#A Canadian Company

[msclaritea]

Shelving Movies for Fun and Profit

Destroying Movies for Fun and Profit

If you ask any director, screenwriter, actor, stunt performer, gaffer, editor, cameraperson or other Hollywood worker, they’ll likely tell you a variation on the same story: “My dream, ever since I was a little kid making home movies, was to one day grant Warner Bros. a deduction for a loss sustained upon the abandonment of property (reported on Form 4797).” Yes, little is more exciting for an aspiring filmmaker than the idea that—with a lot of dedication and a pinch of luck—their years of driving Lyfts and waiting tables could pay off, resulting in a star-studded line item that will be shelved forever so that a major studio can claim a tax write-off. Ah, the magic of the movies!

This practice is back in the news because the powers that be at WB have gone back to their original decision regarding the hybrid live-action/animated Looney Tunes movie Coyote vs. Acme. Despite the film testing well and generating plenty of buyer interest, a team of execs who haven’t seen the finished movie look like they’re going to “unceremoniously delete it” for tax purposes. Sorry, filmmakers, but apparently it actually looks better to stockholders if WB doesn’t actually put movies out. “Hollywood accounting” has its reputation for a reason, but it’s never been so obviously broken.

It might seem like Warner Bros. Discovery CEO David Zaslav is a true innovator of idiocy, but the man behind the permanent shelving of movies like Batgirl and Scoob! Holiday Haunt is just ramping up a long tradition of burning art to save a quick buck.

After buying up DreamWorks, Universal decided to bury the musical-comedy Larrikins instead of selling it to Netflix. Universal president Jimmy Horowitz told Tim Minchin that “It’s schmuck insurance – if someone made a lot of money out of it, we’ll look like schmucks.” That mindset certainly applies here: Coyote vs. Acme is a creation from an earlier group of WB leaders, and would naturally be on the chopping block from a spiteful new C-suite who also happens to hate movies.

Even more relevant is a case from almost 100 years ago: Charlie Chaplin literally torched the film negatives of A Woman of the Sea back in 1933, in front of multiple witnesses, so that he could claim the movie as a loss for tax purposes.

The tax code may have changed since then, but the logic remains the same: Get rid of the movie so you can avoid all the final complications and lingering expenses associated with its “useful life.” If you cut that life short, pulling off an accounting assassination, you save a little immediate cash at the low, low cost of…art. It’s always been a crass practice, more often performed by resentful new regimes or moneygrubbers who’ve found themselves attracting the gaze of Sauron’s IRS. But now shelving movies, completed films that other companies want, is picking up steam as standard practice. Actually making things is such an outdated, small-time business model. It’s far more lucrative to remove things other people made.

For example, if Disney keeps all of its movies and TV shows on Disney+, it has to pay residuals to the people who made them. They’ve also spread out the costs of a movie like Crater (which was available to watch for a mere seven weeks during the summer of 2023) over the years that the movie will ostensibly be available to the public and, therefore, creating value for Disney. Remove these movies and shows from the streamer, or better yet, remove them permanently (like Disney did with Crater), and their value can be added to an impairment charge—basically, a claim to the tax man that something a company owns has become, suddenly, worthless.

Disney recorded a $1.5 billion impairment charge last year. As Julia Rock points out, this means that Disney is claiming something pretty odd: Both “that the assets were producing so little value that it’s cheaper to destroy them than to keep them and that the assets were worth $1.5 billion.” Huh. There’s no push for anyone to justify this contradiction. The IRS isn’t asking questions. It doesn’t matter if a movie is good, or bad, or somewhere in between. It doesn’t matter if it had the potential to one day be rediscovered as a cult classic. It certainly doesn’t matter that even the worst pieces of Z-grade trash are still worth preserving as cultural artifacts. As an aside, the HBO Original Fahrenheit 451 is still streaming on Max.

And sure, you can say that you didn’t want to watch those movies anyways. Kid movies! Superheroes! Cartoons, yuck. I get it, you’re tough and cool. But one day, this will happen to something that you were looking forward to. It will happen to something that would have moved you. Something you’d have remembered fondly, something that would’ve turned your day around. But even if you’re the most jaded, anti-art, movie-hating curmudgeon, you should remember that, released or not, you’re helping pay for this scheme anyways.

“When intertwined with public funding through state and federal tax incentives, the practice of movie and television write-downs represents a troubling exploitation of taxpayer funds,” writes tax attorney Andrew Leahey. “Coupled with rapidly expanding state tax incentives, it represents a multibillion-dollar Rube Goldberg machine that culminates in a nickel being pulled from your pocket, strapped to an Acme rocket, and fired directly into the bank accounts of movie studios.”

Every loophole taken by these studios doesn’t just rob us of art. It burns the work of countless artists. It steals from our quality of life by monkeying around with our broken tax system, allowing our most powerful corporations to skip out on their bills. It picks the remaining shreds of flesh off the bones of our culture, all to further fatten a few vultures at the top.

Politicians like Texas Representative Joaquin Castro are calling for the government to “review this conduct,” but the only people who seem to have the power here are those actually creating the movies. They can boycott the guilty studios, and we can support them, but there are so few left that aren’t exploiting this practice to its most predatory extremes. Cooking the books has always been a Hollywood practice. Burning them is new.

Jacob Oller is Movies Editor at Paste Magazine. You can follow him on Twitter at @jacoboller.

For all the latest movie news, reviews, lists and features, follow @PasteMovies.

It's too bad that this Paste article was written by a Leftist, who let their biases show, ie pushing Castro, and the 'Sauron's IRS'. But otherwise, it is spot on. What the studios are doing to Intellectual Properties is a SIN. It's cruel, it's greedy and so fucking unnecessary. Just how much money do these studios and their shareholders, NEED? I better not find out that the Supernatural Planet Series was destroyed.

[dame-de-pique]

Into the sunset, 1919

[x-heesy]

L o v e

Evening dress, 1913-1915, Franklin Simon Co., Canadian Museum of History 🇨🇦

#history #historyofart #historycal #historyfacts #historylovers #historyinpictures #historymade #historygeek #historyera #historyphoto #historyclass #historychannel #historylesson #historygram #historynerd #historytour #historyofphotography #historyplace #historylover #historyphotographed #historymatters #historyoffashion #historyiscool #arthistory #historical #historicalplaces #historicalpix #historicalclothing #historicalphotos #historicalromance #historicalmonument #historicalfacts #historicalart #historicalsnapshots #historicalphotography #historicalphoto #historicalpictures #historicalhome #historicalcenter #historicaldesign #historicalfantasy #historicalusociety

White Lilies by Peder, Anne Trolle 🎵

[allthecanadianpolitics]

Google says it still expects to remove news links from its search engine at the end of the year.

The company has been a part of the regulatory process for the Online News Act, which will require tech giants to pay media outlets for news content that is shared or repurposed on their online platforms.

Google says draft regulations to implement the bill don't address the company's concerns.

Full article

Tagging: @politicsofcanada

[foldingfittedsheets]

Okay so. We were driving on the freeway home. A two lane road out of the mountains. There was a truck camped out in the left lane, pacing the van in the right lane.

Now common courtesy is that you use the left lane to pass and move right when there’s a car behind you because it means they’re going faster than you.

But this truck. Had a line of seven cars backed up in the left lane, all stymied by this blockade. The right lane backed up too, all because this truck wouldn’t move over. He was dedicated too, braking when the van did to keep them level and keep any cars from getting passed. This went on for over ten miles to much honking and frustration.

When the van finally broke free and traffic was able to move through we saw that the asshole truck was a company truck. So….

Edit to clarify: I cannot call the company, it’s international, and there’s no business email.

[princelancey]

Lance went on a whole spiel about dinner in the pre-season media and the boy followed up on it akjglgd

[torchickentacos]

So, I've had a beetle in my house (my room, specifically). My policy with bugs is generally 'if they're not hurting anything and if it's just one at a time then leave them be, I do not care'. So I've had this little beetle just chilling in the corner of my room. Because, like, what's the harm? It's just the single beetle, I see him regularly, I know this guy. We're chill. But I kept seeing him and got to wondering, how long does this kind of beetle live? And, uh, I think I have a roommate now.

[sweaterkittensahoy]

Tonight's ear worm.

[ducktollers]

kill yourself 👍

[awkward-teabag]

I have to wonder how many people celebrating AI translation also complain about "broken English" and how obvious it is something was Google translated from another language without a fluent English speaker involved to properly clean up the translation/grammar.

Because I bet it's a lot.

I know why execs are all for it—AI is the new buzzword and it lets them cut jobs thus "save" money and not have to worry about pesky labour laws when one employs humans—but everyone else?

There was some outcry when Crunchyroll fired many of their translators in favour of AI translation (with some people to "clean up the AI's work") but I can't help but think that was in part because it was Japanese-to-English and personally affected them. Same when Duolingo fired many of their translators in favour of LLM translation. Meanwhile companies are firing staff when it's English to another language and there's this idea that that's fine or not as big a deal because English is "easy" to translate and/or because people don't think of how it will impact people in non-English countries.

Also it doesn't affect native English speakers so it doesn't get much headway in the news cycle or online anyway because so much of the dominant media is from English-speaking countries and English-speakers dominate social media.

But different languages have different grammar structures that LLMs don't do, and I grew up on "jokes" about people speaking in "broken English" and mocking people who use the wrong word when it was clearly a literal translation but the meaning was obvious long before LLMs were a thing, too. In fact, the specific way a character spoke broken English has been a way to denote their native tongue for decades, usually in a racist way.

Then Google translate came out and "Google-translated English" became an insult for people and criticism of companies because it was clearly wonky to native speakers. Even now, LLMs—which are heavily trained on English compared to other languages—don't have a natural output so native English speakers can clock LLM-generated text if it's longer than a sentence or two.

But, for whatever reason, it's not seen as a problem when it goes the other way because fuck non-English readers or people who want to read in their native tongue I guess.

[canadian-car-shipping]

Exploring The History And Success Of A Canadian Car Company

Buckle up, gearheads! Today, we are revving our engines and taking a thrilling ride through the fascinating history and remarkable success of a Canadian car company that has left an indelible mark on the automotive industry. From its humble beginnings to conquering international markets, this company's journey is awe-inspiring. So, fasten your seatbelts as we dive into the exhilarating world of innovation, challenges, triumphs, and everything in between!

Impact On The Canadian Automotive Industry

Established decades ago, the Canadian car company has played a pivotal role in shaping and driving the automotive landscape within Canada. Its presence has bolstered the economy and fostered a sense of national pride in producing quality vehicles on home soil. The company's commitment to innovation and excellence has set new standards for the industry, inspiring others to push boundaries and strive for greatness.

This company has become an integral part of Canada's automotive sector by providing jobs, investing in research and development, and supporting local suppliers. Its impact ripples through various communities across the country, creating opportunities for growth and advancement. As a beacon of success in a competitive market, this Canadian car company continues to pave the way for future automakers to follow suit.

Expansion Into International Markets

The Canadian Car Company's expansion into international markets marked a significant milestone in its history. It opened up new opportunities for growth and global recognition, and by venturing beyond national borders, the company showcased its ability to compete globally.

With a strategic approach, the Canadian Car Company penetrated various international markets, adapting to different cultural preferences and regulations. This adaptability was crucial in establishing a strong presence in diverse regions worldwide.

The Canadian Car Company successfully introduced its vehicles to consumers worldwide through partnerships and collaborations with local distributors and dealerships. This approach not only boosted sales but also solidified the brand's reputation on an international level.

Expanding into international markets allowed the Canadian Car Company to showcase its commitment to innovation and quality across borders. The company's dedication to excellence resonated with customers globally, increasing demand for its vehicles.

Key Innovations And Technological Advancements

One key factor contributing to the success of this Canadian car company is its continuous focus on innovations and technological advancements. From the early days of manufacturing vehicles, they have strived to stay ahead of the curve by integrating cutting-edge technology into their designs. This commitment has allowed them to meet evolving consumer demands and set new industry standards.

The company's investment in research and development has led to breakthroughs in fuel efficiency, safety features, and overall performance. By harnessing the power of innovation, they have created cars that are not only reliable but also environmentally friendly. These advancements have positioned them as a leader in sustainable transportation solutions.

Moreover, this Canadian car company has incorporated advanced software and connectivity options into its vehicles through strategic partnerships with tech companies and suppliers. This forward-thinking approach has created smart cars that offer customers a seamless driving experience.

By staying at the forefront of technological progress, this Canadian car company continues to push boundaries and shape the future of automotive engineering.

Success Stories And Notable Achievements

One of the most renowned success stories in Canadian Car Company's history is its groundbreaking introduction of electric vehicles to the market. This bold move not only revolutionized the industry but also solidified the company's position as a forward-thinking and environmentally conscious automaker.

In addition, the company's commitment to innovation has led to numerous accolades and awards for its cutting-edge designs and advanced technology integration. Its dedication to pushing boundaries and setting new standards has earned it a loyal customer base around the globe.

Furthermore, their strategic partnerships with key players in the automotive sector have paved the way for collaborative projects that have further enhanced their brand reputation. These successful collaborations have resulted in mutually beneficial outcomes for all parties involved, showcasing Canadian Car Company's ability to thrive in competitive environments.

These notable achievements are testaments to the Canadian Car Company's unwavering commitment to excellence and continuous growth in the automotive industry.

Challenges faced by the company

Navigating the competitive landscape of the automotive industry, the Canadian Car Company has faced its fair share of challenges. From economic downturns to shifts in consumer preferences, staying ahead of the curve requires continuous innovation and adaptability.

One significant challenge has been balancing sustainability with performance in an environmentally conscious market. As regulations tighten, the company continues to address the delicate balance between investing in eco-friendly technologies and maintaining high-quality standards.

Moreover, global supply chain disruptions and fluctuating raw material costs have posed logistical hurdles for production and distribution. Finding efficient solutions to minimize delays and optimize operations remains a top priority for sustained growth.

Despite these obstacles, the Canadian Car Company's commitment to excellence and resilience has propelled it forward. By embracing change, fostering creativity, and prioritizing customer satisfaction, this iconic brand continues to make waves domestically and internationally.

As we reflect on its journey through history filled with achievements, innovations, and challenges, overcome, one thing is clear - the legacy of this Canadian car company will undoubtedly continue shaping the future of automotive excellence for years to come.

[secondhand-lions]

my new year's resolution (yes i know it's still october, hush) is to find and try as many glass-bottled sodas as possible

so! open for recommendations if you have any

[dame-de-pique]

The silver lining

Evening

1919

[oldshowbiz]

You didn't necessarily need to know what SCTV was parodying to appreciate The Sammy Maudlin Show.

Eugene Levy and Joe Flaherty began improvising The Sammy Maudlin Show onstage at Second City in 1975 after seeing an episode of the syndicated talk show Sammy & Company.

It became a signature SCTV sketch in December 1976.

The sidekick/announcer on Sammy & Company was the real-life William B. Williams.

Here's a clip of Sammy & Company with guest Lola Falana.

[allthecanadianpolitics]

The federal government has put a price tag on how much it would like to see Google and Facebook spend under legislation that requires the tech giants to compensate media companies for Canadian journalism.

Federal officials estimate Google would need to offer $172 million and Facebook $62 million in annual compensation to satisfy criteria they're proposing be used to give exemptions under the Online News Act, a bill passed over the summer that will force tech companies to broker deals with media companies whose work they link to or repurpose.

Draft regulations released by the government Friday outlined for the first time how it proposes to level the playing field between Big Tech and Canada's news media sector, and which companies it will apply to.

Full article

Tagging: @politicsofcanada