Stefanie Sparkleface

Again, for a year now, John Cena has been saying his body is breaking down and that's why he's retiring. If he can't be the John Cena everyone expects, then he doesn't want to keep going. Gunther already retired Goldberg in the same exact fashion. He's the absolute worst person to have won that tournament for John Cena, because if he gets in there with Cena, he's going to do to Cena what he did to Goldberg. He even tells Cena what he's going to do to him. Then he does it. And Cena, because he's no longer able to be the John Cena everyone remembers anymore, because as he's been saying for the last year his body is breaking down, finally found a thing he can't overcome, so he taps, against all the things he espoused for years - because he is not that man anymore, and accepts his fate. Obi-Wan Kenobi smiled before Darth Vader killed him too. Say what you will about the story being simplistic or the work not having technical merit (the sleeper was pretty loose, yes), but there is a difference between "there's no story" and "I didn't like the story", as well as "I thought they should have told a different story". Also, that "hive mind" comment was unnecessary. You're not arguing with people who are never going to see your post, so unless you're trying to paint certain people here with a specific brush, you didn't need to say that.

We don't know the conversation that was happening between Cena and Triple H that was happening when that laugh happened, so you're projecting pre-existing bias onto the situation. Gunther literally said what he was going to do with his promo from Raw last week. Cena has been saying the whole year in his media interviews that his body is breaking down. Gunther just put the final straw on Cena's back and broke it. If you are reading a novel and skip pages to get to the next chapter, and you find the novel unsatisfying, that doesn't mean the novel was bad. WWE has plenty of problems, and deserves to be called out on them, but this feels more like grinding an axe.

Sol Ruca is cool. I must have missed something in the main event. I think my monitor cut out.

Note to self: don't be openly happy again

This is exactly who my neighbor is. He's been my neighbor for 13 years and doesn't call me anything other than "White Girl" (except around when I have guests, which is when he remembers my name, unless it's my daughter, who is "Little White Girl"). I would fight an army for him.

THAT POP TART HAD A DREAM, TO BE EATEN BY CATHOLICS

My thought is that Skydance wants the TV assets so it can spin off WBD's TV assets with Paramount's, and send the debt with the TV spinoff company while maintaining the libraries of both Warner Brothers and Paramount. Otherwise, nothing about it makes sense if they intend to keep the TV assets running. It's like buying a boat that's in the process of sinking.

On the other hand, the Pop Tart Bowl lets you get to eat a mascot, and really, isn't that the fun of it all?

It really depends on the market analysis as well as a cost/benefit analysis. Running two different streaming services requires different implementation/branding and infrastructure, so it could be done, but Netflix would likely rather have tiered levels of service on their already beefy infrastructure than running two different services. By getting Warner Brothers' vast library, that becomes a matter of "if you pay for the ad-supported tier, you get this, if you pay for the standard tier, you get this, if you pay for the 4K tier, what the heck we'll throw in HBO and selected Warner Brothers archives", then at that point the 4K tier becomes a higher value proposition than just a higher resolution and a couple of extra screens. Netflix is at a certain point where content acquisition is more about retaining customers month-to-month rather than bring in new ones, so adding in value like HBO's shows and Warner Brothers' theatrical releases first could be the carrot to keep Netflix. On top of that they generate revenue by licensing out older content to other platforms to Pluto and Tubi that you might not subscribe to a service for but you'd watch if it was free (like a lot of companies are doing with pre-2000 content). There's still a lot of ways this could unfold, of course, but I wouldn't be too surprised to see them go that direction.

Wouldn’t surprise me if we saw the same chatter!

I mean House Party got a Criterion release, so hold on to hope.

Warner Archive printings are the real thing you might want to be concerned about, I'd have to imagine Netflix has no real interest in the upkeep on those.

It's going to depend on what Netflix does with the linear channels and with HBO Max. I doubt Netflix makes this buy for anything other than the Warner Brothers library of content. Pretty much all chatter is that Netflix has no interest in the linear channels and would move forward with WBD's initial plans for the Discovery Global spinoff to move TBS, TNT, TruTV, Food Network, Discovery Channel, et al into its own company. I would be stunned if Netflix decides to keep any linear assets aside from HBO, but stranger things have happened. (Pun somewhat intended.) AEW was already slated to go with the spinoff. The real thing that might trigger an antitrust is if they shutter HBO Max, but it'll depend on how strong other competitors (Disney+/Hulu, Amazon) are. I don't have numbers in front of me but I think if Netflix commits to licensing out a good amount of pre-purchase Warner Brothers content instead of keeping it for their own uses, they'd dodge an antitrust bullet.

Yeah, stakes like title shots (or the Rumble being a two-night event) make things a bit easier to handle. When it was like Hell in a Cell being its own event with as many of three of them in one night, good grief that was rough, and it really weakened the gimmick.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO WITH MYSELF NOW THAT BRIGHTON IS IN THE TOP 5 okay girl breathe breathe AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH