• Atomic@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    3 months ago

    I dunno. Leave it be hopefully. The show just looked really cheap. Their clothes looked like costumes instead of actual clothes. Not to mention how poor the makeup was for everyone.

    Maybe I just prefer quality over quantity.

    • golli@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      3 months ago

      And yet it carried a $180m budget, more than something like dune part 1 (and slightly less than part 2).

      • pixel_prophet@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        3 months ago

        There is probably a lot of creative accounting happening with a lot of those types of numbers. Any Disney + ad that has something to do with the Acolyte probably gets counted in that total. Countless examples of movies and shows with way smaller budgets that end up looking a lot better than most of the recent Disney slop.

        • golli@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 months ago

          I guess marketing getting rolled into that number, as opposed to movie budgets where it is usually separate could make up for it. Or it includes lots of long-term investments similar to the huge stage surrounded by screens (“the volume”) that they used for the mandalorian. Although I am not aware that acolyte did something like that.

          Countless examples of movies and shows with way smaller budgets that end up looking a lot better than most of the recent Disney slop.

          Yeah, but that just goes to prove that money doesn’t solve every problem. It didn’t fix the writing either. The spending part is easy enough.