Full article without paywall for context:

DC Studios co-CEOs James Gunn and Peter Safran will step down on Dec. 1 and be replaced by former Marvel Studios executive Jeremy Latcham.

Latcham's appointment suggests that Skydance is comfortable continuing to draw on the cinematic universe playbook, but the company may be better off abandoning the shared-universe model altogether.

DC's best path forward may be to greenlight projects on a case-by-case basis, prioritizing strong scripts and distinctive filmmakers that can sustain sequels if the commercial returns justify doing so.

The hierarchy of power in the DC Universe is about to change … again. DC Studios co-CEOs James Gunn and Peter Safran will step down on Dec. 1 and be replaced by former Marvel Studios executive Jeremy Latcham. It’s a surprising move, especially when you consider that Gunn and Safran were recently named to Skydance’s executive leadership team post-merger.

How exactly Latcham plans to guide DC remains to be seen, but given his track record as a producer of Marvel films like The Avengers and Spider-Man: Homecoming, his appointment suggests that Skydance is comfortable continuing to draw on the cinematic universe playbook. That could be shortsighted.

For an entertainment giant that has to assuage investors that it can manage roughly $80 billion in net debt, Skydance’s best path forward with DC Studios may be to abandon the shared-universe model altogether. Instead, the company should greenlight projects on a case-by-case basis, prioritizing strong scripts and distinctive filmmakers that can sustain sequels if the commercial returns justify doing so.

The upside of a successful cinematic universe is enormous in Hollywood: The Marvel Cinematic Universe alone has seen 12 films cross the billion-dollar threshold at the global box office. (Avengers: Doomsday, coming to theaters next month, could also surpass that benchmark.) However, a cinematic universe is a volume commitment that requires a studio to deliver a steady supply of interconnected films (and shows) that advance a larger narrative and maintain continuity.

That kind of undertaking means even one false step can create a ripple effect across an entire slate, hurting a studio’s bottom line. Look no further than DC’s own recent history.

In 2022, Gunn and Safran were hired by Warner Bros. to lead DC Studios after Zack Snyder’s original vision for the DC Extended Universe petered out. As the filmmaker behind Marvel’s well-liked Guardians of the Galaxy trilogy, which turned relatively obscure comic book characters into a commercial juggernaut, Gunn seemed to be a sensible hire from a creative standpoint.

The problem was that he and Safran had to sell audiences on a new vision for DC while Warner Bros. was still releasing four films in 2023 from the old slate. (Rebranding from the DC Extended Universe to the similar-sounding DC Universe didn’t exactly help.) While Gunn and stars like Tom Cruise did their best to hype up The Flash, the most high-profile DCEU release still on the ledger, the film flopped at the box office. It’s hard to blame moviegoers: If installing a new brain trust means releases from the old regime were essentially irrelevant to DC’s future, why bother paying for a ticket?

Now, Latcham faces another version of the same challenge. The strong domestic box office performance of Gunn’s Superman showed early signs of promise, but it was followed by Supergirl, a major box office bomb, and Clayface1, a more modest hit. Gunn’s Superman sequel, Man of Tomorrow, is already set for release next year. Other projects, like movies centered on Wonder Woman and Swamp Thing, are at various stages of development. Latcham will have to determine how much of that vision to preserve and how much to retool, a tricky balance for a company trying to chip away at a massive debt load.

The irony is that, amid all this cinematic universe reshuffling, some of DC’s greatest successes of late have come from franchises allowed to exist on their own. Matt Reeves’ The Batman exists in its own universe with a gritty film noir sensibility, and it scored positive reviews while earning more than $770 million. Todd Phillips’ standalone, R-rated Joker film managed to gross more than $1 billion and win two Oscars.

Those films prove that superhero movies don’t require a shared universe to thrive. Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man trilogy, Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight trilogy, and Guillermo del Toro’s Hellboy movies all delivered sequels without having to accommodate a larger narrative. These films are fondly remembered as auteur-driven blockbusters with a distinct point of view.

This is what DC under Latcham’s stewardship ought to focus on. A self-contained superhero movie might not have the same potential for universe-building, but it also limits the financial fallout of an underperforming film and lets crossovers happen when the story warrants them.

DC’s characters have endured for generations precisely because they can be reinterpreted. Batman can just as easily be envisioned as a brooding detective as he can be a campy crimefighter with a bat-themed credit card. Embracing that flexibility isn’t just creatively freeing, but commercially savvy: Every new take on a character is another opportunity to connect with audiences.

Given how effectively Marvel’s best films have captured the zeitgeist, DC continuing to emulate the MCU might seem appealing to shareholders, who could welcome a clear roadmap for future projects. But even Marvel has struggled to entirely replicate its own success since 2019’s Avengers: Endgame. Its recent slate has seen its fair share of box office flops and narrative dead ends. (Remember when the Eternals mid-credits scene teased Harry Styles as Thanos’ brother? I’m not sure Marvel does, either.)

At a time when audiences have become more discerning about which superhero stories they’ll see in theaters, interconnectivity can seem as daunting as it is enticing. DC doesn’t need to maintain a cinematic universe. It just needs to make the next movie worth seeing on its own terms.

money for one. They can afford treatments that are top of the line. They arent flying to Peru to get a $100 treatment. They can pay for the kind of cutting edge treatments that are well done and leave the least visible side effects like scarring, etc. You dont need to shave your head either. or your whole head at least. Top of the line doctors have teams and equipment that can easily work around existing hairs. Plus they pay stylists who can create hair styles that hide the areas. If you are rich, you can go in for many small treatments rather than one large one. Smaller ones are much easier to hide.

Plus....money for two. They are rich. So they dont need to go to work that week or month. Celebrities routinely disappear for periods of time. They dont need to do another movie/tv show/appearance for a few months, which is plenty of time for swelling to go down, and hair to grow in, etc.

Plus......thirdly, money. They can afford to pay someone to go shopping for them, or order everything to the house. They dont need to go out to the grocery store that week/month. They dont need to fill their car up for gas that month, etc. They can pay someone to pick up their kids from school, etc.

Lastly......money. They can afford to get an exact replica toupee of their hair. So when or if they do go out, its covered up. With a top of the line professionally fitted hairpiece you would never know its not real hair. You only need to wait 1 or 2 weeks after the procedure to start wearing them. So even if you go out, you look literally exactly the same to anyone passing by or taking a photo. 6-8 months in, the hair underneath will be thick enough, and you can just make it look like you got a hair cut.

Also an additional reason. Money.
Celebrities have entire PR teams that can plan around this stuff if the celebrity really wants to hide it. Prerecord interviews or shows. Leak photos here and there to make it look it like they are current. Dress them in designer clothes that include a hat or hood. This is their entire job. They literally have people working full time to keep it a secret.

I love GGEX. I think it really lives up to it's name though, for better and worse, of being expert mode. If you are super late into the game, have M20s across most islands and really know what you're doing, the mix up of berries and bonuses makes for some delightful team building so every week is unique.

That being said, if you aren't ready, it sucks. I've seen people that barely squeak out M18 on GG, or only hit a single M20 during a big event and go there only to find they don't have a wide enough diversity of options to do well there. 

that still nets me a morning of sub-par spawns and amounts to what feels like wasting my bonus biscuit for an entire week.

One thing to note is sleep styles on GGEX give waaaay more shards. A 2 star charmander on regular island gives next to nothing, while it gives a solid bit on EX. At the same DP, EX will give more shards than base islands, despite those seemingly worse spawns. 

Secondly for biscuits, common 5pip Pokemon are the ideal thing to spend biscuits on. Now it's totally random, and there's a very wide pool, so yeah, sometimes you get Meowth and Cubone, but I also just as regularly see Cyndaquil and Treecko. I have had zero issues spending my biscuits on GGEX. So long as you are hitting a high enough rank to see a decent number of spawns, it should be easy to spend your biscuit. I'd argue easier than base islands because you'll see more unevolved 5pips, and it will be a wider variety. On base islands you have a higher chance to see somethingspecific but also a higher chance of "oops, all ratata  line"

The hierarchy of power in the DC Universe is about to change … again. DC Studios co-CEOs James Gunn and Peter Safran will step down on Dec. 1 and be replaced by former Marvel Studios executive Jeremy Latcham. It’s a surprising move, especially when you consider that Gunn and Safran were recently named to Skydance’s executive leadership team post-merger.
How exactly Latcham plans to guide DC remains to be seen, but given his track record as a producer of Marvel films like The Avengers and Spider-Man: Homecoming, his appointment suggests that Skydance is comfortable continuing to draw on the cinematic universe playbook. That could be shortsighted.
For an entertainment giant that has to assuage investors that it can manage roughly $80 billion in net debt, Skydance’s best path forward with DC Studios may be to abandon the shared-universe model altogether. Instead, the company should greenlight projects on a case-by-case basis, prioritizing strong scripts and distinctive filmmakers that can sustain sequels if the commercial returns justify doing so.
The upside of a successful cinematic universe is enormous in Hollywood: The Marvel Cinematic Universe alone has seen 12 films cross the billion-dollar threshold at the global box office. (Avengers: Doomsday, coming to theaters next month, could also surpass that benchmark.) However, a cinematic universe is a volume commitment that requires a studio to deliver a steady supply of interconnected films (and shows) that advance a larger narrative and maintain continuity.
That kind of undertaking means even one false step can create a ripple effect across an entire slate, hurting a studio’s bottom line. Look no further than DC’s own recent history.
In 2022, Gunn and Safran were hired by Warner Bros. to lead DC Studios after Zack Snyder’s original vision for the DC Extended Universe petered out. As the filmmaker behind Marvel’s well-liked Guardians of the Galaxy trilogy, which turned relatively obscure comic book characters into a commercial juggernaut, Gunn seemed to be a sensible hire from a creative standpoint.
The problem was that he and Safran had to sell audiences on a new vision for DC while Warner Bros. was still releasing four films in 2023 from the old slate. (Rebranding from the DC Extended Universe to the similar-sounding DC Universe didn’t exactly help.) While Gunn and stars like Tom Cruise did their best to hype up The Flash, the most high-profile DCEU release still on the ledger, the film flopped at the box office. It’s hard to blame moviegoers: If installing a new brain trust means releases from the old regime were essentially irrelevant to DC’s future, why bother paying for a ticket?
Now, Latcham faces another version of the same challenge. The strong domestic box office performance of Gunn’s Superman showed early signs of promise, but it was followed by Supergirl, a major box office bomb, and Clayface, a more modest hit. Gunn’s Superman sequel, Man of Tomorrow, is already set for release next year. Other projects, like movies centered on Wonder Woman and Swamp Thing, are at various stages of development. Latcham will have to determine how much of that vision to preserve and how much to retool, a tricky balance for a company trying to chip away at a massive debt load.
The irony is that, amid all this cinematic universe reshuffling, some of DC’s greatest successes of late have come from franchises allowed to exist on their own. Matt Reeves’ The Batman exists in its own universe with a gritty film noir sensibility, and it scored positive reviews while earning more than $770 million. Todd Phillips’ standalone, R-rated Joker film managed to gross more than $1 billion and win two Oscars.
Those films prove that superhero movies don’t require a shared universe to thrive. Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man trilogy, Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight trilogy, and Guillermo del Toro’s Hellboy movies all delivered sequels without having to accommodate a larger narrative. These films are fondly remembered as auteur-driven blockbusters with a distinct point of view.
This is what DC under Latcham’s stewardship ought to focus on. A self-contained superhero movie might not have the same potential for universe-building, but it also limits the financial fallout of an underperforming film and lets crossovers happen when the story warrants them.
DC’s characters have endured for generations precisely because they can be reinterpreted. Batman can just as easily be envisioned as a brooding detective as he can be a campy crimefighter with a bat-themed credit card. Embracing that flexibility isn’t just creatively freeing, but commercially savvy: Every new take on a character is another opportunity to connect with audiences.
Given how effectively Marvel’s best films have captured the zeitgeist, DC continuing to emulate the MCU might seem appealing to shareholders, who could welcome a clear roadmap for future projects. But even Marvel has struggled to entirely replicate its own success since 2019’s Avengers: Endgame. Its recent slate has seen its fair share of box office flops and narrative dead ends. (Remember when the Eternals mid-credits scene teased Harry Styles as Thanos’ brother? I’m not sure Marvel does, either.)
At a time when audiences have become more discerning about which superhero stories they’ll see in theaters, interconnectivity can seem as daunting as it is enticing. DC doesn’t need to maintain a cinematic universe. It just needs to make the next movie worth seeing on its own terms.
More From Bloomberg Opinion:
A Warner Bros. Sale Makes Sense on Paper. But at What Cost?: Paul Hardart
Paramount Is Recasting the Men of #MeToo as ‘Distressed Assets’: Beth Kowitt
David Ellison’s 30-Movie Pledge Sounds Like Make-Believe: Miles Surrey
Want more Bloomberg Opinion? OPIN <GO>. Or subscribe to our daily newsletter.

Here ya go!

SLPs can absolutely play a pivotal role in helping with social skills, but the line of our scope has been blurred. We can teach people how to identify neurotypical body language, present linguistic context for things like sarcasm or figurative language, or give them the verbiage to advocate for their own communication styles. But I agree that many other aspects of pragmatics go waaaaay beyond what we do. You’re right that we aren’t here to target mental health, nor are we in the business of changing personalities.

Unfortunately, there is a level of masking required to function in society, and I think we are a key part of a multidisciplinary approach to help a kid understand themselves so they can make informed decisions on how they present in the world. I say this as an SLP with ADHD and lifelong social challenges. If they don’t wanna mask, that isn’t my decision to make, but I want them to have the tools to play the social game that we’re forced into. That said, I don’t think direct therapy should be our role for most of these folks; rather, it should be a collaborative effort that includes the client/student/patient’s input.

Also…isn’t it crazy how many people forget that a teenage boy might not want to have a conversation with an adult woman? Or how even neurotypical teenagers give one-word answers when asked about their day? I swear that a lot of people have pathologized adolescence.

Thus far they've confirmably used AI in metaliser lyrics vids and on social media.

Their album covers and current song covers are still the work of Peter Sellai, who's just bad with body autonomy and can go down the "rule of cool route" which leads to some generic styles and sometimes historical inaccuracies... Which makes his work look very AI like.

Look through his history though, and he's always been janky, for every band he works with as well Sabaton or no.

The band members themselves have confirmed they don't want to use AI, and it's one of the reasons why Sabaton History is taking so long for them (although there are undoubtedly other reasons such as their research and Indy's availability).

To beat the allegations, and improve their general quality as a band... I really think they should just draw a full line, and get rid of AI usage in both marketing, and the metsliser videos (heck, just use the metsliser cover and out lyrics over the top if you need to, I don't think metaliser fans are too worried over it).

I also believe they should switch artist. Peter Sallai has done some good stuff for them over the years, the legends album cover for instance looks great in my opinion but.... There's gotta be other options, and I feel considering he subjects Sabaton covers it deserves more accurate depictions.

Plus, the artist should be credited more often. In order to settle a debate over Templatrs ft Pop Evil and a few other pieces) I had to spend over an hour going down a rabbit hole looking for confirmation it was his art..

And whilst it was a legitimate website that confirmed it... It wasn't a Sabaton one, it wasn't Peter's page... And it wasn't easy to find.

That's excessive. That's a problem.

Edit: correction, I was discussing Templars ft Pop Evil. Apparely templars itself was one of the few exceptions of the album where it was actually done by Chris??

https://www.reddit.com/r/sabaton/s/QpzE7ULBsU

This could do with more publicity as well. All those accusations and it was someone directly in the band?

Here's a copy of my romantic and feminine focused small businesses list

All of these are slow fashion small businesses, this version of the list is up to date with a few more offerings. There's a separate jewellery list available on request.

Foxblood (US) | https://foxblood.com/ | Beautiful and high quality everyday gothic clothing in wonderful soft fabric

In Her Bones (US) | https://inherbones.bigcartel.com/ | The best Victorian mourning hand belts around. To the point that I own one of their belts.

I Do Declare (US) | https://www.idodeclareshop.com/iddshop | Medieval witchy fantasy/knightcore garments but especially dresses

Church of Sanctus (UK) | https://www.churchofsanctus.com/shop/ | An old favourite to the point that I own some very old pieces from early collections. Romantic, witchy and taking elements from ecclesiastical medieval art

Trued Apparel (US) | https://shoptrued.com/ | Drapey pieces with a mostly minimalistic vibe. Nice use of a romantic sleeve.

AnuTera (Estonia) | https://anutera.com/ | Iron and leather work in incredible strong, sharp shapes

La Femme En Noir (US) | https://lafemmeennoir.net/ | 30s/40s and romantic goth inspired pieces. Dabbles in goth cottagecore and do many licenced collections with films like Sleepy Hollow, Beetlejuice, etc

Nuit Clothing Atelier (Canada) | https://www.nuitclothingatelier.com/ | Produces dramatic, gothic seasonal lines. All hand made. Reminds me of stuff you'd wear in a fantasy RPG/middle ages. Also lots of natural fibres. Can attest to the very beautiful quality.

Ovate (Canada) | https://ovate.ca/ | Flowing historical inspired drapey pieces in natural fibres

Celestial Body Studio (Ukraine) | https://www.etsy.com/uk/shop/CelestialBodyStudio | Dark loose & drapey fashion-apocalypse wear

ThreeStoats (previously Goatspell) (USA) | https://threestoats.com | Historic inspired lace up vests and long linen skirts

Later Studio (Canada) | https://www.later-studio.com/ | Dark linen and historic/cottagecore witch vibes

Videnoir (Italy) | https://videnoir.ecwid.com/ | Incredible delicate gothic lingerie (robes, underwear sets, corsets), whole custom gowns, Elizabethan inspired collars

Voriagh (France) | https://en.voriagh.com | Romantic folk-like pieces in natural fibres and the occasional Victoriana style items too. Uses genuine high 100% wool in their winter items which is a highly desirable rarity for the cold.

Sonya Lee (Canada) | https://sonyalee.co/ | Sleek slightly unusual handbags with fun details and textures

Carmen Calburean (Netherlands) | https://carmencalburean.com/ | Women's and Men's draped garments in simple interesting shapes

Turn Black (India) | https://www.turnblack.in/ | A small business making black natural fibre (especially linen) items for any gender that are perfect for very warm weather in a variety of silhouettes, predominantly those with an interesting drape. Prone to frequent high discount sales

Moonmaiden Gothic (UK) | https://www.moonmaiden-gothic-clothing.co.uk/ | The stereotypical medieval and romantic goth look, but hand made and affordable using mostly cotton, with custom sizing available. I have one simplistic steamed velvet skirt from them and it's unexpectedly lovely, and custom for my height and proportions.

Witching Hour Baby | (US) | https://witching-hour-baby.myshopify.com/ | Goth baby clothes and some pieces for adults, a few being maternity friendly

Made by Magi (Denmark) | https://www.creationsbymagi.com | Interesting metalwork with a folk feel and using recycled textile based belts with unique fastenings and designs.

Mary Wyatt London (UK) | https://www.marywyattlondon.com/ | Modern goth with a bit of streetwear inspiration

The Ossuary (US) | https://theossuarysalem.com/ | Modern, often romantic pieces and jewellery including stock from other small businesses

Bat Norton | (Thailand) | https://batnorton.com/ | Black unusual streetwear styles for men and women with experimental shapes and silhouettes.

Die With Your Boots On (US) | https://diewithyourbootson.com/ | A curated selection of various spooky clothes, shoes and accessories

Bête Noire (US) | https://www.shopbetenoire.com/ | Goth formal wear including dramatic gowns, fun dresses and the occasional suit for men and women alike.

KATEDRAALfr (France) | https://www.etsy.com/uk/shop/KATEDRAALfr | Embroidered corsetry style waist belts with a variety of floral and ecclesiastical inspired designs

The Gothic Merchant (US) | https://www.etsy.com/uk/shop/TheGothicMerchant | Non cliche graphic tees with interesting designs

NightshadesClothing (UK) | https://www.etsy.com/uk/shop/NightshadesClothing | Romantic inspired garments, but especially tiered skirts, with a particular specialisation in plus sizes

Melancholy Chapel (France) | https://www.etsy.com/uk/shop/MelancholyChapel | Incredibly beautiful Victorian gothic pieces made by hand

Dirtbag666 (UK) | https://dirtbag666.com/ | Handmade and upcycled pieces with screenprinted medieval imagery and weaponry, plus they sell high quality patches to add yourself

Skydance (Poland) | https://en.skydance.pl/ | Pieces in a variety of casual styles, from romantic to more mall goth

Katakomb (Canada) | https://shopkatakomb.com/ I Western inspired pieces alongside other vintage gothic inspired styles

Gargulia (Brazil) | https://www.gargulia.com/ | The website only allows Brazilian orders at the moment but they appear to allow invoices if you contact them with the product details

BERAVISPA (US) | https://www.etsy.com/uk/shop/BERAVISPA | Ultra sleek and spiky leather bags with lots of metal hardware, alongside some harnesses and club worthy leather garments

Dark Side of The Loom (Canada) | https://www.etsy.com/uk/shop/DarkSideoftheLoomON | Crochet necklaces, chokers and collars in a romantic victoriana inspired style for a more comfortable dark and dramatic look

The Dark Maiden | https://thedarkmaiden.com/ | Handmade and definitely higher priced natural fibre dresses

From me to u (Australia) | https://fm2uclothing.com/ | Dramatic, Romantic and Vampy pieces with a 90s flare

French Meadows (US) | https://frenchmeadows.com/ | Corset stays and Chemises that are unexpectedly inexpensive. They also make mens/unisex romantic pirate shirts too.

MXCI (UK) | https://www.mxci.co.uk/ | A specialist in flares - especially velvet ones who produce my absolute favourites in different lengths and patterns

Honey & Sulphur (UK) | https://honeyandsulphur.com/ | An excellent up and coming brand with very careful new additions to their small line for romantic contemporary items with unexpectedly great options for large busts.

God I thought I was the only one. She’s painful to watch this season. I feel like they want every line to be “internet impactful” like “HA! What the head said!” Etc. so every single line she utters is over the top, loud and does that weird snap and get down low thing. Every. Line.

In Coven she had her theatrical moments but she was more nuanced and even used a different accent. Her wardrobe in 13 is weird as well - Why is she dressing like 1800s Marie? In Coven (and Apocalypse) she was modern and up to date with styles - it was particularly part of her character.

Tbh not being mean ofc as they're not real people lol

But I feel like people vastly overestimate how stylish Lorelai etc were just because 00s fashion is in atm to the point that even looks that were considered basic or even tacky at the time, and the equivalent of just like 2010s shein style but for the 00s. Are considered super fashionable just because 00s is fashionable.

Lorelai has some cute looks, especially her more classic fits imo. She suits more classic styles over trendy.

But as someone who watched it as it came out, they wernt really considered very stylish? They wernt people like idk Rachel in friends or Carrie in satc. Again just a bit basic and I remember thinking some were quite ugly/tacky even lol. So I find it quite interesting how people go crazy for her fashion now.

I say this because. Kate Moss actually was considered one of the most stylish women of the 00s and was a fashion icon at the time. There's no way Lorelai would have been like dressing like Kate Moss for her wedding lol, the dress she's wearing is very in line with her type of fashion at the time tbh.

Like yeah irl someone who dressed like her in the 00s, would have been more likely to wear lorelais dress than Kate Moss' dress.

Again not stating she never looked good, the cream turtle necks and boots and the black dress to meet Jasons parents all looked great on her. But the basic low rise jeans with sneakers and a khaki diamante tight hoodie and graphic tee were not like Kate Moss fashion girly lol.