Yea the first one is very good and also draws out the comedy very well (I am now thinking about the character insisting the biker woman was not alive cause they had decided to use her as a bomb bait now... my gosh), maybe the second one the weakest (as I said, baby scene? But it has some gems too, like the mexican luchadores yelling "Yea, save the pussy!" when they see the survivors arriving), but the third one, in my opinion, has some gems which made me put in on top (I won't be able to forget the robot literally crushing bartender's "repopulation sex" idea ... and the mariachi!)... Except they don't. They accuse him of not having told he went out after witnessing the assault deep in the night (which he did to escort his lover to the car, but his neighbor only saw him as he returned, alone, around three am). The first victim, unseen in the movie, was killed after the assault. They then accuse him of having been where the second victim was dancing on the table while noone remembered the real killer. Movie is average, averagely enjoyable, but this isn't a plot hole. This, I think: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0105589/ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Moment_of_Romance_II Well... if you speak about paid services, they will pick what they feel like they want to pay for. Now, if I have to pay 15 euro a month for Netflix, it's fine. If it's that plus another 15 for Disney's service and maybe another 15 for Sky or whatever... well... I may want to abstain. Found it: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0234837/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzhou_River_(film) Hope that was it. You might be right, Disney has a lot of the content people want to watch (at least it does in the USA, as it might have sold that content for the foreseeable future in other markets). On the other hand, it doesn't have all the content you might want to watch. If the content creators all go alone and try to build what Netflix built, they may indeed bury Netflix (I don't see it despite the article you posted, which sounds pessimistic: Netflix is still adding new users and having profits), but people won't have one single platform where they might find what they like. If the majors are greedy (lol) they might set their price target too high and people will not want to pay up. They would for one platform, they won't for three. The obvious winner is .... Vpn companies selling subscriptions to people looking to download torrents? Writing from Italy: this movie was indeed strongly criticized for its rethoric, which was read by some as courting the extreme right, or the "law and order" field, even though the movie was reportedly filmed to expose hate and its consequences. I think the movie is a complex one. The policemen are indeed bastards, it's difficult to argue the movie really presents their point of view. Maybe the point of view of that kid who gets into police "because it's an honest job". The two fathers are terrible parents, I don't believe what you see is really MRA from our point of view. A father who leaves his kid alone to go beat some immigrants up does deserve to get his child taken away. Yes, the movie is filled with anti immigrant rethoric. However ... Are the neo Nazis there the good guys? Is the political right guy the good guy? Is the Tunisian immigrant who occupies an apartment in a housing project the bad guy? Yes, this movie became popular with angry young people from the Italian big cities, children of the housing projects who have incarceration rates similar to black people in America and who use soccer hooliganism as a way to express their anger. Unlike America, cops in here come from the same exact background. Unlike America, people see the State as the bad guy, because they think the state should provide (jobs, housing, care). Like America, people feel easy to direct their anger towards immigrants. But I think it's difficult to see this movie with American eyes. It's best seen from the eyes of a young Italian who lives in a big city. Even here, the question "Is ACAB a rightist movie?" didn't find an unequivocal answer yet.