It's in page 2 because he's not saying anything new he hasn't already said before, and by the sound of it, its not going to happen any time soon, if ever.
But when someone tells you "this is Coke, it has a coke label on it..." do you question him? "Is this the original coke? Is anything different?" No, you take the knowledge as its presented. Most of the world does not know to question IMAX. They say its an IMAX theatre, so before you see how small it is, why should you question it?
Most people who are scammed don't know they're about to be scammed, As large as this internet controversy is right now, I would guess that 90% or more of moviegoers have no idea, and won't know they paid more for a small screen until it happens to them personally
Warner Bros is in the Christopher Nolan business. Yes, technically Nolan could have no part in a third film if he wanted to, but I would say realistically the worse case scenario is that he produces the film.
Yes, technically, but I'm saying realistically, the worse we can expect is for Nolan to produce
I like to complain about it. Plus... its a really slow news night
he has a very original take on the Noah's Ark story
We verified the location information of Dr. Drew's test screening the next day with Paramount. He saw it.
And if the test screening review appeared elsewhere, we would have linked it either in Page 2 or an early buzz roundup. We don't steal other people's content. You can't just reprint a complete review from another website.
As I said before, I don't believe Raimi intended this interpertation, but I think it works well for 90% of the movie. Its not without its flaws however. But I look at it as more fun than serious.
As for the headline change: I felt like the question headline was leading people to jump the gun and leave comments like "This is ridiculous, sam raimi didn't intend that!" I wanted to make it more clear that this theory should be fun, and not aggressive. Hopefully that way people would be more receptive to consider the theory and not go into it antagonistically