Today in staying the course:

Ideally, companies prefer earnings to go up.

(source: business)

You might not know this about me, but I am not a movie executive, nor do I know anything about movie executive-ing...executing? No, that sounds like you murder movies. Whatever the verb is, I don't know thing one, but I did feel somewhat smart today when the news came that Disney CEO Bob Iger announced that going forward the company would limit itself to a maximum of three new Marvel movies and two new Marvel TV shows per year. This comes as their quarterly earnings report showed a decline.

Who are these people and what are they
doing? I have no idea, and I watched
a whole ass movie about them.

Hey, get me. Did it sound like I knew what I was talking about? Largely I didn't, but what I do know is that many of the recent Marvel movies have been pretty forgettable, and this might have something to do with the sheer volume of entires that they've been cranking out. I mean, I thought I was just being sophisticated and snobby when I rolled my eyes at Endgame, yawned my way the third Guardians, and straight-up skipped the last two Ant-Mans. Ants Men? But there are two things I still don't get.

One, they already do three Marvel movies per year. Like, since the first one, Iron Man, there've been about three per year, so in many ways this new plan to stave off the general fatigue audiences feel, sounds a lot like the old plan to put out as much CGI nonsense as possible and hope we just get numb to it. 

Pictured: CGI nonsense. For real, I mean, what's even happening here?

No, we haven't yet. I see some room in the back.

But secondarily, how come it took them this long to catch on? Of course three movies in the same series is too--huh? Yes, I said series. I don't read Variety, and normal people don't say use words like franchise, or content, or IP's in normal conversation. Wait, where was I? Oh, right, over saturation. It's a thing. See? I do know business words. There have been thirty-three movies in the series since 2008. That's bonkers. We could fill the oceans with the Blu-rays of these movies. It's just too much, and without getting too critical, the quality kind of suffers, you know?

Also, how come it took them this
long to X-men? I mean, seriously. 

And look, I don't want to back in my day this, but back in my day you had to wait for things. There were fully three years between Batman and Batman Returns (the best Batman--fight me). Fourteen between The Return of the Jedi and The Phantom Menace. It was interminable, sure, but it made a new installment in a series feel, you know, special? There's just something disposable about these movies. Don't get me wrong, they've got my twelve dollars for Deadpool & Wolverine, I am a huge hypocrite. 

But are we saying that it took Disney this long to figure out that it was time to slow down with these things? And that they need to pay Bob Iger thirty-one million dollars a year to come up with a plan to scale back his studio's output? And also that that plan is to keep making three movies per year, which was kind of the problem in the first place?

I know literally every nerdy, cis white dude thinks he knows better
than the people who actually run movie studios, but I mean...do I?