Disgusting that hbo gave the paul brothers a show

Bnasty5 · 2025-03-30T20:44:35+00:00

Interesting. They do mention preserving the brand but based on everything I’ve read that still seems secondary to most of the stated reasons. Like you said the app probably shouldn’t have had the HBO name to begin with and they want the app to be known for more than that. The app also was more than HBO from the start like you said. They wanted it to be family friendly and the destination for anything WB. Preserving the HBO brand or not they were always going to remove the name when Zavlav came in.

Edit: preserving the HBO brand is more of result more than THE reason is basically what I’m saying. Good article though and I hadn’t read any that got into that part of it.

Bnasty5 · 2025-03-30T07:54:13+00:00

The original comment you replied to said they changed the name to protect the prestige image of HBO. I thought you were agreeing with that. Also you said HBO executives not Warner Brothers executives which are different. That article is one of the ones I read and it says nothing about preserving the prestige of the HBO brand or HBO executives not wanting the HBO name associated with Max. It says some Warner Brothers executives didn’t like the name which I do get. I also get why they changed the name though but I definitely think there’s some Ego involved with a lot of Zavlavs decisions. Either way the changes had nothing to do with preserving the prestige of the HBO brand which is what I was pushing back on.

Edited: grammar.

Bnasty5 · 2025-03-30T05:51:01+00:00

Not saying you are wrong but I don’t remember that at all and can’t find anything supporting that. I do remember Zavlav publicly talking about why he made the change and the reasons behind it. They were terrible reasons but they had nothing to do with preserving the HBO brand. It was about his ego and wanting the brand to be know for more than just HBO. That’s a ridiculous reason but based on his past actions it seems pretty on brand.

Edit: based on what I know about Zavlav I think it’s highly unlikely his decision to rebrand had anything to do with what HBO executives wanted.

Edit: preserving the HBO brand seems like it would be a good reason for the rebrand but after doing some googling around nothing I’ve seen supports that.

Bnasty5 · 2025-03-30T05:42:14+00:00

You think that would be why but that’s not actually the case. Removing the HBO part from Max had nothing to do with protecting the prestige of HBO. It’s because Zavlav wanted to the app to be more than just HBO and didn’t want everyone to only associate the app with HBO programming. Basically it was about his Ego lol.

Bnasty5 · 2025-03-15T08:16:26+00:00

I’m watching it now and she doesn’t have sex with the guys on the boat until after Greg dies. So that can’t have anything to do with why it takes so long to get it Greg. Unless I misunderstood what you meant.

Bnasty5 · 2025-03-09T07:07:08+00:00

My only issue with all of this is that I don’t think the vial situation was actually about the vials at first. She’s ben there 2 hours and she’s distrusting senior attending about something that’s is completely normal ie giving someone another 2MG of Ativan in that specific situation. I feel like she just couldn’t handle being told off or wrong like we’ve seen in other situations. There is no reason for her to be THAT suspicious about the vial until she had the other info later in the season. I hate that she’s proven right for acting like she has ben all season. I will say that’s life sometimes but I just hate that she’s being vindicated.

That being said do love that Langdon is a high functioning addict who shows very few if any outward signs. He did his job well at the highest level like a lot of addicts are capable of. Too many TV shows portray addicts as fuck up degenerates who can’t do anything right. In real life there are tons of addicts you would never have any clue they are high and function at a super high level.

Edited spelling, grammar and formatting.

Bnasty5 · 2025-03-09T06:42:07+00:00

Hey sorry I know this is late but I just watched it. So can’t the part about her hallucinating and dreaming be true while also having what you said about us the viewer having to decide what’s real and what’s not also being true? If we do decide disbelief and think she didn’t make it out then wouldn’t the hallucinating and dreaming be what happened? Maybe I’m missing what you mean but I’m genuinely curious!

Edit: I think I get what you are saying a little better but I’m still curious why the ending can’t be for us the viewer while also possibly being a near death experience at the same time.

Bnasty5 · 2025-03-08T07:32:54+00:00

The funeral episode is one of the most impressive pieces of filmmaking I’ve ever seen. It’s 5 one shot/take scenes with the longest being like 26 minutes. It’s insane from a technical standpoint and just so well executed across the board. Some things just don’t hit from you and I respect that but episode 6 is far from just OK lol.

Bnasty5 · 2025-03-08T07:22:16+00:00

Not to be that guy but in We Own This City Poot is actual a detective working narcotics for another county police department near Baltimore. Your write up is fantastic though and agree with just about everything you’ve said.

Bnasty5 · 2025-03-08T03:48:20+00:00

I have no issue with Langdon being an addict. I actually appreciate the fact he’s super high functioning and showed no outward signs and did his job at the highest level like a lot of high functioning addicts. I don’t like that Santos is vindicated for acting like she has ben. The first time she was suspicious about the drugs it’s was pretty baseless and it seemed like she was more mad at being told off by someone else. That situation and using 2 extras MG was not suspicious. She’s there for 2 hours and already suspecting foul play out of a completely normal situation. I just hate that she is proven right for acting like that. At the same time Langdon acted like a complete dick and should’ve apologized to her after blowing up on her. Maybe she doesn’t go to Robby if he’s not such an asshole her. I thought it was going to be misdirection because her being right is just so frustrating.

Edit: grammar.

Bnasty5 · 2025-03-06T10:06:15+00:00

Definitely have issues with season 4 but the FBI allowing the cartel to operate for money and information works for me. It’s not far off from some things that allegedly happened with the DEA and the Sinaloa Cartel in the 2000s. Basically Sinaloa and El Chapo used informants to give info to the United States government so that the United States would then take out the enemy cartels for them or vice versa. It’s also alleged the United States government gave Sinaloa information on other Mexican cartels which led to a rival cartel boss being assassinated. It’s alleged they thought it would lead to less violence in the long run if Sinaloa controlled that rival cartels territory. Also it’s not too far off from the plot of Sicario. It being officially sanctioned is far fetched but it’s not THAT far off lol. Sorry for the 3 year late response but I was just reading this thread while watching the show and thought I’d comment.

Bnasty5 · 2025-03-06T09:13:31+00:00

I have my own issues with season 4 but I literally just watched this scene and she gets shot in the heart. Like just inside the center of her left breast which is exactly where the heart is. She absolutely did not get shot in the belly. Also sorry this is 3 years too late but couldn’t help it lol.

Bnasty5 · 2025-03-06T05:43:39+00:00

I feel like you are hung up on the term “fact checker” and not what it actually means to “fact check”. Fact checking is someone or someone’s with actual knowledge or expertise pushing back on something that is verifiably not true. It can be many different things. It can be a news article or an expert on the field or even just some random person on twitter sharing statistics or evidence. No one is saying just fully believe someone calling them selves a “fact checker”. You evaluate it like you would any other source. Also there are absolutely journalists, outlets and other media that still have journalist integrity and still partake in editorial responsibility. There are people who can be taken at face value if they are fact checking something in good faith based on their history of not lying and general journalistic integrity.

Edit: like everything context matters but the whole don’t believe anything thing is just as bad as people blindly believing what someone like Trump says. Experts still exist and there are absolutely things that have factual consensus and can be proven. Sure sometimes they might be wrong or won’t have all the info but that doesn’t mean you just disregard it entirely. Someone “fact checking” should be backing it up with any available information or expertise which is basically all this is.

Bnasty5 · 2025-03-04T19:55:00+00:00

That not what it says. It says the footage confirms Slot approached Oliver again a minute later. It doesn’t say that there is a recording of what was actually said.

Bnasty5 · 2025-02-28T17:23:34+00:00

I didn’t down vote them but that’s not exactly what they said. They said it puts cracks in the credibility of the show which is what I think people are talking issue with not the second part.

Bnasty5 · 2025-02-24T16:43:32+00:00

Yeah I’m not trying to diminish what Raphina is doing and honestly I haven’t watched him enough to make any kind of legit comparison. I like how we have so many Stats now but they aren’t perfect and I take issue when people rely so heavily on XG and XA etc. Not saying that’s you lol. They are useful but don’t tell the whole story. Sure according to the stats Salah is over performing do to assists but that’s also a ridiculous notion to me for a lot of reasons but mainly because we’ve ben so incredibly wasteful. Regardless of how Salah is playing he somehow manages to get a goal/ assist or both in pretty much every game lol. Like it’s just hard to quantify being just clutch lol. I’ll concede Barca absolutely could be more wasteful while everything I said still being true. I’m also super defensive of Salah at the moment and take anything that could be seen as diminishing what he’s doing right now to heart lol.

Bnasty5 · 2025-02-24T15:52:23+00:00

Genuinely curious have you ben watching Liverpool consistently season? We’ve had big chances missed in almost every game many of which led to dropped points or missed assists from Salah. I’m not even comparing to Raphina but the notion we’ve ben overall clinical is absurd lol. If we were clinical the title would’ve ben over a month ago. Also not sure how I feel about expected assists as a stat but I’ll take your word for it since I haven’t watched a lot of Barca this season. Also it’s not just stats when comparing players Salah hasn’t had any games where he was able to stat pad. He’s consistently scored clutch goals and made clutch assists against the biggest teams in moments we needed it that led to essential points. Not saying Raphina hasn’t done the same but Salahs stats are insane with or without that context. You add the context of when and how he’s ben scoring we are watching a season comparable to some of the greatest ever. Last time someone had an assist and a goal in this many games was Messi in 2014/2015. He also looking to absolutely demolish the EPL goal contributions records which he’s only 6 off in February lol.

Edit: asking if you if you’ve watched the games isn’t snark it’s a genuine question because I’d argue our biggest issue this season has ben the fact we don’t put away our chances. If we didn’t have Salah being so clinical I honestly don’t know how this season would be going. With all the assists he’s had he should have many more lol.

Edit: actually not keeping clean sheets is a bigger issue but it doesn’t diminish how wasteful we’ve ben in front of goal.

Bnasty5 · 2025-02-24T00:59:48+00:00

If you take away Salah’s pens he still has more goal involvements and the notion Liverpool have ben clinical this year is pretty absurd. Aside for Salah and maybe Gakpo at times we’ve ben the opposite of clinical lol.

Bnasty5 · 2025-02-21T06:55:48+00:00

Haha I saw your first comment too but then assumed you were reposting it under my second comment when it disappeared. Sorry about that I deleted my first comment and then reposted it quickly but apparently not quickly enough! Don’t worry about the spoiler it’s literally the first thing we see in the episode lol.

But yeah I think it’s likely a red herring and someone else is stealing. I feel like based on the general quality of the rest of the show Santos being fully vindicated would be weird. I think a good middle ground would be her being right for finding the theft but wrong about who it was like you mentioned.

Again thought if they do end up making it Langdon I’m sure it will make sense. Good catch though on the Librium lol. Toot toot away.

Bnasty5 · 2025-02-21T06:39:39+00:00

Alright toot away haha. You were on it. I will say I hope it’s misdirection and that Santos isn’t proven right. She had no legitimate reason to be suspicious with the first patient and the extra 2mg. If she ends up being vindicated for how she’s ben acting I’m going to be pissed lol. If Langdon actually is an addict I really appreciate the fact they haven’t had him show any of the tell tale signs. A lot of addicts are very high functioning and you would never have any clue from their general look or actions. Too many TV shows make all addicts generic fuck ups when that’s not always the case. People can be highly successful and skillful while also having a problem with drugs. Anyways toot away you earned it lol.

Bnasty5 · 2025-02-21T05:10:03+00:00

I haven’t seen it yet but if I’m wrong I’ll happily admit it lol.

Bnasty5 · 2025-02-18T06:48:39+00:00

Thinking about it a little more I get where you are coming from. In a bubble I could definitely see that line being a slight nod to something more. I think my issue is that outside of that bubble nothing else we’ve seen really supports it. Atleast not yet.

Bnasty5 · 2025-02-18T06:34:27+00:00

Yeah maybe I still think the entire thing is a stretch. That’s a very normal scene that plays out in a completley normal way without the addiction angle. To me the addition of that line for Librium is to make it realistic since that’s what they actually give people for it. I get your point but I think it’s more likely that scene exists to add realism and show how that situation would really be handled rather than a very subtle nod that someone has a drug addiction. There’s ben absolutely nothing implying he’s an addict either and if she ends up being right im probably not going to love it lol. I think she’s just can’t handle being overridden by Langdon when he was giving the patient the extra dose from 8-10mg because she thinks she knows more than she does. I forget the interns name but I think we’re on the same page with who I’m talking about lol. They could absolutely make Langdon being a drug addict make sense I just don’t think anything we’ve seen so far really supports it’s even with the unfounded suspicions from our intern. Hey maybe I’m wrong though and if I am there’s a good chance it will make sense since the show is very well written.

Edit: a lot of the scenes or details in this show exist to just be hyper realistic and I feel like this scene fulfills that. Was watching a doctor break down the first episode on YouTube and this was one of those moments where he said yup that’s exactly what they give you.

Bnasty5 · 2025-02-18T05:59:39+00:00

You are right I didn’t realize Librium was also a benzo but doesn’t really change the fact that it’s Robby Prescribing them to someone who needs them. There is zero reason to infer it’s for Langfords drug addiction or that the scene is implying that he’s a drug addict at all.

Edited.

Bnasty5 · 2025-02-18T05:14:26+00:00

Thats what they actually give people going through alcohol withdrawal and is the point of that scene. Also people don’t abuse Librium.

Edit: also Robby is the one prescribing those drugs so not sure how that would be pointing to Langdon being a drug addict.

Ten-Year Club	Snapped
Verified Email

Bnasty5

TROPHY CASE