Hudlin Entertainment Forum

Quote from: CvilleWakandan on August 21, 2019, 09:13:24 pm

Killmonger, WoW#6, Sound and Fury, the Annual, BP vs BD, Ghost Panther, Rise, and Avenger(for BP)were all hot for me.

I been eating good. Lol.

problem with the spin offs is that the initial ones sucked, too influenced by what Coates was doing, and trying to make the MA a thing.

If the spin offs started with Rise, BP vs DP, Avengers, Agents of Wakanda (tbd)  instead of WoW, Crew, and Ultimates (good idea, meh execution here, team was too niche)...... momentum would have carried longer.

Coates pessimism murdered the takeover before it started

I liked The Ultimates more than you did...probably a lot more...but I pretty much agree across the board with you, MoS.

And this? Is one of the few times that advertisers are STAYING AWAY. It's a testament to what we can do when we apply CONSISTENT pressures:

https://www.mediamatters.org/tucker-carlson/tucker-carlson-returns-fox-news-advertisers-are-staying-away

Carlson has almost 60% fewer ads per show than before advertisers started to flee

WRITTEN BY JORDAN UHL

PUBLISHED 08/19/19 5:07 PM EDT

SHARE

COMMENT

Fox host Tucker Carlson is returning to his show tonight, after an attempted cooling-off period for defending white supremacy and downplaying white nationalist violence in the wake of the El Paso, TX, mass shooting, but he'll be returning to one of the lowest number of paid advertisers since Tucker Carlson Tonight debuted.

Since December 2018, Carlson has lost over 70 paid advertisers. Over the past 11 days, at least five advertisers — HelloFresh, Nestle, SteinMart, Calm and SoFi — have removed their ads from Tucker Carlson’s show, and many more have quietly distanced themselves. One major Fox News advertiser, Long John Silver’s, was so frustrated that it removed its ads from the network entirely.

Fox News sent Tucker Carlson on vacation in hopes of stemming the tide of advertiser losses. Instead, advertisers have only increased the drop rate in order to get off the show (and some off Fox News entirely)

“Fox News sent Tucker Carlson on vacation in hopes of stemming the tide of advertiser losses,” tweeted Angelo Carusone, president of Media Matters for America. “Instead, advertisers have only increased the drop rate in order to get off the show (and some off Fox News entirely) before Tucker is [scheduled] to return.”

Through the cooling-off period, Fox has been trying to show advertisers that it’s safe to come back. But Fox’s programming, even in Carlson’s absence, has further exposed that the bigotry is not limited to Carlson -- it’s networkwide.

Carlson has seen his nightly paid ad load plummet from a high of 36 paid ads each night in October 2018 to averaging 15 per episode in August 2019.

“Network figures going on sudden vacations” is a commonly employed tactic by Fox used to distract the public, mitigate public outrage, and prevent advertisers from fleeing. With this “vacation,” Fox News is hoping everyone, especially advertisers, forgets what happened. Fox’s PR team then works overtime trying to spin the media narrative, claiming that everything is fine and that pressure campaigns don’t work. Despite those efforts, many observers quickly noticed the negative changes to Carlson’s ad breaks -- including losing an entire break, leaving the show with only four -- and observed that the network is heavily relying on in-house promos and PSAs, as it has done when other hosts have faced similar mass exoduses.

Tucker Carlson ad loss through August 2019
To understand why the vacation tactic doesn’t work, it’s important to remember how we got here.

On December 13, 2018, Carlson opened his show with a racist and xenophobic monologue in which he said immigrants make America “poorer and dirtier and more divided.”

Video file
Video Player

00:00
03:20


SHARE
TUCKER CARLSON (HOST): Our leaders demand that you shut up and accept this. We have a moral obligation to admit the world's poor, they tell us, even if it makes our own country poorer, and dirtier, and more divided. Immigration is a form of atonement.

Previous leaders of our country committed sins -- we must pay for those sins by welcoming an endless chain of migrant caravans. That's the argument they make.

...

What is more predictable is how leaders of the caravan are starting to talk. Suddenly, they sound like community college professors from Long Beach. Entitled, cut off from reality, and highly aggressive.

Yesterday a group of leaders of the caravan marched into the U.S. consulate in Mexico, and demanded $50,000 to return to their own countries.

Huddled masses yearning to breathe free? Nope, cynical shakedown artists who have been watching too much CNN.

No surprise there. When rich liberals tell you that America owes you a comfortable life, nobody should be shocked when you believe them.

Immediately following that segment was an ad for Pacific Life. When reached for comment, the insurance giant quickly denounced Carlson’s comments and said it wouldn’t be advertising on his show anymore. Instead of apologizing or clarifying, Carlson doubled down.

On January 2, Carlson kicked off the new year with a misogynistic rant attacking career-oriented women, claiming that when women make more money than men, that leads to “more drug and alcohol abuse [and] higher incarceration rates.”

These two controversies sent shockwaves through his ad breaks. Companies soon realized the risks associated with advertising on his show, fearing their brand would be the next one juxtaposed with an offensive viral moment. It became a race not to be last.

Over 30 advertisers publicly dropped Tucker Carlson Tonight during those few weeks.

In March 2019, Media Matters uncovered recordings of a radio show in which Carlson defended statutory rape, called Iraqis “semiliterate primitive monkeys,” and used offensive and misogynistic language to demean women.

This news spurred another wave of advertiser drops, with most of Carlson’s remaining blue-chip sponsors -- including Outback, Capital One, and AstraZeneca -- finally separating themselves from his show. By this point, Carlson’s ad breaks had already shrunk and the network became reliant on in-house promos to fill time.

Things went from bad to worse in early August, when a white supremacist fueled by xenophobic and racist rhetoric -- similar to views Carlson espouses on his show -- opened fire at an El Paso Walmart and specifically targeted Latinx people, killing 22 and wounding 24 more. Just two days after the horrific attack, Carlson claimed white supremacy is “actually not a real problem in America” and that calling it a serious issue is “a hoax” and “conspiracy theory used to divide the country.”

Another wave of advertisers fled as his comments were widely panned (while also drawing praise from former KKK Grand Wizard David Duke). Several more brands left, including Long John Silver’s, which announced it was dropping Fox News entirely.


Angelo Carusone
✔
@GoAngelo
 CONFIRMED: Long John Silver will no longer advertise on Fox News.

In 2018, Long John Silver ran ads on Fox almost every day; they advertised heavily for the first portion of 2019. In April declined to renew contract and to avoid Fox News going forward. Today they confirmed to me

9,651
4:58 PM - Aug 8, 2019
Twitter Ads info and privacy
1,926 people are talking about this
Meanwhile, Carlson’s trip fooled few:


Six advertisers left while Carlson was off the air. And as he returns, one thing can be certain: Nothing about his show will change. The pattern of behavior is clear and well-documented. Advertisers are already well aware of his behavior. He won’t return as a reformed man who has changed his ways. He’ll still be the incendiary opinion host white nationalists cherish.

The question for the few remaining advertisers is whether they want their branding on his show."
"

We need that.

Maybe start a petition, or something?

That is all.


https://shadowandact.com/remembering-a-man-called-hawk-the-coolest-brother-on-tv/















"

Television
Remembering 'A Man Called Hawk' - The Coolest Brother On TV
 Facebook
 Twitter
April 20th 2017
nullTonight I got into a conversation with some friends about old TV shows from the past that we really liked, and I brought up A Man Called Hawk. You remember him don't you? A brother so cool that he could literally drive a car at night with tinted windows with shades on. Now, THAT'S one bad mutha'.



ADVERTISING

inRead invented by Teads

For those you youngsters out there, you who don't know what I'm talking about, Hawk was a spin-off series from the ABC Network popular detective TV show Spencer For Hire. Hawk, who was played by Avery Brooks, was Spencer's sort of friend and occasional partner.

Yet, thankfully, he was his own man, and never took risks or sacrficed his own safety for Spencer. No devoted servant was he. Spencer was his friend, but only up to a point. He looked out for No. 1 and if Spencer needed him, which seemed to be all the time, he would help him out. Maybe. If he had the time.

But Hawk was so charismatic and became so popular that ABC gave the character his own show, which premiered in January 1989. Unfortunately, it only ran for 13 episodes.

In the show, Hawk had relocated  from Boston, where Spencer was based, back to his hometown of Washington D.C. Once settled there he became a kind of do-gooder helping out desperate people in trouble who had nowhere to turn. It was full of action and had a certain gritty vibe to it. It was sort of like a 70's blaxplotation movie every week.

But with the show centered on Hawk, Brooks gave him some depth. He was a jack-of-all-trades and a Renaissance man to boot. He collected African art, played the vibes and chess, and was skilled in martial arts. He was a man's man, and a real genuine black masculine presence on TV when they were so rare (even today).

And when you look at the talent who appeared on various episodes, you'll be amazed. Aside from Angela Bassett, who played Hawk's girlfriend in a few episodes, other guest stars included people such as Charles S. Dutton, Wendell Pierce, Keith David, Deroy Lindo, Kasi Lammons, Wesley Snipes, Joe Morton and, oh yes, some unknown by the name of Samuel L. Jackson.

Of course after Hawk went off the air, Brooks later became the lead on Star Trek: Deep Space Nine for several seasons. But I still think A Man Called Hawk was his best role.

Since the show was produced by Warner TV, perhaps there's a chance that the Warner Archive DVD-on-demand label, which has been releasing old Warner Bros TV shows from the 70's and 80's, will release a complete Hawk series multiple DVD set sometime soon. It would be fun just to revisit them again. Maybe we need Hawk more than ever now."


We DO need Hawk MORE THAN EVER, now. What would his reaction be to Trump?

Quote from: supreme illuminati on August 16, 2019, 05:28:54 pm

So we're going to have a multiyear break before the next BP movie comes out. In the interim, seems like our leading light for Afrakan heroics will be Anthony Mackie's new Falcon-cum-Captain America. I don't see any projects named WAR MACHINE or any major WAR MACHINE TV stuff or streaming series coming on. No Doctor Voodoo, which is kinduva surprise what with the whole "horror" thing Marvel has going with GHOST RIDER and HELLSTROM. No Okoye or Shuri stuff, no live action Miles Morales stuff that I'm aware of. Seems like the only brutha holdin it down for us that we know of right now is Falcon. We'll have to wait til 2021 for even the hope of LUKE CAGE [ and the rest of the excellent NETFLIX MARVEL stuff ] coming back.

Soooo...does anyone know if there'll be some Afrakan heroics worth watching between now and the return of BP, BLADE, etc in the MCU?

Btw. The sleeper star in all of this? Mess around and be the [ highly underrated ] Jeremy Renner's Hawkeye. Thoughts?

Agents of Shield has one more season and Henry Simmons' Mack has been prominent on there. Also, there's still Runaways and Cloak and Dagger. When it comes to touting MCU diversity the television shows don't get the credit they might deserve up to this point.

Well said. I rocks with Henry Simmons since way back...since ABOVE THE RIM, back in like what was that? 1995? 1994? And one of Tyler Perry's Madea movies. I think he isn't given the options that he deserves. And it's crazy to think that he and I both are 49. He is winning at Life much more than I am, lol.

But still...that's just not enough. Cloak on Cloak and Dagger isn't hard enough. Isn't MAN enough. Neither is what'shisname on RUNAWAYS. I like both characters and support both actors, but...they're just too soft, man. They don't carry that Black man PHYSICAL swag, that CULTURAL identification and soul, that HARDCORENESS, man. They're very much new age new kid compromised...and packed with that new age cross over appeal which is so important for success nowadays.

But bottom line? Them kids just not hard enough.


 Mack? Is with the biz but he's not WITH THE BIZ like Blade is, you know? Or Black Panther. Hell, I'm starving for HAWK [ A MAN CALLED HAWK, SPENSER FOR HIRE  ] to come back...even though it's a helluva lot to expect some foolish Millenial to hope to have a shot at doing a younger Hawk any kind of justice. Or writers of this era to do Hawk any justice.

Hawk remains the best dressed. Coolest. Baddest. Smartest. Most Woke. Most Ahead of His Time. Dopest cars drivingest. Biggest Colt Python revolver carryingest. Man to ever hit the small screen.

"You can't surprise me Spenser, you're too White."--HAWK











HAWK was where got his BLADE SHADES from. For rillz.

That's it, man. Let's start this. BRING BACK "A MAN CALLED HAWK"! Hell, BRING BACK SPENSER FOR HIRE!! BRING EM BOTH BACK!! LET'S START A PETITION.


But which one of these young bucks...BESIDES MICHAEL B. JORDAN WHO WOULD TURN DOWN ANY OPTION TO PLAY HAWK ANYWAYS...could actually rock Hawk with a serious Morpheus+John Wick upgrade in physicality and weaponry, but without sacrificing the iconic Cool, Wokeness, and amazing acting skill of Avery Brooks infused Hawk?

Quote from: supreme illuminati on August 16, 2019, 05:28:54 pm

So we're going to have a multiyear break before the next BP movie comes out.

Thoughts?

I'm O.K. with this decision, Supreme.

As I've written before, MARVEL Studios is doing in cinema exactly what MARVEL comics was doing on the bookstands...

--- expanding their universe and introducing new characters.

I agree with the Strategy [ avoids superhero fatigue, expands properties ]  but have some issues about some of its execution. And I would like there to be a bit more to "hold us over" til next time. When does BP show up even in Disney animation stuff? Where are The Avengers, The X-Men, The F4 in all this? Where's Iron Fist, Daredevil, Jessica Jones, Luke Cage, and their spin off characters in this? Where's Cloak and Dagger and THE RUNAWAYS in this?

Will there be a YOUNG AVENGERS [ answer: almost certainly YES ]? will it be a TV property?

We're looking at a dearth of Black male hetero super types tho. Can Anthony Mackie rock a PROGRESSIVE PRO-BLACK Falcon? If they bring CJP FALCON which is the GOAT FALCON? Yeah. If not? uhhhh...NO.

And RH LUKE CAGE IS STILL THE GOAT LUKE CAGE. No doubts.

And somebody GET A CLUE and HAVE LUKE CAGE BE AN EXPERT IN 52 BLOCKS.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1mR05qY-yM


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T89g-DgS-3A

Way to come through with that Priest info. I barley read whole articles anymore. lol

It was this specific mention of Priest that made me go back and read the post by our most excellent brother Ture more thoroughly. I diss so hard TurnCoates BP that I even skipped the cover art automatically and without even noting it...

...but after reading Cville above? I saw that cover art. Man? That ish IS DOPE. Seriously. And? I still ship T'Choro. Til the casket drops. R to the H got it right.




And if you peep the article in the link, you'll see that R to the H and Eric Jerome Dickey's version of history has been/will be absorbed into popular culture, the movies and eventually...inexorably...the comics, too. For the record? I still very much like EJD's story, I think that his inclusion of T'Challa and Storm having sex, being in love, and T'Challa being Ororo's first is very believable, very "realistic". I absolutely for a fact don't think that a 16 year old having sex with a 13 or 14 year old is rape [ c'mon, now...rape? Nope. Less than ideal? Absolutely. But RAPE? Nooooo. ]







Anyway.

Thank you my brethren for the links, the hawking on TurnCoates, and further comics development. AMANI...

I'm sorry Supreme, in general I agree with you more than disagree, but some of your ideas here I don't agree with. Even though Amandla Stenberg is being pushed by Hollywood she hasn't proven she can get enough young or older people to actually support her films, especially with her as the star or being prominently in them, outside of the first Hunger Games. While The Hate U Give was praised by some it only made $35 million off a $23 million budget. And The Darkest Minds made $41 million of a $34 million budget. That's not to say that she won't eventually become the star I think Hollywood is investing in, but so far, that hasn't come to pass. I can't see putting a movie on her shoulders. Perhaps one of the Disney Plus shows, especially if she's part of an ensemble.

Tessa Thompson and Chris Hemsworth didn't wreck shop with MIB: International; they wrecked that franchise. It got pilloried by the reviewers and press. It hasn't even made $80 million domestic yet, off a relatively cheap $90-110 million budget. I don't think that's going to have any real bearing on them in the MCU, and while I don't think MIB: International was as terrible as lots of other people, it's poor showing does not sell Thompson and Hemsworth as bankable outside the MCU. Once again, both are good actors and likable and could eventually get there, but aren't there now. And Hemsworth has had several shots at it, but hasn't found a non-Thor role or franchise yet that is a hit with mass audiences.

Fast and Furious is already a diverse franchise. It's been ahead of the curve there. And while it will get more diverse-featuring female characters more prominently in the next entry I gather-as well as I think an upcoming female-led spin off or entry-it was a diverse franchise from the start. It's not like the mostly lily white franchises that are at times awkwardly diversifying that causes some to complain about 'forced diversity.'

For its time period, the original Star Trek was diverse, and throughout it's run, it has been more diverse than other television series. And Discovery has expanded on that. Comparatively Star Wars has not been as diverse and still has a ways to go to catch up to where Star Trek has already been.

The movie Solo-while decent-was a totally unnecessary film-and I think it deserved its fate. It was unasked for, it was a money grab, and it was cashing in on nostalgia months after some in Disney-Lucasfilm and the Hollywood Press mocked nostalgia while defending The Last Jedi. The Solo story was too lightweight and undercut the character of Han Solo. For one, it muddled if not outright ruined Han's character arc in Episode 4. In that film he went from a selfish person to someone willing to stick his neck out for his friends and for a cause that wasn't just about himself or money. Yet, Solo has him already at that point, and that his bluster in Episode 4 was just a bluff because he's always been a softy with a heart of gold underneath. Solo took away some of Han's danger. Solo also wasted Thandie Newton and it also took away some of Lando's competence. As a film itself, it wasn't bad, and better than Episodes 7 and 8, however it was a story that could've been told in a comic book or novel. They wasted something like $300 million on that film, and for what? You could've given that money to schools, the homeless, etc.

I really like this answer above. I'll get to my thoughts on some of the specifics a little later when I have the time, but Idk that MIB only made about $80 million thus far. I must have accidentally looked at the wrong data. Well, check that: you said about $80 million domestic and that's what I thought it would make, but it's about $250 million international off of $110 million production. It'll probably make close to $400 million, which actually isn't bad...but definitely isn't wrecking shop. I don't remember where I saw more robust numbers [ maybe a projection? ], but I thought it probably close to eclipsing $600 million now...but the reality seems to suggest that it might not. I'm going to see it, anyway. I don't let critics make up my mind for me about movies.

More of my response about the above when I get back.