Before I log off for the year, wanted to say thank you to everyone who subscribes! We just passed a big milestone on Substack and are so appreciative of all our followers, subscribers, and supporters.

This one touches on everything from the “binge versus weekly” debate to the “football trap” to “hire the opposite” trend to the “why I don’t judge creative exec hires” to “price to earnings hype” to “UX changes" to…well, a bunch more! All in one place! entertainment.substack.com/p…

Plan to put out an article tomorrow about all the turbulence at that one streamer, explained in one chart. (Who am I kidding? There’s absolutely NO WAY I keep it to one chart. We’ll be lucky if my “visual of the week” includes fewer than ten bespoke charts!)

Here... theankler.com/dcs-clayface-c…

And @mfrankreporter is out as well with terrific analysis on superhero films and budgets. “In Hollywood’s superhero business, $150 million at the box office can be a disaster. Or wait, can it be a triumph? It turns out it all depends on how much you spend getting there.” Amen.

Damn. That’s both excellent analysis and excellent writing. And the article has a terrific visual as well. (I should admit that I was interviewed for the piece, but that doesn’t change the fact that you should read it.)

That diminished Disney+ output reflects a wider downsizing across the streaming landscape—but also, perhaps, an overcorrection to an overcorrection by a service that’s searching for a happy medium in the speed of its streaming assembly line.”

But seriously, this line: “Each year, Disney delivered several live-action originals between the two franchises. Now the company appears to be cutting that cadence to one or two titles per year. theringer.com/2026/10/15/tv/…

I had a short line in TV flops, bombs and misses article on how Disney+ went from making too many shows to almost none. Well, the always-must-read @BenLindbergh of the @ringer is out with a piece expanding on and fully-explaining that.