I have to admit that I’ve never listened to a Taylor Swift song all the way through — when I’ve tried to do so, the first couple of minutes have been sufficient for me to get the message that while’s she’s reasonably attractive:
…her music sucks.
Nevertheless, it’s clear that I’m very much in the minority when it comes to appreciation of the Plastic Princess’s output.
So this article at Breitbart got me thinking:
Taylor Swift: The Eras Tour broke box office records last weekend, and left-wing Hollywood didn’t make a dime. Not one red cent. Nothing. Nil. Nada.
Ha ha.
Swift Inc. knew it had a hot property on its hands with this concert film, and rather than work through a Hollywood studio to distribute this hot property, Swift Inc. made a deal directly with theater chains like AMC. The result was astonishing. Eras Tour opened like a Marvel movie — well, like Marvel movies used to open before Marvel went woketard: $93 million domestic, $124 million worldwide. That is the second-best October debut in history. After three days, Swift Inc. already captured the title of the highest-grossing concert film in history.
Eras Tour was and is, by any measurement, a smashing success, and Hollywood was shut out completely.
Did I mention ha ha?
After the theaters took their cut, Swift Inc. got all the money. Hollywood got zippo. Had Swift Inc. gone through a studio for distribution — which is how things are supposed to be done —the studio would have eaten up anywhere from 10 to 25 percent of whatever was left over after paying theaters as a distribution fee.
The message this success sends is obvious. Why not go the Swift Inc. route if you have a no-brainer box office hit? Why not produce it yourself and cut a deal with theaters to distribute it? That way, the producer keeps all the money.
I feel the same way about Hollywood as I feel about the music recording studios — “exploitative scum who should suffer a daily mass scourging” would be a decent summary — although it must be said that Hollywood’s wokism has only been a recent reason for my loathing, which goes back decades.
Aside: I should also mention that the Eagles did the same thing with one of their albums, striking a distribution deal with Wal-Mart and cutting out the foul studio, although I seem to recall that the album sucked green donkey dicks compared with their earlier albums.
Anyway.
So as soon as the Taylor Swift movie appears on a streaming channel, I’ll give it a look. Maybe I’ve been wrong — hell, there has to be some reason why TS is so immensely popular worldwide — and she’s the new Beatles or something (although I seriously doubt it).
Open-minded, that’s me though; and I’m willing to learn.
(A baby-blue Gibson? Oy vey. It’s not a promising start.)
Never heard 1 second of her music nor have I viewed 1 second of any video of her. I’m simply not interested.
Yes, mildly attractive. So what? Billions of others are too. LOL
2 eyeballz, billions of nice faces, bodies, skweezable teetz and tasty quimz, a poor boy can’t spend too much time per.
on a scale of 0-10 She’s a 7 at best. Easy on the eyes but her music is vapid.
I’m glad that she avoided going through Hollyweird to distribute her movie. Hollyweird and Nashville gate keepers for movies, television and music are atrocious.
JQ
Can we donate her to Hamas in return for some hostages ? Just wondering….
Don’t care for her music, but I’d take a baby blue Gibson any day.
I wouldn’t mind being married to her for a week. Just not THAT week.
Its a tweenage white-chick thing. Except they now grew up and are adults.
I had 3 daughters and I could see why they liked her earlier stuff, because it was all about awkward teenage crap we all felt from time to time.
Then she never went away.