#I’m not watching that it has 1.5 million views to an obviously easy answer

[mr-double-downer]

“Could L catch Walter White?” can you catch a bullet to the chest at point blank range?

[literaphobe]

okay i’ll bite. what is mcyt and dream smp. like i know what they stand for but what exactly... is it.... is it actually good or just your latest hyperfixation AGSHJSJSKS

oh god beware this is long and also i technically wrote it as part of a tangent to another ask but i realized this response suited this question much better but it also makes references to that ask which i will answer right after this one

“what is minecraft youtube?” well any YouTube video that features minecraft is technically minecraft youtube. i specifically only care about like. dream + friends. i follow the ‘feral boys’ (dream george quackity sapnap karl) mostly? but if ur question is: what is dream known for? the answer is minecraft manhunt and dream smp

so what’s minecraft manhunt? to understand that, u need to understand that minecraft isn’t “just blocks” because it is a beatable game haha. u beat the game by killing the ender dragon and obviously there’s a lot of stuff u need to do to do that. but i won’t bore u w the details. “speedrunning minecraft” means u beat minecraft very fast. dream used to be the record holder for beating minecraft a few months ago. he no longer is but i won’t get into that. it’s an annoying discussion n literally no one cares. all i’ll say is if u really believe he cheated and that he wasn’t being targeted by people who have since been exposed for trying to frame him for saying slurs that he never said (amongst other stuff), then u literally hate neurodivergent people so much. that’s all!

so what is MANHUNT, specifically? basically, dream does a series where x number of people are HUNTING him down and trying to KILL him before he beats the game. if he dies even ONCE, he loses. he’s done this with one hunter (george), two (+sapnap), three (+badboyhalo), four (+antfrost), and now five hunters (+awesamdude)

the hunters have infinite lives, and a compass that leads them to where dream is at any given point in the game. dream is allowed to kill them as many times as he wants, as a form of self preservation

so what’s the allure to manhunt? essentially, it’s how dream plays the game. he’s incredibly skilled at pvp (fighting) and parkour (moving fast and agile that i can’t even begin to explain. u need to see this for urself. it’s even more impressive if u play the game) and “clutching” (how he saves himself from risky moves and all the absolutely CREATIVE ways he does it)

also all the traps he sets to kill the hunters since it’s hard to go up against multiple people no matter how good you are. and how QUICKLY he thinks. it’s amazing. people with adhd are amazing and dream is a PRIME example of that. it makes me less hateful of my adhd :) and more appreciative of my traits :)

how did he do this? lots of research, lots of practice, lots of training. dream used to be a really average minecraft player who had to beg GEORGE to go easy on him. now? george loses to dream even on 40/50 hearts (the usual is 10). dream poured his heart into making his videos, putting a creative spin and skillful spin to his content that had never really been seen/executed as well before. and so 1.5 years after he started actively making YouTube videos he has over 20 million subscribers. and I’m not kidding, that number could be 30 million in a few months from now. that’s how fast he’s growing

ok i got off topic. another great thing about manhunt is dream’s relationship w the HUNTERS. the hunters are friends who dream has known for many years, and also they come up with great plans to defeat him as well. in many ways, they can also be seen as the “underdogs” in manhunt, especially since dream won the 4 hunters series 3-2. anyway in manhunt, all of the players are in an open channel discord voice chat, so they can all hear each other talk, and also talk to each other. sometimes the hunters discuss strategies before the face off, or they dm ideas secretly in the game chat, or attempt to talk in code. but mostly dream can hear the things they say, and they can hear the things he says. it makes it so that they can attempt to trick each other, but they can also hear things that give them a leg up in the game. etc etc. the banter that goes on is like. BIG part of what makes manhunt fun to watch

and the editing...... it is very good and engaging n he chooses fun music :) the speedrun music is a meme by now but it still slaps unironically. he makes excellent choices n i am very entertained

OKAY. so what is dream smp?

(smp stands for Survival Multiplayer. aka: a lot of people play together in a world where u can die and monsters spawn. the dream part is because dream owns the server)

once upon a time, there were two best friends. their names were dream and george. they decided to play minecraft survival together, but they didn’t want to beat the game super fast this time. THIS was about having fun. they wanted to casually explore the world, build a house together, raise some animals, start a farm, etc! after a bit they started to add some of their other friends so more people could have fun with them. and then more people got added. and the dream smp started to include a roleplay aspect because they invited people who did roleplay on other servers

i won’t summarize the events for u. if u wanna know what HAPPENED plot wise, this dude evanmcgaming makes like. summaries that are low key documentaries. very well made, he includes clips from the actual lore streams when necessary! his channel is here and i’ll list the documentaries in order: first | second | third | fourth | fifth

and then this really cool 18 year old Filipino girl started animating events on the dream smp to look REALLY cool n it got so many views and her first animation was done on her PHONE w her FINGER and it made the people on dream smp go damn we need to step the FUCK up so that this girl can get better material for her animations. they are all huge fans of her. everyone is a huge fan of her. she’s called sad-ist, and so far there are 4 main animations: first | second | third | fourth

anyway now! dream smp is essentially what i would call gay planned theatre improv but the medium through which they perform is not a stage but on minecraft. there actually is WRITING involved in this, they script the series of events etc, but for the most part they don’t actively script dialogue afaik?

some truly AMAZING bits of dialogue has come out of the dream smp. the dream smp is basically. gamers transform into theatre kids before ur very eyes + some of these bitches WERE theatre kids and they’re showing it now!

it’s amazing watching the growth because a lot of them have improved leaps and bounds. one of the most notable improved actors is dream ❤️  yea im bringing him up ok because im RIGHT his acting used to just be him screaming but now he can give me chills. he’s very good n is the “main villain” on dream smp :)

and like. not only do we have people like sad-ist animating the smp we have members like quackity who include pre recorded elements in his lore streams to make it just. a truly incredible experience. quackity my beloved. i love him so much

[fromtheringapron]

WCW Bash at the Beach 2000

Date: July 9, 2000.

Location: Ocean Center in Daytona Beach, Florida. 

Attendance: 6,572 

Commentary: Tony Schiavone, Mark Madden, and Scott Hudson.

Results:

1. WCW Cruiserweight Championship Match: Lieutenant Loco (champion) defeated Juventud Guerrera. 

2. WCW Hardcore Championship Match: Big Vito (champion) defeated Norman Smiley and Ralphus. 

3. Wedding Gown Match: Daffney (with Crowbar) defeated Miss Hancock (with David Flair). 

4. WCW Tag Team Championship Match: KroniK (Brian Adams and Bryan Clark) defeated The Perfect Event (Seas Stasiak and Chuck Palumbo) (champions) to win the titles. 

5. Chris Kanyon defeated Booker T. 

6. WCW United States Championship Match: Mike Awesome defeated Scott Steiner (champion) (with Midajah) via disqualification. 

7. Shane Douglas defeated Buff Bagwell. 

8. WCW World Heavyweight Championship Match: Hollywood Hogan defeated Jeff Jarrett (champion) to “win” the title. 

9. Goldberg defeated Kevin Nash. 

10. WCW World Heavyweight Championship Match: Booker T defeated Jeff Jarrett (champion) to win the title. 

My Review

Oh, man, where to begin with Bash at the Beach 2000? Certainly one of the more noteworthy shows of the Russo-penned, dying days of WCW, although obviously not for the right reasons. The company is just a complete mess at this point. They’re losing millions of dollars, title changes and storylines are impossible to keep up with, and worst of all, they’re trying way too hard to be edgy like the much more successful WWF. This is the same pay-per-view event where, a mere four years previous, WCW made the ultimate power move by turning Hulk Hogan heel and cemented themselves as the number-one promotion in America. Now they’re circling the drain and trying everything to paddle themselves upstream. A prime example how things can unravel in such a relatively short period of time.

The show is infamous for its worked shoot involving Vince Russo and Hulk Hogan, which becomes a legit shoot and drove the latter out of the company for good. It’s something I wouldn’t even bother explaining to a person who doesn’t watch wrestling and, to be honest, it’s a bit difficult for me to wrap my head around it too. In the shortest way I can sum it up, Russo cuts a worked promo on Hogan. It crosses the line when Russo goes off the script and personally insults Hogan, whose ego is famously more fragile than freshly laid eggs. Hogan gets pissed, leaves WCW, and files a lawsuit. Oh, yeah, and it’s all fucking embarrassing to watch. For all of Russo’s bonkers and distasteful storylines, his worked shoot stuff is by far his worst. Such a blatant, transparent attempt at generating Montreal-like controversy and it’s fooling absolutely no one. Just watching everyone else, from the wrestlers to the commentary team, play along with the bullshit is a huge amount of cringe.

When this show isn’t going completely off the rails, it’s dreadfully boring, which is kinda weird to say. It’s not like there isn’t a lot going on. In fact, there’s a ton going on here. Unfortunately, the majority of the storylines are twisted into oblivion to the point where it’s hard to care about any of them. I’m already struggling to remember a Scott Steiner heel turn on this show that happens for, um, reasons?!? WWF storylines could get hella twisty around this time, but they didn’t lose sight of developing characters you could invest yourself in. WCW has all the twists, but they forget the characters. They’re also ensconced in the New Blood vs. Millionaires Club storyline, which is booked ass backwards. Pitting rookies against veterans isn’t a bad idea at all, but we’re really supposed to buy the Nash’s and Hogan’s of the world as the babyfaces despite their egos and ridiculous amount of creative control being what drove the company’s decline in the first place.

Tragically lost amidst all of this stuff is the rise of Booker T, one of the bright spots of late WCW. It’s great watching him over the course of his WCW run, transforming from an anonymous half of a tag team to the super charismatic dude we know him as today. I guess that’s what makes it so unsavory that all of the embarrassing Hogan nonsense really puts a damper on his coronation here. Everyone involved tries hard to make it a special moment, and his match with Jarrett is quite good, but it all feels a little off. Thanks to the booking, the match is announced out of nowhere, right after the audience is essentially screwed out of the main event title match they paid to see in Hogan vs. Jarrett. They could’ve had something a lot more special on their hands if they invested more time Booker’s chase of the title, but then such a thing would be asking a lot from WCW at this stage.

Nonetheless, Booker’s victory is touted by the commentary team as the culmination of hard work and perseverance. That’s the truth, but it’s also a sad truth: there were a ton of hard-working people in WCW until the bitter end. For all the corporate hands involved in the company who largely didn’t care for wrestling, there were a bunch of people from the roster to the backstage employees who gave a damn and tried to put on the best show they could. When the company finally went belly up, most of these hard-working folks had little to show for it. Due to all of Russo’s machinations, it’s easy to paint late WCW as a soulless, barren wasteland of ineptitude and low morale, but there was a heart beating somewhere in there that was determined to keep the ship afloat.

My Random Notes 

Adding onto the depression, the buyrate for Bash at the Beach 1998 just two years earlier was a 1.5, the second highest in WCW history, and the buyrate for this show was a paltry 0.22, which still somehow makes it one of the most bought WCW pay-per-views of the year 2000.

Misfits in Action and The Filthy Animals have been feuding for months, apparently over which stable is more embarrassing. I’m gonna go with MIA. They’re so representative of Russo’s sense of humor. HAHA THERE’S A GUY NAMED PRIVATE STASH. YOU KNOW LIKE THE WEED HAHAHA *stabs self in the eye with a screwdriver*

This show reminds me of Mark Madden’s existence and now I’m depressed. It’s already one thing to borrow Jerry Lawler’s whole obnoxious perv schtick, but a whole other fucking thing to somehow be even less likable than Lawler in that role.

My favorite part of the show is definitely the Graveyard Match, which is the sort of late WCW content I can appreciate. Vampiro jumping off a tree! Fights in a pond! This is my kind of shit. How far was that graveyard from the arena, by the way? And how are we supposed to believe Vampiro found his way back? This is pre-Uber times and I’m curious.

God, the poster for this show is frickin’ ugly. Why is there an action figure of Randy Anderson just hanging out there?

I could say many things about the Wedding Gown match, but I’ll leave it at feeling bad for the people who put all the effort into that wedding cake just to have it destroyed. No justice for the people who bake goods for wrestling segments.

One of this show’s most unforgivable qualities is the lack of the amazing Bash at the Beach entrance set, sandbox and all. I’m not sure what lead to the finer things in WCW’s presentation disappearing but at this point you could watch Bash at the Beach and Halloween Havoc and aesthetically feel like you’re watching the same show.

I did a half-assed attempt at researching the current whereabouts of Ralphus. Still haven’t got a clear answer yet. My search led me to r/squaredscircle and I read a range of answers from people saying he died to some random person saying “He lives in Orlando with a heart condition and diabetes. He’s my uncle.” Take that info for what it’s worth.

[alexhatesmusic]

Alex reviews the song Closer by the group the Chainsmokers

The beginning to {insert your favorite crime show here} always unfolds in the same way. Someone is running through the woods, breathing heavily, and looking back over their shoulder. The viewpoint juggles between tight, close-ups to far away landscapes to point-of-view as we watch this character sprint through the wilderness. It becomes pretty evident that this person is running from something, but we never get a clear view of what they’re running from, only that it’s terrifying and evil. The escapee crouches behind a tree/fallen tree/randomunexplainedstructure and we think, “Hey, they made it!” Right as relief washes over the character (and us), the poor soul is stabbed or shot or something and we learn an important lesson: You can never escape evil.

That’s how I feel about the song “Closer” by the Chainsmokers. It had been a few weeks since I had last heard “Closer.” I was enjoying life; a soul-crushing burden removed from me. I let myself believe that I had escaped this song and perhaps I would never hear it again. I thought that maybe (just maybe) I was free.

And then some fuck tagged me in this.

First of all, let’s talk about this band. “From Lambs to Lions???” realllyyy??? You wanted to start a faux-screamo band with your fake-metal friends and your fake-metal aesthetic and overdone haircuts that are now both out-of-style and the go-to Nazi style (s/o Richard Spencer) and you call yourself From Lambs to Lions? 

Okay. 

I would have gone my whole life not knowing who you are, but because you somehow thought “punk goes pop” was still relevant and because someone out there decided, “Hey, Alex would looooooove this,” I have to watch you sing shizzy autotune and do awkward choreographed instrument dances in an empty barn (so very punk). But enough with you.

I’ve been asked before why I don’t like the song “Closer” by the Chainsmokers. Somehow the answer “well, have you listened to it?” isn’t good enough, so I’ll elaborate here. Line by line.

The song starts with what I can only assume is a walrus slapping his fin down on a piano and hitting the same two chords over and over again. A voice pops in nonchalantly and says, “Hey.”

Before we go further I’ve got to note: Some people are really talented. Some people are really, really great at singing. Andrew Taggart of the Chainsmokers is not one of these people. I thought the singing might be coming from the walrus playing the same sparse notes in the background, but upon watching this video, I learned that there is in fact a man behind the voice.

So the song goes:

“Hey, I was doing just fine before I met you/ I drink too much/ And that’s an issue, but I’m okay”

Where to start? Easy knocks: I was doing just fine before I heard this song. I would drink too if I heard your voice on the daily. Blah blah blah. Beyond that, he’s obviously setting up a narrative. There’s a love interest and he drinks a lot.

“Hey, you tell your friends/ It was nice to meet them/ But I hope I never see them again”

Hey again! Not a greaaat way to start off a relationship, telling your so’s friends to fuck off and all, but alright. That last line is super wobbly vocally, but not the worst vocal experience of the track, because that belongs to the following pre-chorus.

“I know it breaks your heart/ Moved to the city in a broke-down car/ And four years, no calls/ Now you're lookin' pretty in a hotel bar/ And I-I-I can't stop/ No, I-I-I can't stop”

We don’t really know what Taggart can’t stop doing (the narrative foundation isn’t super strong here), but if it’s singing, I implore him to just try really hard for everyone else’s sake. 

So the narrative timeline is a bit wonky here. He told the girl’s friends to fuck off, he admits that he’s a drunk and that he was doing a-okay before she waltzed into his life. They obviously moved from somewhere into the famed, archetypal CITY in the famed, archetypal BROKE-DOWN CAR; they haven’t spoken in four years; and, above all, he-he-he can’t stop. He runs into her at a bar, so what’s the logical thing to do next? Hook up.

“So, baby, pull me closer/ In the backseat of your Rover/ That I know you can't afford/ Bite that tattoo on your shoulder”

I guess my biggest thing is: If you own a Land Rover, why are you having sex in the backseat of your car and not indoors like a normal person? Don’t get me wrong, Car and Driver reviewed the LR4 and noted, “The LR4 is one of the few modern vehicles with a genuinely low cowl, and combined with the tall roof it returns the sensation of extreme roominess,” which means there’s probably plenty of head room to get head, but come on, man. You’ve had how many #1 singles and you decide to get it on in your girl’s Range Rover? SHE CAN’T EVEN AFFORD IT! YOU’RE GOING TO GET STAINS ON THE “luxury-lined interior” (s/o Car and Driver). 

“Pull the sheets right off the corner/ Of the mattress that you stole/ From your roommate back in Boulder/ We ain't ever getting older”

So your girl’s a criminal, Taggart. Wow. At least now you’re having sex inside like a normal adult and not like a high schooler trying to hide from your parents. 

So, you haven’t seen this girl for four years and you run up on her at the bar. You hook up, not only in the back seat of her car, but on a mattress that she’s had since college and your excuse is, “We ain’t ever getting older.”

Alright.

Meanwhile, the world’s laziest EDM drop is happening as the walrus continues smashing his head against the same four notes that he’s been hitting all song. 

So, let’s hear what the other side of this relationship has to say. 

Picture Halsey, sitting at the bar, sipping on a (lets say) Irish car bomb and (enter frame) ex-bf walks in. You haven’t spoken in four years. So far we know that you used to go to the University of Colorado, you stole your roommate’s mattress and somehow brought it 1023 miles to what I can only assume is LA. You own a Range Rover that is way out of your price range, your ex is a drunk who can’t sing, and you have a tattoo on your shoulder.

And action!

“You look as good as the day I met you/ I forget just why I left you, I was insane”

Okay, on that last part, make it a present form of the “to be” verb and we’ll talk. Maybe it was because of his alcoholism? Maybe it was he was a dick to your friends? Does he really look as good as the day you met him? It’s been at least four years plus however many years you were together (healthy estimate based on time at Boulder and time in Tuscon (see upcoming lyrics) is that you met at least six to eight years ago). 

What water are they drinking in the archetypal CITY? Are y’all really not “getting older?”

Stay and play that Blink-182 song/ That we beat to death in Tucson, okay

You really couldn’t find a better band to prove that you’re a badass than Blink-182? Don’t get me wrong, “I Miss You” is a hit, but you’re hitting low-hanging pop punk fruit here. 

The worst part though? SHE SINGS FOUR LINES BEFORE THE PRE-CHORUS COMES BACK INTO THE SONG. She’s the redeeming factor of this track. She doesn’t have a terrible voice. She’s pretty and provides the narrative contrast to a so far confusing son. Why in the world are you only giving her four unique lines before shoeing her into the chorus?

“I know it breaks your heart/ Moved to the city blah blah blah blah” 

Same lyrical content over again. You’ve heard this song, so you know it repeats this pre-chorus and chorus another time in a charming (eh) duet before finishing the track in anthemic shouts of “We ain’t ever getting older” over the same lazy beat and same three or four electronic chords that have plagued the entire song.

And that’s the track.

So what does this story tell us? I honestly couldn’t tell you. The narrative is cloudy and the music is too devoid of variety to be able to make anything out.

The best I can tell you is that these are obviously the rantings of a drunkard and his borderline kleptomaniac ex-girlfriend. They find each other again in the archetypal CITY and hook up in a station wagon and that is the song.

This is pop music.

I don’t like this song. It’s lyrically dumb, instrumentally inept, and vocally horrifying. 

That being said, I know a lot of people do (897,256,229 plays on spotify and counting). Honestly, there’s really nothing wrong with liking this music. The music industry has spent decades and billions of dollars engineering pop music to be aesthetically pleasing, so it makes sense that people out there like this track. I just can’t be one of those people.

At the end of the day though, I spent an hour or two typing all of this and I learned something. I really am no better than Andrew Taggart. As I said earlier, “Closer” is just the ranting and raving of a post-hook-up, drunk boy in the city. This review is nothing more than the ranting and raving of a no-hook-up, sober boy in the country. The only difference is I don’t have festival headlining appearances and 39 million monthly listeners. Which, truth be told, is probably for the best.

So that’s that. My review of “Closer” by the Chainsmokers featuring Halsey. If I had to assign it a value, I’d give it a 1.5 star out of 5. If you’ve read this far, god bless you, you crazy person. If you gave up long ago, I honestly don’t blame you.

[jamieclawhorn]

Forget a cash ISA if you want to make a million. Here’s what I’d do instead

I reckon the cash ISA is one of the deadest ducks that’s currently being offered to the investing public.

Wanting to save some money and not pay any tax on the interest sounds like a great idea, until you realise what pathetic rates of interest they’re offering these days.

I’ve just looked, and the best no-strings-attached rates I can find top out at around 1.5%. You can get a bit more for fixed-rate, fixed-term accounts — but if you don’t need short-term flexible access, that’s one more reason not to go for a cash ISA anyway.

Inflation

The UK Consumer Prices Index rate of inflation dropped to 2.1% per year in December, down from 2.3% in November. Even though that’s the lowest it’s been for two years, it’s still higher than those 1.5% top cash ISA rates — and that means investing in a cash ISA will actually lose you money in real terms.

Sorry, did I say “investing”? Obviously that’s not what it is, it’s throwing money away. But you don’t have to pay any tax on the interest and so you can avoid losing even more? Big deal.

Your chances of achieving millionaire status using a cash ISA? Well, if you save £100 in a cash ISA at these rates, you won’t even be a hundredaire after inflation when you take it out.

Putting inflation to one side for a moment, how long might it take to accumulate a million in a cash ISA?

How long?

If you can afford to stash away the full £20,000 ISA allowance per year, at today’s 1.5% interest rates you could actually do it in 38 years. But, if inflation remains at the current 2.1% for the entire period, you’d lose a big chunk of cash in real terms.

In fact, you’d have saved (I just can’t say “invested”) a total of £760,000 over those 38 years and ended up with £1.02m — but inflation would have eroded its worth to just £679,000 in today’s money.

Of course, only those with a very good income could spare £20,000 per year anyway, and they’re far more likely to be kinds of people who would go for a Stocks & Shares ISA every single time.

In fact, if you invested the same sum in a Stocks & Shares ISA and you achieved a total annual return of 6% (which I think is certainly achievable, especially now with the FTSE 100 forecast to provide 4.9% in 2019 from dividends alone), the same 38 years would result in a pot of £2.8m.

Nice result

And adjusting for the current rate of inflation at 2.1%, you have the equivalent of £1.7m in today’s money — a pretty good return on the £760,000 you’d have invested overall.

But the real test is — do investors really achieve millionaire status by investing in Stocks & Shares ISAs? And the answer is a big YES. 

At the time last year’s ISA deadline was approaching, there were estimates of around 1,000 ISA millionaires in the UK — and they did it by investing in stocks, not by watching their money dwindle away in a cash ISA. And interestingly, the best performances appear to be from investing in a relatively small number of high-quality companies. 

When should you start? How about right now?

You Really Could Make A Million

Of course, picking the right shares and the strategy to be successful in the stock market isn’t easy. But you can get ahead of the herd by reading the Motley Fool’s FREE guide, “10 Steps To Making A Million In The Market”.

The Motley Fool’s experts show how a seven-figure-sum stock portfolio is within the reach of many ordinary investors in this straightforward step-by-step guide. Simply click here for your free copy.

More reading

Searching for income? I’d take a look at these small-cap dividend stunners

Forget Bitcoin, buy-to-let and Brexit: Why I’m buying the FTSE 100

Don’t blame Brexit for the collapse of buy-to-let

Should I buy the FTSE 250’s 10 top-performing stocks of the last 10 years?

Was I wrong about the Lloyds share price all along?

Alan Oscroft has no position in any of the shares mentioned. The Motley Fool UK has no position in any of the shares mentioned. Views expressed on the companies mentioned in this article are those of the writer and therefore may differ from the official recommendations we make in our subscription services such as Share Advisor, Hidden Winners and Pro. Here at The Motley Fool we believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors.

[topinforma]

New Post has been published on Mortgage News

New Post has been published on http://bit.ly/2sHpYMD

Could you be living paycheck-to-paycheck after a $20 million payday?

Johnny Depp is involved in a $25 million lawsuit against his business managers. (Toru Hanai/Reuters)

It might be easy to shake our heads in judgment when the rich and famous struggle with money.

After all, they live a life of luxury when so many are just scraping by. They fly first class while we suffer in cramped coach seats worrying about how to pay the credit card bill when we get back home from vacation.

Playing out in the courts right now is a $25 million lawsuit filed by “Pirates of the Caribbean” star Johnny Depp against his former business managers. Depp says they mismanaged his money. The firm, The Management Group, has countered Depp spent lavishly and didn’t heed advice to curtail his ways.

“The company filed a countersuit in which it stated the actor’s lavish spending habits averaged to around $2 million a month,” reported Jason Guerrasio for Business Insider.

E! News obtained emails, as part of legal documents filed by TMG, which show a series of warnings to Depp about his spending leading to $40 million in debt.

One email from Depp’s business manager, Joel Mandel, said his “bank accounts were nearly $4 million overdrawn,” reported McKenna Aiello.

In one instance, Aiello points out, there was concerned about Depp’s holiday spending to which the actor responded in an email, “I am doing my very best on holiday spending, but there is only so much I can do, as I need to give my kiddies and famille as good a Christmas as possible, obviously within reason.”

It’s not just about the presents. It’s about your presence.

Depp’s answer to his financial woes was much like what I’ve heard from people who think they just need to make more money

Depp referenced his movies as a monetary solution for his financial crisis, Aiello reported: “According to Johnny, he was set to earn $20 million for ‘The Tourist,’ $35 million for ‘Pirates Of The Caribbean: On Stranger Tides’ and $20 million for ‘Dark Shadows.’ ”

So what can we learn from Depp?

Live within your means because you most definitely can you have money problems even with paydays of $20 million – or more.

As Captain Jack Sparrow said: “The problem is not the problem. The problem is your attitude about the problem. Do you understand?”

And as further reminders to watch your expenses, read more about how Depp dug a deep debt hole: — The No. 1 lesson from Johnny Depp’s financial meltdown

“Whether Depp’s own spending or poor management were to blame, everyday consumers (ones who don’t own entire villages in France) can learn an important lesson from the financial breakdown, experts said: Achieving a balance in how often you check your accounts is necessary to having healthy relationship with money,” wrote Maria LaMagna from MarketWatch.

— Johnny Depp made $650 million but couldn’t pay for his lavish lifestyle, ex-manager says

— The Case of Alyssa Milano & More Stars’ Lost Millions: Who’s Really to Blame for Falling Behind on the Bills?

Color of Money question of the week Are you struggling even though you make good money? If so, what lessons have you learned about your spending habits? Send your comments to colorofmoney@washpost.com. Please include your name, city and state. In the subject line put “Rich but struggling.”

Live chat canceled today I’m away this week so there won’t be a chat. Next week, my Washington Post colleague Jonnelle Marte will guest host the online discussion. Show her some love by showing up. She’s got good insight.

If you missed some chats here’s a link to the archive. Last week was a great discussion about the fiduciary rule.

If you are saving for retirement this is one rule you need to know.

On June 9, a new fiduciary rule took effect. Under this rule, financial advisers have to put their clients’ interests first when giving advice about retirement accounts such as a 401(k).

Last week I asked: What are your thoughts on the fiduciary rule and has a financial adviser talked to you about its impact on your retirement saving?

“Basic math skills, common sense and a plethora of information about low-cost investing should tell anyone interested in investing for retirement that advisers are not really necessary,” wrote David Cain of New York. “It appears this fiduciary rule is being implemented to compensate for the ignorance of the populace. Follow one’s informed instincts and the advisors will eventually ask for the business. An informed consumer knows there would be room for negotiation without obligations.”

Terri Smith of Whitefish, Mont., wrote, “I’m not sure a law will make financial advisers any better–they are still human and in it for their own profit. Here’s why I say that. After retiring from a 38-year federal career in 2012, my husband and I decided to start working with an adviser. He claimed to be a fiduciary. However, all of his advice was bad: from advising us to roll over our Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) into an IRA to putting our funds into high-priced mutual funds. We share some of the blame because we didn’t ask the right questions. Our presumption was his 1 percent fee was all we paid. We had no idea some of our mutual fund investments had additional fees as high as 1.5 percent. We were losing money like crazy–this during the years the stock market was increasing by double digits. His advice was to stay steady. We finally asked specific questions about fees and realized why we were losing money. We immediately dissolved our financial relationship with him and started working directly with Charles Schwab. We now pay extremely low fees, and are earning 6 percent to 10 percent a year. If we had it to do over, we would still be in the TSP. Safe, low fees, and a cash fund (G Fund) that pays more than any other fund.

David Kaune of Phoenixville, Pa., wrote, “I’ve worked in the financial services world my entire career — primarily with the systems used to support the business of asset management. It gave me an up-close view to the wide variety of retirement investment options and their various fee structures. For me, I see the ‘fiduciary rule’ as long overdue. I’m not saying all financial advisers are guilty of the practice, but there are/were too many ways for them to first consider getting their piece of the pie by pushing high-fee products. All too often the same investment performance could have been achieved — and often exceeded — with a lower fee product. In my opinion, the rule is a ‘positive’ for the individual investor and their hard-earned retirement savings.”

Color of Money columns this week Knowledge isn’t power. The right knowledge is power.

Stay informed about your money. Read and share my column from this past week.

— When your mom’s money problems become your own

Here are some recent personal finance newsletters in case you missed them: —A new conflict-of-interest rule for retirement savers is causing a lot of confusion

— Have a pension and a spouse? Here’s what you need to know about your benefit options.

Have a question about your finances? Michelle Singletary has a weekly live chat every Thursday at noon where she discusses financial dilemmas with readers. You can also write to Michelle directly by sending an email to colorofmoney@washpost.com. Personal responses may not be possible, and comments or questions may be used in a future column, with the writer’s name, unless otherwise requested. To read more Color of Money columns, go here.