... just the fact that a single good actor (that will play in ANYTHING) is in a move is probably not the best way to prejudge a film.
It's because he's old enough not to give a f*** anymore. This is the man that said yes to "Snakes On A Plane". You can tell that he truly just enjoys acting. He takes the bad with the great. And while you're right, him being in a film isn't an indicator of whether it's good or not, it's a bit more than that. He's a great actor, with a lot of charisma, and people enjoy watching him even when the film is ridiculous.
 
Samuel Jackson is enough to make me want to watch is. Maybe I should give Apple tv+ a second chance.
This!

And also, not this.

This is how Apple TV+ will survive, and perhaps even thrive. People will be drawn in by one or two things that appeal to them, and maybe they will expand as they give other content a shot. With more content being added periodically, Apple will have enough subscribers (even counting those who subscribe for just a month to catch up on what's new and interesting to them and then unsubscribe until tempted back again).

But not this particular announcement. I have no strong feelings one way or another about Samuel Jackson. He's not a draw for me to see "The Banker". I might be attracted by the plot synopsis, but not the actor. I do have actors who would draw me into something I might not otherwise watch.

It will be different projects that bring in different demographics.
 
I get Apple TV+ free with my Apple Music Student Membership, and I won't even watch it...for free. Nothing they offer interests me. Another classic blunder from team Cook.

So there are now three classic blunders
- Getting involved in a land war in Asia
- Going against a Sicilian when death is on the line
- Apple not making something that interests Jobs 3:16?
 
I am told that Hollywood financial accounting is … weird. It truly depends on the production costs, plus the royalties. A google search puts Samuel L. Jackson at about $6,200,000 per movie, or 1,550,000 paid subscriptions to pay just for his salary. Jennifer Aniston is at $1,100,000 per episode, or 275,000 paid subscriptions per episode. Add other names such as Reese Whiterspoon or Jason Momoa and the price goes up quite substantially.
This is even before actual production costs (pre-production, director, tech services, post production, CGI etc. and, again, royalties. PLUS the actual service's costs such as servers, programmers, lawyers etc).
I am starting to think that ATV+ is just to sell more devices as a "free" service included with the purchase.
Apple knows this service isn’t going to be immediately profitable. They need to build a catalog and users first.
 
With Apple +, it is possible to watch everything in the subscription service in a few hours. I don't think I'll have time to keep up once Disney + comes out. That is going to kill any free time I had for TV shows and movies at home.
 
  • Like
Reactions: yaxomoxay
Apple knows this service isn’t going to be immediately profitable. They need to build a catalog and users first.

The problem I see is that building a catalog will require even more investments, which in turn will require even more users in order to be profitable. Netflix, Disney, Hulu etc. have a pretty large catalog full of stuff that was not developed by them for the specific service. Netflix has "Friends" and the "Gilmore Girls". Hulu has "Seinfeld", "Community", "Parks and Recreation". "Twin Peaks" is on both... just to name a few. They do produce their own series, but they are not the only element of their catalog; what they don't produce is likely generating lots of money, while what they produce ("The Crown", "Mindhunter", "The Act") probably makes less money but attracts people.
ATV+ does not have any of that. It has a few programs, and it is paying lots of dollars in production value. Unless they have some other money generating source (for a streaming service), I don't see it lasting it long on its own legs.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.