#and bro justified it by saying that marvel gets to create multiple universes with their characters. what a great comparison because the

[idiosyncraticrednebula]

I will never understand why some people feel the need to defend the indefensible.

[holytheoristtastemaker]

Introduction Marketing is important for your career. I don't have to justify this; according to a recent survey I saw, 91% of you already agree. The more common doubt people have is in their ability to market themselves well. They see "Tech Celebrities", and then they look at themselves, and they say: "I'm not like that, when I put out a blogpost I don't get a billion likes," or "I don't want to be like them, that seems hard." The mistake here is equating Marketing with Celebrity. It's like saying your favorite restaurant shouldn't bother trying because McDonald's exists. They're two different (but related) things! You are a product. You work really hard on making yourself a great product. You owe it to yourself to spend some time on your Marketing even if you don't want to be a "Celebrity". Like it or not, people want to put you in a box. Help them put you in an expensive, high-sentimental-value, glittering, easy to reach box. Preferably at eye level, near Checkout, next to other nice looking boxes. It's not that hard to be better than 95% of devs at Marketing. The simple fact is that most devs don't do the basic things that people tell them to do. I think this has two causes: It's not code. Code is black and white. Marketing is shades of gray. A lot of advice is very generic. "Blog more". Devs often need more help transpiling Business Talk to actionable instructions. Let me try. You Already Know What Good Personal Marketing Is You may not feel confident in practicing good marketing, but you should realize you are being marketed at ALL. THE. TIME. Therefore you can be a world class expert in marketing that resonates with you. Step 1 is identifying the kind of marketing you already agree with. That's the kind that you can practice - not that other scammy, sleazy, invasive, privacy destroying kind. You've almost certainly already benefited from good marketing - by finding out about something from someone somewhere, that registered a hook in your mind, that eventually drove you to check it out, and now you cannot function without it. And you certainly want to benefit in the other direction - you want to be that thing that others find out about from someone somewhere. You want to register hooks in people's minds. You want to drive people to check you out. And you want people to prioritize working with you. One constraint you have that other marketers wish they had, is that you don't have to market to the whole world. You can target specifically the audiences you want to work for, and no more than that - meaning, as long as you are well-known in those circles, you don't need a public presence at all. Your conversion rate will be higher, and your stress probably lower (as will be your luck surface area). Personal Branding The topic of Marketing Yourself is pretty intertwined with Personal Branding. If you're like me, you've never really thought about the difference until right now. Think of yourself as a plain, unmarked can of soda. Branding would slap distinctive logo and colors on the can. And then Marketing is responsible for getting you, the freshly minted can of Coca Cola, in front of people. Branding is the stuff that uniquely identifies you. Marketing just gets your awesome in front of people. Of course, it helps marketing to have strong branding. This is why they are correlated. In fact, the strongest branding creates its own market. You don't want a laptop, you want a Macbook. You don't want an electric vehicle, you want a Tesla. I could list more examples, but I trust you understand. It's really easy to sell to a market in which you are the only seller. Almost literally shooting fish in the barrel. Nobody can compete with you at being you. The other wonderful feature of personal branding is that it is entirely up to you to create stuff that uniquely identifies you. There's no store somewhere from which you pick a brand off the shelf and put it on like a new coat. You create it from thin air, with the full dimensionality of all human personality has to offer. 7 billion humans on Earth doesn't even come close to exhausting the possible space of unique selling points you can pick. Picking a Personal Brand Your Personal Brand is how people talk about you when you're not in the room. So naturally, one way to start picking a brand is to listen to the one people naturally chose for you. Caution: you may not like what you hear! That's ok! That's what we're trying to fix. Personal Anecdote Time! If you can get a friend to tell it to you straight, good. If you can get some people on a podcast talking about you without you there, good. Or, like me, you can accidentally eavesdrop on a conversation. I swear I did this unintentionally - the first time I found out I had established an incredibly strong personal brand was when I was at a house party with 20 friends and friends of friends. While in a small group, I overheard someone behind me talking about me. They introduced me as "that guy that preaches Learn In Public". Then, at a later hour, I heard another person introduce me without me there. Then, again, when joining a new group, a third person introduced me the exact same way. I don't consider myself a personal branding expert. But I understood instantly that I had pulled off a very important feat - which was to write so much about a topic that multiple people instantly associate me with that topic. It's not critical that they say it in the exact same way, as that can be a bit creepy/culty, but it's good enough to use the same terms. If you want a more relatable example, think about how you would introduce your list of 5 people to a colleague, and compare that with how your 5 people introduce themselves. Anything But Average There are other aspects of my personal brand that don't get as much attention. But I bring it up front and center when it is relevant. I changed careers at 30. I used to be in Finance. I served as a Combat Engineer in the Army. I am from Singapore. I speak Mandarin. I've written production Haskell code. I sing Acapella. I am a humongous Terry Pratchett fan (GNU Terry Pratchett). I love Svelte and React and TypeScript. I am passionate about Frontend/CLI tooling and developer experience. I listen to way too many podcasts. The list goes on. But I have this list cold. I know exactly what parts of me spark interest and conversation. Therefore I can sustain interest and conversation longer, and people know when to call on me. You should keep a list too - know your strengths and unfair advantages. What I do NOT consider my personal brand is the stuff that doesn't differentiate me at all. For example, when asked about my hobbies, I deflect extremely quickly. I identify as a "Basic Bro" - I have my PS4, and Nintendo Switch, I like Marvel movies and watch the same Netflix shows you watch. Just like the million other Basic Bros like me. Totally basic. Totally boring. NOT a personal brand. In fact anything not "average" is a good candidate for inclusion. In particular: Diversity is strength. Adversity is strength. Weakness is strength. Nothing is off limits - the only requirements are that you be comfortable self identifying with your personal brand, AND that it evokes positive emotions as a result. I'm serious about that second part - You don't want trolling or outrage or cruel sarcasm to be your brand, nor do you want to bum people out all the time. Entertain, Educate, Inspire, Motivate instead. Identity + Opinions What I did accidentally, you can do intentionally. A nice formula for a personal brand is Identity + Opinions. A personal brand based solely on who you are, doesn't really communicate what you're about. A personal brand based solely on what you do, is quite... impersonal. People like knowing a bit of both, you should give it to them. You can be: the Mormon that teaches JavaScript Testing the Theater Nerd that loves Cloud Computing the Knitter that encourages Accessibility the Pianist that evangelizes State Machines (thanks to schwayse on my livestream for suggesting this one) In the right circles, there are exactly 1 person for each of these I just listed. I don't even have to say who they are. Identity doesn't have to be so personal if you're uncomfortable with it. Professional affiliations work. You can be "That Applitools Gal that created Test Automation University" or "That Googler that maintains RxJS" or "That Coursera Guy that loves GraphQL". It's just a little awkward when you eventually leave. I really want to give you more hints on this, but I'm afraid if I gave more examples I might limit your imagination. Don't even take this formula as a given. It's just one template. Consistency Humans love consistency. Developers REALLLLY love consistency. Here's an idea of how much Humans love consistency. We often want people who are famous for doing a thing, to come on to OUR stage, and do the thing. Then they do the thing, and we cheer! Simple as that. There's so much chaos in the world and having some cultural touchstones that never change is comfort and nostalgia and joy bundled up into one. Here's Seth McFarlane being prodded to do the voice of Kermit the Frog and Stewie from Family GUy - something he's done a billion times on a billion talk shows - but he does it anyway and we love it anyway. We LOVE when people Do The Thing! Similarly, when we market ourselves, we should be consistent. People love seeing the same names and faces pop up again (Caveat: you should mainly be associated with positive vibes when you do this). I recommend taking consistency to an extreme level. We used to do this offline with business cards. Online, our profiles have become not only our business cards, but also our faces. The majority of people who see you online will never see you in person. In most platforms, your profile photo is "read" before your username. Your username is in turn read before your message. Your message is read more than any link you drop. And so on. Therefore I strongly recommend: Photo. Take a good photo and use the same photo everywhere. A professional photographer is worth it, but even better can be something with a good story, or an impressive venue. If possible, try to show your real face, and try to smile. This puts you ahead of ~50% of users already who don't understand the value of this. Companies spend millions on their logos - why shouldn't you spend some time on it? We are irrationally focused on faces, and we really like it when people smile at us. Thankfully, because it's just a photo, it costs us nothing to smile at everybody all the time. It's a really easy way to associate your face with positive emotions. And when we see you pop up on multiple different platforms with the same face, we light up! The emotion completely transfers, and the branding is nonverbal but immediate. Real Name. Show your real, professional name if possible, unless your username is your working name. This works especially well in anonymous platforms like Reddit and Hacker News, because you are taking an additional step of de-anonymizing yourself. People respect this. Username. Your username should be your name if possible (so people can guess it), or failing which, something you intimately identify with. You should probably have the same one on most platforms, so that people can find you/tag you easily. Some, like myself, will simply use their usernames as their working names for ever. This can be a branding opportunity as well, similar to how music artists adopt mononyms and how fighter pilots adopt callsigns. Words. You should consistently associate yourself with a small set of words. Where a bio is allowed, you should have those words prominently displayed. For example, it doesn't take a lot to show up whenever SVG Animation or React and TypeScript are mentioned. You can set Google Alerts or Tweetdeck filters for this, and before long you'll just get associated. When you have your own words, like a catchphrase or motto, and it catches on, that is yet another level of personal branding. You will have made it when people start making fun of you. I'm not 100% serious, but I'm at least a little bit serious: Can people make memes of you? If so, that's a personal brand. All this personal branding will be 10x more effective when you have a Domain. You Need a Domain You Need a Domain. I mean this in both ways: Set up a site at yourname.com that has all your best work Pick a field that you are About. The first is hopefully obvious - instead of putting all your work on a platform somebody else owns, like Twitter, YouTube, LinkedIn or other industry blog, have it primarily discoverable on your site/blog. This builds your site as a destination and lets you fully control your presentation and narrative - even off-site, on Google. Having a distinctive site design is yet another point of personal branding that, because you are a dev, costs basically nothing. People come to my site and they remember my scrollbars. But the second meaning deserves more introspection: I am asking you to plant your flag. Put up your personal bat signal. Planting Your Flag I used to have a very crude, kinda sexist name for this idea: "Be The Guy". This is because I noticed how many guys were doing this: The Points Guy is the Internet's pre-eminent authority on travel perks (It is now also a 9-figure business - pandemic aside) The RideShare Guy is who Wall Street called upon when Uber and Lyft IPO'ed Science communicators have definitely caught on to this. Neil deGrasse Tyson always introduces himself as your Personal Astrophysicist. But he's completely owned by Bill Nye - The Science Guy! If you skim over "the Guy" as a gender neutral shorthand, the actually important thing about having "a Guy" is that you look better just by "Knowing a Guy". Listen to Barney Stinson brag in How I Met Your Mother: You know how I got a guy for everything?... My suit guy, my shoe guy, my ticket guy, my club guy, and if I don't have a guy for something I have a Guy guy to get me a guy! This effect is real and it is extraordinarily powerful. Just by "having a guy" for something, you suddenly feel no desire to overlap with that person's domain. You can now focus on something else. And, to the extent you do that, you are now utterly dependent on "having a guy". You're also extremely invested in your "guy" being as successful and prominent as possible, so that you look better by association. It should strike you now that being someone's "guy" is very valuable, and that this also scales pretty much infinitely. You get there by planting a flag on your domain, and saying, this is what I do. People want expertise. People want to defer to authority. People don't actually need it all the time, they just want the option just in case. People love hoarding options. You can satiate that latent insecurity indefinitely. Most people also define "expertise" simply as "someone who has spent more time on a thing than I have" (The bar is depressingly low, to be honest. People should have higher standards, but they just don't. This is a systematic weakness you can - responsibly - exploit.) Picking A Domain You don't need to get too creative with this one. You want to connect yourself to something important: Maybe something people deal with daily but don't really think about too much (especially if they know they are leaving something on the table, like airline points - it is easy to make money from helping people unlock free money). Maybe something people only deal with once in a blue moon, but when they do it REALLY hurts (so you gain unfair expertise by specializing in having repeated exposure to rare events across multiple customers). There are a bunch of these, so to narrow down even more, look out for something you disproportionately love. Look for your own revealed preferences - search a topic in Slack or Twitter and see how often you talk about it. Look up your own YouTube watch history. An ideal domain for you is something that seems like work to others but you have fun digging into. With everything you love, there are things to hate. Find something within what you love, that you are ABSURDLY unsatisfied with. That love-hate tension can fuel you for years. For any important enough problem, there are plenty of experts. Do you feel like you haven't narrowed enough? Shrink your world. Be an internal expert at your company for your domain. This also helps you focus on things that bring value to a company, and therefore your career. It's also a very natural onramp to being an external expert when you leave. Claiming Your Domain Picking your domain is 90% of the journey. Most people don't even get that far. To really clean up, be prolific around that domain. Show up. To every conversation. I kind of joke about this as "High Availability for Humans". By showing up consistently, you become part of the consideration set. Humans don't have room for a very wide consideration set. It's usually 2. If we make lists and try really hard, we can get up to 10 (see: the Oscars). Think about the last time you purchased soap. You probably buy 1 of 2 brands of soap. But there are 100 on the shelves. They just weren't in your consideration set. So they never stood a shot. So your goal, as a brand, is to make it in. You do that by being Highly Available. By the way, we also have huge Availability Bias when it comes to recall. We conflate "first to your lips" with "being the best". We're also really good at backwards justifying what we just called the "best" by pulling up a bunch of bullet point reasons that have nothing to do with being "first to your lips". (Did I mention we like consistency?) It's your job to earn the right to be the best (and to define what that means), but also entirely within your control to be considered the best, which is what claiming your domain looks like. Give Up Freedom - For Now The flip side of planting your flag is you shouldn't plant it anywhere else. People like to see commitment. It implies, and usually does mean, that you have no choice but to be a domain expert. You signal commitment by giving up optionality. This is 100% OK - what you lose in degrees of freedom you gain 10x in marketing ability. The secret is - and don't tell anyone - that if you pick a Domain and it doesn't work out, you can still pivot if you need to. Nobody's going to hold it against you, as long as you don't pivot too often. If you really aspire towards more general prominence, you will find a much easier time of it if you first prove yourself in a single Domain. Blogging Blogging is usually mentioned up there in the "Marketing for Developers" space. I will always encourage you to blog - but don't fool yourself that pushing a new post every month alone will do anything for you by itself. There's just a lot of generic, scattershot advice about how you should blog more. These are usually people trying to sell you a course on blogging. (Except Steve Yegge!) The fact is Blogs gain extra power when they are focused on a Domain. CSS Tricks is a well known blog in the Frontend Dev space, and, as you might guess, for a long time it's domain was entirely CSS tricks. (It's expanded since then). Like everything else you follow, it's all about Signal vs Noise. Blogs let you get more juice out of that Domain Name you own, by constantly updating it with fresh content. You can also use it to feed that other most valuable online business asset: your email list! Overall, it is just a good general principle to own your own distribution. Twitter is a form of microblogging. It lets you export data easily and your content shows up on Google without an auth wall. All good things. But you're still subject to a feed. Definitely not a distribution you own - but it can be worth it to make the Faustian bargain of growing faster on a platform (like Twitter) first, then pivoting that to your Blog/Mailing list when you have some reach. Growing a Blog/Mailing list from zero with no other presence is hard. Marketing your Business Value vs Marketing your Coding Skills Business Value A large genre of "Marketing for Developers" advice basically reduces you to an abstract Business Black Box where your only role and value to the company is to Grow Revenue or Reduce Cost (or Die Trying?). I call this Marketing Your Business Value. This is, of course, technically correct: Technology is a means to an end, and ultimately your employer has to make ends meet and justify your salary. It is especially in your interest to help them justify as high a salary as possible. Have at your fingertips all the relevant statistics, data, quotes, and anecdotes for when you solve major product pain points, or contributed a major revenue generating/cost saving feature. You should be able to recite your big wins on demand, and frame it in terms of What's In It For Them, because you will probably have to. Managers and Employers are well intentioned, and want to evaluate you fairly and objectively, but often the topic of your contributions comes up completely without warning and out of context, and you want to put yourself on the best footing every time. Consider this Applied Personal Branding - success is when your boss is being able to repeat everything you say you've done to her boss, to advocate for you as fullthroatedly as you should do yourself. If you can, get it down to a concise elevator pitch - Patrick McKenzie is fond of citing a friend's Business Value as "wrote the backend billing code that 97% of Google’s revenue passes through.” Enough said. Coding Skills Unfortunately, this is not at all helpful advice for people who have yet to make attributable business impact through their work: Code Newbies and Junior Devs. Sometimes, even as a Senior Dev, you are still trying to market yourself to fellow Devs. These two situations call for a different kind of marketing that is underexamined: Marketing your Coding Skills. To do this other kind of marketing, you basically have to understand the psyche of your target audience: Developers. What are they looking for? There are explicit requirements (those bullet points that companies list on job descriptions) and implicit requirements (subconscious biases and unnamed requirements). You can make it very complicated if you want to, but I think at the core Developers generally care about one thing: that you Do Cool Stuff. Some have an expansive definition of Coding Skills - even if you've done something totally unrelated, they'll easily assume you can pick up what you need later. Others need something closer to home - that you've Done Cool Stuff in a related tech stack. If you're marketing yourself for employment, then the Risk Averse will also want to know that you have also Covered Your Bases - That, alongside the upside potential of hiring you because you've Done Cool Stuff, the downside risk of you being a bad hire is minimized. Do you know Git? Can you solve FizzBuzz? Is your code an unreadable, undocumented mess? This is covered if you have shepherded a nontrivial project from start to finish, and have people you can ask for references. If instead you're just marketing your projects and ideas, then downside matters less - it's easy to walk away. The definition of Cool really depends on your taste, but people's interests are broadly predictable in aggregate. If you look at tech sections of popular aggregator sites like Reddit and sort by, say, most upvoted posts in the past Year, you can see patterns in what is popular. In fact, I've done exactly that for /r/reactjs! Even if your project is less visual, and more abstract, you still need to explain to the average programmer why your project is Cool - it solves a common/difficult problem, or it uses a new technology, or it has desirable performance metrics. The best Cool Stuff will be stuff you have been paid money for and put in production, and that people can go check out live. If you don't have that yet, you can always Clone Well Known Apps (automatically Cool) - or win a Hackathon (check out Major League Hacking) - or Build Your Own X from Scratch, another popular developer genre. Portfolios vs Proof of Work Usually the advice is to assemble your Cool Stuff in a Portfolio. Portfolios do 2 good things and 2 bad things: Portfolios display your work easily and spells out the quick takeaways per piece - You control your narrative! Portfolios help you diversify your appeal - if one project doesn't spark interest, the next one might! In this sense it is most like a Stock Portfolio - you're diversifying risk rather than adding upside. Portfolios look skimpy without quantity - meaning you can feel forced to Go Wide instead of Go Deep, Quantity over Quality. Portfolios overly bias toward flashy demos (which doesn't really help if you're not trying to focus on Frontend Dev/Design) You can and should buy designs if design isn't a skill you're trying to market - it gives your projects an instant facelift which is generally worth multiples of the

http://damianfallon.blogspot.com/2020/04/how-to-market-yourself.html

[furederiko]

Surprise, surprise! It's the 2nd Random-News-Digest of the month... Just like last one, it's gonna be a shorter one than usual...

Disney Live Action

Production for Guy Ritchie's "Aladdin" has begun in Longcross Studios, UK. FINALLY. It was planned to start in Summer, but then casting was reportedly hit a hurdle, and it was postponed until August. I guess it's now September, then! Will Smith personally announced this via his social media, and it was later 'reblogged' by Disney.

The announcement also confirmed the core cast of the live action remake. As we all know, Mena Massoud and Naomi Scott will play Aladdin and Princess Jasmine, while Smith himself will portray the iconic Genie. Marwan Kenzari is playing the antagonist Jafar, while the Sultan is played by Navid Negahban. This core cast will be joined by several new characters, that to my knowledge, were NOT in the animated movie (unless my eyes have been deceiving me all these years): Jasmine's handmaiden, played by Nasim Pedrad. She might likely serve as the comic relief, considering Pedrad's comedy background; Jafar's right hand Hakim, played by Numan Acar. I seriously hope his inclusion doesn't mean we won't be seeing Jafar's sneaky parrot Iago. THAT would be a huge miss, especially when most Disney live action remakes so far, have been very close to the original animated versions; and last but not least, surprise surprise, Prince Anders, who will be played by Billy Magnussen. Yeah, I know what you're thinking. Turns out the movie still NEED a white actor anyway. Anders is said to be Jasmine's suitor and potential husband who hailed from Skanland. This isn't the first time Magnussen plays the only white character in a foreign-setting movie, with the very recent "Birth of the Dragon" as his first.

To be completely honest, I'm still on the fence for this particular remake. Not just because Ritchie's "King Arthur: Legend of the Sword" somehow tanked in the box office. I'm not keen on Smith's casting, and that hasn't changed. There is however, one thing that easily caught my interest: Alan Menken is providing the score, and is in charge with bringing the original songs from the animated movie! Now THAT... is an okay, for me. Not just him, recent Academy Award winner Benj Pasek and Justin Paul (the guys who did "La La Land", in case you forgot their very specific names) contributed two new songs for the movie. The first one might be Jasmine's very own solo song, not unlike Dan Stevens' Beast in "Beauty and the Beast". The other one? With Magnussen's musical background, I have an inkling suspicion that he's going to perform the other new song. Anyways, here's hoping we'll hear more about this movie soon.

Star Wars

Meanwhile, the hurdle that stumbled "Aladdin", had probably moved on towards another Disney property. Yes, in case you haven't heard, Colin Trevorrow will no longer be directing "Star Wars: Episode XI". Creative differences, as they say. As they ALWAYS say. Certainly not unlike Chris Miller and Phil Lord, right? Lucasfilm themselves announced the termination of their collaboration with Trevorrow, so it's not just a whistleblown rumor, but an actual thing.

What happened to Trevorrow? The reason is not perfectly clear until now, but I suspect it has something to do with the performance of his latest work, "The Book of Henry". Not only it had a tremendously weak opening, but its stars were a no-show during the preview too, sending all the wrong message. Apparently, that might truly be the case. Vulture has published a follow-up report since then, and revealed that the split wasn't really a mutual one. It is said that Trevorrow was fired because he was... NOT easy to work with. Other reports claimed he had a strenuous relationship with Lucasfilm president Kathleen Kennedy, that led to her decision to boot the brash and overconfident Trevorrow out of the project.

It's now unclear who will take over Trevorrow's seat. Fans immediately began throwing around names, from the most obvious like J.J. Abrams, Ava Duvernay, to the unlikeliest. The latest report from Deadline, revealed that "Star Wars: The Last Jedi"'s writer/director Rian Johnson is currently on top of the shortlist. No confirmation yet on whether he will take it or not. Judging from Johnson's genuine enthusiasm to the franchise, how much he enjoyed working on his "Episode VIII", and the studio's positive response to it, I won't be surprised if he ends up really stepping in to get a second run. That's the most logical turnout, anyway. Thankfully, the final capper of the modern trilogy isn't expected to begin production until January 2018 (for a May 24th, 2019 release). So it's not a similar situation to what happened with "Han Solo: A Star Wars Story" (tentative title), which have almost completed its filming when Ron Howard entered. If Lucasfilm can get a replacement for Trevorrow right away, the new director will have 3 whole months to adjust the script with new scripwriter Jack Thorne, while preparing for the directorial role.

By the way, have you heard that Joseph Gordon-Levitt might be in "The Last Jedi"? Oh and yeah, there's an "Obi-Wan Kenobi" movie on the works too, with Stephen Daldry signed as director. Will Ewan McGregor return to portray the amazing Jedi master? These are important questions for another day...

James Bond

"Bond 25" has been confirmed, with actor Daniel Craig returning (for the last time?) as the lead. Problem is, the 2019 movie no longer has a distributor, after the agreement with SONY expired with "Spectre". Should fans be worried? Probably not, because several major studios like Warner Brothers, FOX, and Annapurna have entered the bidding for the movie. And they are not alone, because surprise surprise, even Apple and Amazon are among them too. Apple's the one that surprised me, but Amazon? Not really. Just like Netflix, they have been on a streak in producing their own movies and series lately. Adding a franchise as beloved and well known like "James Bond", would be a possibility too big to ignore for the company. Sure, it turns out the franchise doesn't give much profit to its distributor, but I imagine the appeal would benefit it anyway. Let's just wait and see how this turns out.

DC Films

They don't call it Warner Bros, if it's not thinking and talking big, and/or doing things and trying anything without snob and grand ambition. That's mostly why discussing about DC Films tend to be on the... 'annoying' side for me.

You've already heard the recent news, right? WB has approached the great Martin Scorcese to... *drumrolls* create a stand alone solo movie for "The Joker" (obviously not the title, for now). According to recent report, this project will NOT take place in the current DCEU. Which means, WB is already planning on a replacement, just in case the Zack Snyder vehicle continues to perform weak. A good idea and all, but isn't it too ambitious? I get it though, they want to be 'different'. But I digress. The fact is, WB is STILL trying to ape or mimic if not downright copy Marvel's current situation: having multiple Cinematic Universes (Marvel Cinematic Universe, FOX's, SONY's Spider-Man, and now Marvel TV, and Netflix) due to the movie rights being hold by various owners. WB is the single owner of DC properties, but it also wants to have the same thing: that questionable DCEU, and various anthology-style spin-offs NOT bound/related/connected to it. Apparently, having David F. Sandberg's "Shazam" being worked by New Line Cinema (also a WB label), and CW TV Network with its "Arrow-verse" is simply not enough! Yikes... greedy much?

Here's where it got more interesting. Scorsese and Todd Phillips won't be using Jared Leto, because apparently, WB is already thinking BIG, setting their eyes on a much promising name: Leonardo Dicaprio. Make sense really, because Dicaprio has been Scorsese's golden boy in the past few years. Will he take the job though? That one is unclear, leaning towards UNLIKELY (he's currently eyeing a marvel-ous project instead LOL). It was also reported that Leto has not taken this turnout comfortably. I might have totally disliked his pointless-exaggerated performance as the supervillain in "Suicide Squad" (he's a metaphor of how bad the movie as whole), but seriously... Poor Leto.

Speaking of the 'Skwad' movie, "Suicide Squad 2" has possibly found its writer and director! Gavin O'Connor, who previously worked on... WB's "The Accountant" (classic WB, always rotating around their own), has been signed to pen the script and has also entered negotiations to direct. It seems WB is keen on getting the script done right away. The filming however, will not be able to start until Fall 2018, due to Will Smith's other commitments. Unless... speculation and all, Smith is written out from this direct sequel, allowing for production to begin earlier. This is WB, so you can never tell what its bigwigs are thinking, huh? Beside, they need to service an angry Jared Leto, and a growingly important Margot Robbie before the two walks away, so sidelining Smith could still be a possibility in their agenda. What do you think, would you like to see a Deadshot-less Suicide Squad? I'm fine either way, because I'm totally NOT watching this sequel (I'd rather see one for "The Accountant", to be honest). I've already made a fatal mistake watching the first movie anyway... LOL.

All eyes are on Patty Jenkins now, who has just officially signed up to write, direct, and produce another "Wonder Woman" less than 24 hours ago. And not just for double the initial prize, but so much more, which probably explains why the negotiation took a lot longer than usual. Will she continue to do wonders with this sequel for the DCEU, being the only director who had accomplished that so far and all? Her upgraded demand, was it justified, or perhaps a little too much? Can the sequel really do better, or was the first movie's success just an example of an unexpected flux, a one-time-wonder influenced by US current political condition? We'll just have to wait and see...

X-Men Universe

Drew Goddard almost had his major comic book adaptation with SONY's "Sinister Six". He even left behind Marvel TV's "Daredevil" project for that. But then SONY decided that the Spider-Man universe was working, and rebooted it... again. So that super villain team up movie only remained a vague dream. Well, dream no more, because Goddard has finally found a project with prospect.

It's back with Marvel, folks. Not Marvel Studios, nor Marvel TV (although he remained as executive producer for "Daredevil" and "The Defenders") though, it's for... FOX. Yes, according to The Wrap, Goddard has been signed to write and direct that "X-Force" movie. I guess this implies that Joe Carnahan is no longer involved, huh? Pretty sure HE was going to direct and not Goddard. This "X-Force" movie is expected to not only serve as yet another FOX' ensemble movie (they have X-Men, and New Mutants so far), but also a direct spin-off to "Deadpool". That means we can expect Deadpool, along with Domino, and probably Cable to be in it too, right? Then why not just call it... "Deadpool 3"...? O_o

This news can either be good or the opposite. I liked most of Goddard's work before this, so I think it's in good hands. But I'm also quite surprised how "The Defenders" that he executive produced, ended up becoming such a bore. Suffice to say, I'm not so sure about it anymore now. Let's just wait and see...

Oh, one more thing. Turns out Jessica Chastain might NOT be playing Empress Lilandra Neamani in "X-Men: Dark Phoenix". Who is she playing? Don't know and don't care, please consult the nearest X-Men movie enthusiast near you. LOL. Then again, this COULD be related to that statement by writer/director/producer/whatever Simon Kinberg, who stated that this movie would be 'grounded'. Considering the movie will somehow be set in Genosha, which character is your lucky guess? Magneto's other child Polaris? Great goodness, I sincerely hope it won't be FOX' version of Scarlet Witch... O_O

Marvel Studios

Filming set can be a tricky little thing. Sometimes it reveals a little too much, even if it isn't really supposed to (mostly due to fans taking candid pictures and all). The scene of Tilda Swinton's Ancient One's death in New York for example, hit the internet months prior to "Doctor Strange" official release. Such is with the case of UNTITLED 2019's "Avengers 4". Had the movie was filmed concurrently with "Avengers: Infinity War", things wouldn't be as bad. Problem is, Marvel Studios decided to do these two movies one at the time. Production for "Infinity War" had been wrapped in July, and continued with the next movie sometime last month. That means, any behind the scene takes that flew around the internet lately, automatically serve as spoiler for "Infinity War". Regardless of how big or small.

*WARNING: the following paragraphs include reports that might/could(should?) be considered spoilers for "Infinity War". So if you're avoiding that with all cost, then please skip the remaining Marvel Studios category and just move on to the next one.*

Look no further than the actress who was spotted on set late last month. Yes, Gwyneth Paltrow's presence on set, pretty much confirmed she would be returning as Pepper Potts in the movie. Problem is, she was NOT alone. She was doing a scene with... Robert Downey Jr., Mark Ruffalo, and Jon Favreau. You see where I'm going with this, right? That's right, it's proof that Tony Stark, Bruce Banner, and Happy Hogan all make it out of "Infinity War" alive. Meanwhile, a Marvel Studios actor showed up and joined the production of now-Ron Howard's "Star Wars" spin off. Paul Bettany! Wait, why is he NOT among the Marvel Studios set? Could it be because... something bad truly happens to his Vision? It's uncertain for now (the super tall Bettany can still join production later on), but it's one of that undesireable possibilities.

Then there's that generous inspiring "Day of Giving" charity video from the cast of "Avengers 4" and "Ant-Man and the Wasp", dedicated for the Hurricane Harvey's survivor in Texas. It might seem harmless, but pay attention to which actors are included there. We got Scott Lang's Paul Rudd (a spoiler too, though it's pretty much logical if we consider the release dates of his solo sequel), and Hope van Dyne's Evangeline Lilly. Make sense, right? But hold on, who's next...? Zoe Saldana (the spokeperson in behalf of everyone) and Karen Gillan, reprising their roles as Gamora and Nebula. Please don't tell me you think they are in the "Ant-Man" sequel! And how about Don Cheadle, who was also spotted in Atlanta precisely a week ago? Last but not least, a Japanese-esque set was build for the movie, hinting that the movie will probably visit an East Asian country (like it did before with South Korea). The interesting part though, is because it is rumored to feature Scarlett Johansson's Natasha Romanoff taking down criminals! And she might not be alone, because someone else is reported to be joining her, but with a new moniker. MCUExchange reported that... Jeremy Renner's Clint Barton will also be in the movie, but no longer as Hawkeye. He's going to be in it as the elusive anti-hero... Ronin, due to being "in a very dark place". Japan? Ronin (a term for a master-less Samurai)? That's too much to be a coincidence.

In case you're somehow missing out on my points here... Pepper, Iron Man, Hulk, Happy, Ant-Man, Gamora, Nebula, War Machine, Black Widow, and Hawkeye/Ronin are pretty much confirmed to be in the movie, while Vision probably isn't (or is he?). More are coming too! Do you think that's NOT enough to be called spoilers? I rest my case.

Journalist's set visit, is equally dangerous when it comes to harbouring potential spoilers. Usually released a few months before a movie premieres, it's primarily used as an effective marketing tool. Yet it's also a double-edged sword, because while it can generate buzz and attention, it also unleashes a horde of new information that... depending on the case, probably should've been best to be kept as secret. That's right folks, before I move on to the next category, let's talk about "Thor: Ragnarok" quickly!

Arriving alongside that catchy bright-colored individual character posters, embargo for set visit reports has also been lifted. That obviously led to various discoveries and scoop from the movie itself, like: when the movie is set, how it connects to or is influenced by previous Marvel Studios movies, the overall plot rundown and confirmation of a flaming Marvel character, what happens to an absent character, to Asgard, and the antagonist. If you're not privileged with extra time to read the original sites one by one, you can head on to Birth.Movies.Death for a quick digest of what has been reported there so far. I must say, though some of these are really great, there were also some 'sensitive' facts that I would've wanted to discover as I watch the movie late next month (or November 3rd, in other countries). A double-edged sword indeed, and I've already stumbled upon it rather intentionally. Here's hoping this won't ruin my movie-going experience...

And yeah, you can already pre-order your tickets for the movie right now. Don't pretend like you don't give a darn about it, I KNOW deep inside you're already itching to see this movie right away. Am I right? LOL.

Marvel TV

To be honest, I've been thinking about dropping, or at least skipping the upcoming 5th season of Marvel's "Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.". The 4th started great, but it ended in a rather disappointing way. Top that with my genuine distaste to that Inhumans series (it premiered on theatres here, but apparently only for one/two days before it's burried under the sand), the WTF disappointment that was that highly anticipated Netflix crossover mini series, and basically... it's an instant JACKPOT.

Well... good job AoS, now you've got my attention (again). Why? Due to the news reported by Entertainment Weekly. Yes folks, the witty and pointless chitty-chatty Lance Hunter is back!!! Hunter is among my very few instant favorites of the show (the other is... duh? Iain De Castecker's Fitz. What can I say, I have a soft spot for Brit smartasses LOL), so of course this is good news. At least, it works in... convincing me to reconsider my initial plan to drop/skip this season.

The big question though, is how and/or why is he back? And what about Adrienne Palicki's Bobbi Morse? The pairing was ceremoniously retired from the show back in Season 3, to pave way for their own series Marvel's "Most Wanted" that sadly never saw the light of day. We never even got to see the pilot episode, while a wasted potential like Inhumans got an IMAX debut. Talk about one truly unfair world, huh? Ever since then, Palicki had scored a leading role in FOX's and Seth McFarlane's scifi comedy "The Orville", so she likely don't have time to join actor Nick Blood's return. Now that I think of it, this fact does make me more worried instead. I can only hope that Hunter's not coming back to be killed off, nor joining the new season because Bobbi has been killed off-screen. That would be an aggravating disservice to both characters. Then again, this IS Marvel TV we're talking about, with the tendency to kill a character as much as they pleases. Should we even expect better? Not really... *sigh*

DC Television

Last we heard, DC was developing a "Titans" series for their very own dedicated streaming service, that is set to be available in 2018. And apparently, it's slowly progressing nicely. Greg Berlanti, the Godfather of the Arrow-verse at CW, is set to executive produce, eventhough it's still unclear whether this new show will take place in the continuity to the other CW superhero series.

Casting is moving forward too, with young teenage actress Teagan Croft being the first cast member to portray the supernatural hero Raven. I haven't heard of Croft until now, mainly because she's more popular in her home country Australia, being part of the soap opera "Home and Away". I've said this over and over again, that Australian show is basically the gateway to Hollywood for Australian actors. Croft is just another name in the long list of talent who are its alumn!

Comparing this casting to the animated series "Teen Titans GO!", it seems "Titans" will be slightly 'younger' than the CW shows. But that's not the case, due to the next casting announcement. African-american actress Anna Diop has been cast as... Koriand'r, an alien character more popularly known as Starfire. Intriguingly, 29 years old Diop is obviously way older than Croft, which means the show could be taking an 'older' route instead. With Dick Grayson's Nightwing and not Robin being said to be the team leader, he might hold the key to this question. Don't forget, Grayson IS famous for being romantically connected with Starfire.

Turns out, the 'older age' route is what the show is aiming after all. This was confirmed by the official casting of Grayson, and he's a name that I doubt any of you would expect. 28 years old Aussie Brenton Thwaites, is DC TV's choice for Robin/Nightwing (apparently, it's still unclear)! If you think his name sounds familiar, that's because he's yet ANOTHER "Home and Away" alumn, and has been featured in numerous Hollywood movies. He was the lead human character in the mythological sci-fi "Gods of Egypt", and his most recent work was "Pirates of the Carribean: Dead Men Tell No Tales", where he played the son of Orlando Bloom and Keira Knighley's characters. Calling him a rising star would be an understatement, because he's been everywhere.

I have to admit, I had a pretty unfair reaction when I first read the news. I actually shouted, "Is this for real? What WERE they thinking?". No offense to Thwaites, I think he's a good actor to his own's worth, but certainly NOT Dick Grayson material. A Tim Drake/ Red Robin or Damian Wayne/ (new) Robin perhaps, but not a Dick. He somehow lacked the physicality and charm I've always expected from former circus performer Grayson, so this casting news was a HUGE let down for me. Then again, this has always been DC's game of beef against me. The company always casts actors I'm not too fond of when it comes to my favorite characters *sigh*. Poor Steven R. McQueen, since the beefier 'dreamboat' is the guy I've been rooting for the character *sigh*. He's around the same age to Thwaites, and has always wanted to play Nightwing (and openly public about it). I guess his stardom (departure from "The Vampire Diaries") just wasn't in the right alignments when DC was casting for this show. Too bad... (dear Steven, please try out for that Nightwing movie instead. Or head over to Marvel Studios for better result!)

Following Thwaites, Alan Ritchson and Minka Kelly joined the series as recurring characters Hank Hall and Dawn Granger. The two is famous as the Hawk & Dove duo, and the plan is for them to have a spinoff series in the future. Wow, already thinking ahead, huh? Their casting also pretty much confirmed that the series is definitely not a "TEEN Titans" adaptation, but the grown-up version.

I was initially kind of genuinely excited about "Titans", because it's going to debut one of my favorite DC characters (mind you, I only have a few). Unfortunately, thanks to this casting... not anymore. To be fair though, the prospect of me paying a subscription to an entirely new streaming service that ONLY has DC titles, is VERY low anyway. My days with DC shows have long gone, I've dropped "Arrow" after Season 2, and never could catch the appeal of the other CW series. "Justice League Action" is the only thing I'm currently following, and clearly that says a lot. Why would I subscribe to a service that I won't probably use? Seems like DC TV is just not fated to be with me...

Super Sentai

As wildly enjoyable and vastly entertaining as it may be, "Uchu Sentai Kyuranger" has passed its halfway point last month. That means it's most logical for TOEI to start moving forward with their plan for next season. Thanks to that, a very strong rumor for the upcoming 2018 series has landed. Courtesy of the ever-helpful and informative Power Rangers aficionado Dukemon. This is not officially confirmed for now, but as proven by past years, it's usually close to being highly reliable. How so? It's customary for TOEI to announce the title sometime around the month of September, so details about it are usually already set to be promoted via toy catalogues.

The source of this rumor, J-Hero, recently posted a report that somehow combined two previous rumors into one. Said rumors were: a vehicle-themed series to celebrate Go-Onger's 10th Anniversary; and a Fairy-Tale themed storyline that incorporated folktale characters like Momotaro, Cinderella, and others. J-Hero claimed, that the title for the next Super Sentai series might be called "Shinsha Sentai Racerranger", with a mix-match theme of Cars + 3D + Fairy Tale. The quantity of members are down to 5 personnels, and the story involves them using racing cars to travel through time, and meet Fairy Tale heroes of Legend.

There were additional technical details as well. Similar to Go-Onger, the Racerrangers will still use 3D cars, but they are also a hybrid of mythical creatures from various Fairy/Folk Tales: Shisha, Kyuubi, Kirin, Buffalo, and Mermaid. Transformation device will be called Mechanitime Changer, with the form of engine and a clock. The collectible gimmick is a 'number 8', which falls in line with the year it's released (2018, duh? And the pattern of decreasing number pattern with 10/Zyuohger, 9/Kyuranger, and then 8) and the quantum theme (8 is also generally used as symbol of Infinity). These members belong to the "Speed Association of Time", and has a logo called RCT (Racing Club Timer). Perhaps, something similar to those Space Police/Quantum Patrol on "Doraemon"?

Considering Kyuranger is currently doing a time travel twist, and 2015's "Kamen Rider Ghost" had already approached the use of historical figures (referring them as... heroes), this rumor might very well be true after all. Do you think these sound interesting? I think it does. At least, TOEI is trying to do something new, not just rehashing the same concept over and over again. That alone will easily persuade me to give it a chance. Of course, all we can do for now is just wait and see. Here's hoping it would be as good if not better than Kyuranger...