Associated Press AP

Priyanka Chopra and Nick Jonas Just Revealed How He Proposed, and It’s So Romantic

You’ve probably heard that Priyanka Chopra and Nick Jonas are getting married this weekend in India. I mean, we haven’t seen wedding hype quite this loud since Priyanka’s BFF Meghan Markle was about to walk down the aisle with Prince Harry.

Sure, Meghan and Harry had a literal royal wedding, but Priyanka and Nick do have a lot in common with them: Both include a celebrity-filled guest list, international travel, and a very romantic proposal story at the start. In a new interview with Vogue, Priyanka and Nick open up for the first time publicly about how it all went down.

It happened this July, when Priyanka and Nick took a vacation to Crete in Greece. She thought it was simply a birthday trip, but he had other plans in mind—in fact, Nick had already shut down a Tiffany & Co store in London weeks prior (with his brothers) to pick out a ring.

“I got down on one knee, again, and I said: Will you make me the happiest man in the world and marry me?” Nick says of the moment. “No joke—she took about 45 seconds. Forty-five seconds of silence.” Priyanka says she was speechless, hence the silence. But Nick would not be deterred, saying, “I’m going to put this ring on your finger now unless you have any objections.”

As for how she knew he was the one…she says it was a moment on a date in Los Angeles when he told her, “I love the way you look at the world. I love the drive you have.” She explains, “As a girl, I’ve never had a guy tell me, ‘I like your ambition.’ It’s always been the opposite.”

Once they were engaged, the couple continued the celebration with a traditional Hindu engagement ceremony called a roka in Mumbai in August. “It was such an incredible coming-together of two really ancient cultures and religions,” Chopra says. “Nick did the Hindu prayers. The prayers are in Sanskrit. Even I can’t say them. But he did it in Sanskrit. The Indians were so impressed with their National Jiju [Jonas’ nickname in the Indian press, meaning ‘brother-in-law’ or ‘sister’s husband’].”

Next up? Not one but two ceremonies this week honoring both their religious backgrounds. We can’t wait.

Related: Everything We Know About Priyanka Chopra and Nick Jonas’ Wedding

What I Wore to Get Divorced

Religion has always been really important to me. Growing up as a modern Orthodox Jew, I went to yeshiva [and] but I also grew up in Brooklyn, and I would lie, cheat, and steal to get onto the island of Manhattan. I remember saving up for my first pair of Manolo Blahniks when I was 16 years old, and I made myself fit into the last pair that was on sale in my size.

[Ever since] I was a young child, I just loved clothes. I feel like clothes are really a fabulous way of expressing yourself. And it’s not about wearing something loud, it’s not about wearing something that says look at me. You can really kind of start articulating who you are and what you want to say. But there’s always this traditional part of me that kept the Jewish laws like being kosher, keeping the laws of Sabbath. And it was a really kind of interesting thing to get into the fashion industry, which—it’s not that there aren’t people who are religious in the fashion industry—it’s that, for fashion people, fashion is their religion. So it was always challenging to balance the traditional way that I grew up with the modern world [of] New York City.

One of my very best friends from growing up in Brooklyn is a girl named Rosie Assoulin. Now, Rosie Assoulin happens to be a name that people know. She’s a fashion designer and getting tons of press for her amazing gowns, but when Rosie was 19 and I was about 23, we made a pact that someday she’d make my wedding dress. So when I met the man I would marry I called Rosie and I said, “This is happening—do you still want to do it?” And she said: “Absolutely.”

It’s funny, I never thought of myself as a Bridezilla, and I didn’t become one. The one thing I cared about was my dress. It was off-the-shoulder with these long, billowing sleeves in textured silk. It kind of had this boxy, A-line top. It was actually a skirt and top, but it looked like a gown. And the skirt itself, it was fitted throughout the hips and then it kind of trumpeted out into this long train. The first time I tried the entire thing on I screamed: “Rosie! I’m a bride!” I had never thought I’d feel that bridal moment but then there it was. It was a really special moment to have it be with a friend, on Seventh Avenue, and to see it go from sketch to muslin to the real thing. It was the most “couture” experience I’ve ever had and it was really, really special.

The Jewish wedding ceremony is really the combining of two souls, that is something that is very special and sacred; the bride and groom come into a room before the ceremony and sign something that’s called the ketubah that is a Jewish wedding agreement. Once the ketubah has been signed, and the glass has been stepped on, the marriage is complete and the souls are considered joined for life.

Life is full of surprises I guess. And to make a long story short, our souls weren’t meant to be together. As much thought and effort and love that went into my wedding dress, that’s as much shock and pain that went into choosing what I would wear to my divorce, and while most girls dream about their wedding dress, I’d be hard pressed to find a woman or a man that anticipates what they would wear to their divorce. But to me, clothing isn’t superficial; fashion isn’t superficial. It’s another language for me, it’s my jargon. And it was important for me to express myself in a way that I wanted to in a situation where I felt I had no control. As an Orthodox Jew, I knew a lot about the wedding process before I got married.

What I had no idea about was an Orthodox Jewish divorce. There are stringent laws and the key part of a Jewish divorce is the obtainment of a “get.” A “get” is a Jewish divorce decree that the husband serves the wife with, and with that document the wife is then free to marry whom she likes. It is up to the husband or man’s discretion whether to give a get, when to give a get, how to give a get. It’s intense, and it’s heart-wrenching, it really is. It tore my heart out.

I walk into this room and there’s this huge conference table. The longest one I’ve ever seen. At one end are three rabbinical judges, two witnesses, and my soon-to-be ex-husband. At the other end of the table are my parents and I. One key part of the get ceremony is that the woman is instructed not to speak except for one word: yes or no, whether she accepts this decree of divorce from her husband. Being a writer and an editor by trade, I’m a communicator. Once someone takes away my first amendment rights, I’m angry. The notion of not being able to say anything was infuriating, upsetting, and I felt helpless.

But being a fashion editor, fashion is my jargon, it’s the way that I articulate myself. And so I chose my outfit very methodically. Let’s just start from the bottom up. I wore my highest black suede ankle booties from Christian Louboutin. I know Christian fairly well, and I’ve heard him speak often times about the energy that the red sole brings to a woman. It’s not just about the sex appeal, it’s about the power, and I wanted to feel power. And I think that these particular booties had a platform.

It was a crop top but my midriff was covered by my high-waisted skirt. And the sleeves zipped away from wrist to elbow, almost giving me these Beyoncé-style wings. Because I was about to be freed and I wanted to feel that Beyoncé, I wanted to feel that freedom.

I’m 5’8’’, they must have made me like 6 feet. I wanted to be eye-level or above with my soon-to-be ex-husband. And going on up from there I wore these sheer black hose because I still wanted to remember that I am a sexy, strong woman, but I still had to be fairly modest in front of the rabbis. So, I wore this dark purple Margiela skirt set. And the skirt was below the knee, which is considered modest and appropriate, and it had a matching long-sleeve top. It was a crop top but my midriff was covered by my high-waisted skirt. And the sleeves zipped away from wrist to elbow, almost giving me these Beyoncé-style wings. Because I was about to be freed and I wanted to feel that Beyoncé, I wanted to feel that freedom, I wanted to feel that I was about to fly, subtly of course. And then I wore this necklace that [jewelry designer] Jennifer Fisher, an amazing friend of mine and a warrior herself made me, and it’s a gold collar. It’s just a simple, thick gold wire that has an opening in the back, but I wore it opened in front as a symbol of freedom.

When I walked in with my parents alongside me, I started to shake. I was terrified of the unknown and terrified of what my future would hold. I still am sometimes. But at one point, the rabbis asked me to stand directly across from my soon-to-be ex-husband, and I remember thinking I couldn’t do it, I couldn’t do it I was going to faint. And then I channeled the strength of my clothes. I know it sounds silly but I thought about the power of my red soles and the sex appeal of my sheer hose and the strength of my outfit, and the freedom that I wanted, and the wings of my sleeves, and it made me strong. And I stood above eye-level. It wasn’t a competition to be taller than him, but it was a way of me saying that I’m strong, too, and I’m worthy of being regarded.

When we stood up across from one other and he looked me directly in the eye saying nothing, but handing me the now-completed get document, my heart was racing as it is now as I tell this story. But I felt this instant freedom, and all of a sudden I got excited for all the potential that was there.

Now, I’m not telling you this story to feel bad for me or to say that clothes can save the world, but that they can make you feel strong, or happy, or excited, or any number of feelings that you feel or you want to express. And that when I couldn’t speak or express myself through words, I was able to express myself through what I was wearing, and that’s really powerful.

The below was adapted from a February 2015 episode of “What I Wore When,” a Glamour podcast. The author lives in New York City.

Is the Future of the Sharing Economy Airbnbing Your Clothes?

THE PHRASE “peer-to-peer clothing rental app” might summon up an image of a millennial pink office with velvet upholstery, matte metal accents and perhaps a neon sign radiating the company’s name. But today Violet Gross and Merri Smith, the co-founders of the app Tulerie, are working out of gray conference room. This is where they come when they’re not camped out at coworking space The Wing (heavy on the millennial pink), when they really need to focus.

Gross and Smith, both 35, are upbeat and friendly, and they talk excitedly…

Why Does Hollywood Keep Missing The Mark With Public Domain Characters?

While Ralph was breaking the internet this past weekend and Adonis Creed was fighting the past, another hero with a much longer history and greater name value also made an appearance for another big screen adventure: Robin Hood. The Lionsgate film from director Otto Bathurst stars Jamie Foxx and Taron Egerton in the latest cinematic depiction of the legendary outlaw.

Unfortunately, but not surprisingly, Robin Hood bombed, debuting in 7th place at the box office over the Thanksgiving holiday weekend with a meager $14.2 million five-day haul. Given its budget, that may make Robin Hood 2018’s biggest flop. It would be easy to chalk it up to competition or marketing or as an isolated occurrence too, if it weren’t for the fact that Robin Hood is just the latest example in a long line of disappointing and underperforming films based on public domain characters.

Robin Hood, King Arthur, Peter Pan and Dracula: characters known the world over that, in recent years, have struggled to find success on the big screen. It makes sense that Hollywood keeps trying. Public domain characters don’t come with hefty licensing fees, and they have strong name recognition. Why Hollywood continues to make Robin Hood movies is obvious, but why do they keep failing?

If it were only Robin Hood, or only one movie, the answer might be easier to pinpoint. But because we’re talking about multiple characters and many movies, the answer may not be simple. But nevertheless, read on as I try to suss out why Hollywood keeps missing the mark with public domain characters.

The Characters Are Overplayed

Maybe the answer is simply that Hollywood keeps going to the well too many times with these public domain characters, and it has long since run dry. We often discuss the concept of fatigue in the superhero realm and it’s possible that audiences are just not interested in another Robin Hood or King Arthur movie. There may be a ‘been there, done that’ mentality, that the audience has seen this story one too many times before.

Even if it has been a while since the last studio attempt at these characters on the big screen, it can still feel like the last Robin Hood or Peter Pan movie was just yesterday. Also, just because superhero fatigue hasn’t set in — and may never — doesn’t mean that the same applies to these public domain characters. After all, they’ve been around much longer and have been depicted many more times. This can make films about public domain heroes feel unnecessary and exhausting. That can sap the audience of any sense of urgency to check out a new take.

The Stories Are No Longer Relevant

Hollywood’s films featuring public domain heroes might keep failing because the stories and characters no longer resonate or feel relevant to a modern audience. Tastes change and for some, these characters may feel boring, stale, or rote. Not every subject enjoys everlasting enthusiasm. Westerns aren’t what they once were on the big screen; the same goes for musicals and the same may be true of Robin Hood, Peter Pan and their public domain brethren.

However, as a counterpoint, there is a reason that these characters have endured for so long, centuries for some, and that’s because their stories are universal and evergreen. In an era of vast income inequality, you would think there would be some receptiveness to the story of an outlaw who robs from the rich and gives to the poor. And Game of Thrones has proven how much audiences will buy in for a medieval setting with fantasy elements, surely King Arthur could tap into that same interest. Plus, who among us couldn’t use an escape to Neverland?

An Overemphasis On Origin Stories

A common trend in Hollywood in general, and especially among these public domain characters in the past decade or so, is to give us origin stories. You can understand the impulse too. Hollywood studios are attempting to entice audiences to check out a film by promising them a story of these characters that they’ve never seen before. But in so doing, they may be missing what made these characters special and so long-lasting in the first place. These aren’t superheroes and we don’t necessarily need a gritty origin story for them.

Dracula Untold, Ridley Scott’s Robin Hood, King Arthur: Legend of the Sword and Pan were all origin stories, some of which were intended to start franchises but none of them did. When origin stories don’t succeed, we never get to the meat of the story we wanted to see in the first place. Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, probably the last traditional Robin Hood film, told us everything we needed to know in the opening act. These characters are legend for a reason. Show us that, not 120 minutes of prologue. Origin stories may miss the mark because they are too different, which brings me to my next point…

Modern Takes Are Too Different From The Traditional Stories

Personally, I really like Antoine Fuqua’s King Arthur, but it is not really King Arthur, and that’s indicative of another possible problem Hollywood is running into with public domain characters. That 2004 film attempted to do a realistic take that bore little resemblance to the traditional story that people have in their heads when they hear King Arthur. No magic, no grail quest, no Green Knight — it lacks many of the elements we associate with Arthurian legend.

In its attempt to give audiences something that feels fresh and new, Hollywood does gritty origin stories and gussies these public domain characters up with modern style. The result of this practice isn’t that Robin Hood or Peter Pan or Dracula look more interesting, it’s that they look like every other generic action film on the market. Shots from the trailer of this latest Robin Hood look like they are from The Matrix, complete with pillars being shot up, and moderate explosions. And while it has its defenders, King Arthur: Legend of the Sword lacks the Lord of the Rings-esque grandeur the Arthurian legend should have.

The Quality Hasn’t Been There

It might not matter that films based on these public domain characters were origin stories or that they bore little resemblance to the traditional tellings if they were good, but that has not generally been the case. To find a generally well-reviewed film about Dracula or Robin Hood or Peter Pan there’s a good chance you’re going back a decade or more. So if all of the films you’ve seen about these characters of late have been mediocre to terrible, it makes it hard to get excited about a new one.

For example, the last great Robin Hood movie for many people might be Disney’s animated film (my pick would be Prince of Thieves). If you haven’t seen that, you may not know or care about the character. Combine that with the fact that kids these days may not be reading about these characters growing up, and you have a recipe for apathy. I don’t think these public domain characters have the cultural capital that Hollywood thinks they do, but I still like to think that quality is king. Give us an unquestionably great Dracula or Robin Hood or King Arthur or Peter Pan movie, and it will be impossible to ignore.

I don’t feel as my colleague Matt Wood does that Hollywood needs to stop making Robin Hood movies altogether, because there are success stories and reasons on the horizon to hope for better. Guy Ritchie’s Sherlock Holmes films starring Robert Downey Jr. have taken a public domain character and had a ton of success with him by retaining what makes him special and making entertaining films for modern audiences. Sherlock Holmes 3 even is on the way.

Also, Disney is basically adapting all of its animated classics into live-action and Peter Pan is getting a remake from Pete’s Dragon director David Lowery. In addition, a remake of The Sword in the Stone is in development for the Disney+ streaming service. So Hollywood will continue to try with public domain characters, but it is clear that at the moment, something isn’t working and whatever it is, it needs to be addressed before any film can have hopes of starting a franchise.

Why Does Hollywood Keep Missing The Mark With Public Domain Characters?

Blended From Around The Web

 

Jason Momoa Thought He Was Up For A DC Villain During His Aquaman Audition

Secrecy is important on movie productions. Spoilers have the potential to really damage a film’s success, and so major blockbuster productions especially like to keep things close to the vest. Things were apparently so secret when Jason Momoa went to audition for Zack Snyder before Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice that the actor had no idea what role he was auditioning for. Momoa says he’d been told he was auditioning to play Batman, but even he knew that wasn’t true, leading him to believe he was probably auditioning to play a bad guy. According to Momoa…

It seems that the secrecy involved in casting Aquaman almost cost DC its Aquaman, as Jason Momoa says he initially wasn’t even going to bother auditioning because he knew he wouldn’t get the role he was being told he was auditioning for. Of course, that fact also may have given Momoa the freedom to do the audition in a way that made it even more clear that he was the right choice to play Aquaman.

It seems that after playing his “not really Batman” version of Batman, Momoa figured he was actually being looked at to play a villain, but then, as he tells This Morning, Zack Snyder called him into the office to reveal the truth behind the secretive audition.

Jason Momoa would make his official debut as Aquaman in a brief clip during Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, before taking on a larger role in the follow-up Justice League. Now, Momoa is getting ready for his first starring role in the first ever big screen Aquaman movie.

For what it’s worth, Jason Momoa probably would have been a great DC movie villain, but if he’d been cast in a role like that there’s a good chance he never would have made more than one movie. Based on the early word about Aquaman, it’s a very good thing that he was cast in that role, as the movie is quite good. We’ll find out in December.

Priyanka Chopra and Nick Jonas’ First Date Ended With…a Back Pat

The celebrations are already under way in India for Nick Jonas and Priyanka Chopra‘s wedding. But now we’re learning more about the early days of their relationship, thanks to a new interview with the couple in Vogue.

The pair’s seemingly whirlwind romance actually started with Twitter DMs and text messages way back in September 2016. “It was Nick who sent the first message,” Chopra says. That “friendly with an eye toward flirtation” correspondence eventually led to a date—drinks at the Carlyle Hotel in New York City—a week before they both attended the 2017 Met Gala as guests of designer Ralph Lauren. After drinks, Chopra invited Jonas back to her apartment where both confirmed that her mother was there…in a nightgown, watching Law & Order.

"Rei Kawakubo/Comme des Garcons: Art Of The In-Between" Costume Institute Gala - Arrivals

PHOTO: Jackson Lee

Priyanka Chopra and Nick Jonas at the 2017 Met Gala.

Still, “We hung out for a couple of hours,” Chopra says. But, it didn’t exactly end as she expected: “He patted my back before he left.”

“There was no kiss. There was nothing,” Jonas confirms. “She’s still upset about that.” But Jonas thought he was doing the right thing. “Your mom was in the house!” he says. “I thought it was a respectful first night.” Chopra, however, deemed it “too respectful.”

Obviously, the two moved past that awkward (but highly relatable) moment, though they didn’t see each other again after that first Met Gala until the same big event the following year. By date three, though, Jonas was all in. “She walks into the Chateau [Marmont in Los Angeles], and I feel an overwhelming sense of peace and understanding about this next chapter of my life.”

The next chapter starts this weekend, with many days of festivities to celebrate their union including, reportedly, two wedding ceremonies honoring both Christian and Hindu culture. And to think, it all started with a DM and a back pat.

Related: Everything We Know About Priyanka Chopra and Nick Jonas’ Wedding

Pop Quiz: What’s Your Favorite Throwback Viral Song?

The TRL Pop Quiz works like this: our editors are posed a music-related question and have only 15 minutes and just 100 words to research, choose and explain their answers. This week’s question: which viral YouTube song is your favorite throwback hit?

You can’t talk about viral songs without bringing up the Gregory Brothers. On their YouTube channel Schmoyoho, they’ve become known for their series Songify the News, manipulating videos using Auto-Tune to create viral songs. Their most successful has been the “Bed Intruder Song,” based on a news interview with Antoine Dodson. Combining Dodson’s colorful personality with a catchy beat was a homerun, as the song hit the Billboard Hot 100 and became the most popular YouTube video of 2008 with over 141 million views. It even led to the group composing the theme song for Netflix’s Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt! – Kristen Maldonado

It’s impossible to overlook Rebecca Black’s “Friday” when it comes to viral YouTube hits. I was in middle school when this tune dropped and while it received overwhelmingly negative critiques, it’s one of those songs that’s so bad, it’s good. Also, can we talk about that music video? Who doesn’t love a 12-year-old driving a convertible and a random 35-year-old man showing up to rap?! Years later we all still remember Rebecca’s name. Nobody could get this song out of their head, so it’s hands down one of the most successful bops of 2011. – Landyn Pan

There’s definitely a lesson that can be learned from Jenna Rose‘s still-catchy viral hit, “My Jeans.” It’s songs like Jenna’s that simultaneously attract criticism for their lyrics and visuals while still getting stuck in their detractors’ heads. I’m not convinced that Hannah Montana, Keke Palmer and Ashley Tisdale were actually wearing Jenna’s jeans, but I’ll keep listening to the 2010 song nonetheless. And as amazing as “My Jeans” is, Jenna’s recent video reacting to the music video is equally iconic. Matt Gehring

Remember “What Does the Fox Say?” I do. The Norwegian comedy duo Ylvis made the 2013 song as a joke, designed not to be a hit, but as promotion for their television show. That backfired because here in the United States we loved it. It’s catchy and dumb and funny, everything a viral hit should be. I love the nonsensical syllables the song lists as fox sounds, layered over the generic club beat. My personal favorite Ylvis song is actually about the mystery of Stonehenge, aptly named “Stonehenge,” but I’ve got to credit “What Does the Fox Say?” for its virality. – Leah Williams

Yes, Hugo Weaving Was Asked To Reprise Red Skull In Avengers: Infinity War

Despite being released back in April, moviegoers and Marvel fans haven’t stopped discussing every frame from Avengers: Infinity War. The Russo Brothers did the impossible, servicing a massive cast of characters, and keeping the audience on their toes through plot twists. In fact, the directors even did a deep dive by bringing back Captain America: The First Avenger villain Red Skull.

The inclusion of Red Skull is something nobody saw coming, and his appearance also brought another revelation: actor Hugo Weaving didn’t return to the role. Instead, The Walking Dead actor Ross Marquand played the villain. Fans have been wondering what happened to Weaving, and now we’ve seemingly got the answer: he was asked to return, but did not.

This revelation comes to us from Slash Film’s Peter Sciretta, who was in the audience for a Q & A with The Russo Brothers after a recent screening of Avengers: Infinity War. It was during this talk that The Russo Brothers revealed Hugo Weaving was offered Red Skull’s role in the blockbuster. They didn’t go into details about the negotiations or what went wrong, but the final result shows that Weaving ultimately didn’t return to the MCU during the film’s Soul Stone sequence.

Red Skull’s appearance and the Soul Stone scene actually ended up being one of the most heartbreaking moments from Avengers: Infinity War, and really helped to flesh out the character of Josh Brolin’s Thanos. He and Gamora travel to Vormir so that he can collect the stones for his finger snap of death, which is where they meet the Stone’s protector, Red Skull.

Ultimately Thanos must sacrifice a part of his soul in order to acquire the stone. While Gamora maintains he’s lost since there is nothing the Mad Titan loves, his insidious intentions become clear. Thanos kills Gamora to acquire the stone, and becomes one step closer to “saving” the galaxy through his finger snap of death.

Gamora’s death isn’t something anyone anticipated, especially with Marvel’s plans for Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3. But now that James Gunn has been fired and the franchise is on indefinite hold, does that mean Gamora is dead for good? And could Red Skull appear once more in Avengers 4?

All will be revealed when Avengers 4 arrives in theaters to end Phase Three on May 3rd, 2019. In the meantime, check out our 2019 release list to plan your trips to the movies in the New Year.

MoviePass Users Are Starting To See Fewer Movies Per Month

It’s been a tumultuous year for MoviePass as the company has lost subscribers and stock prominence while figuring out how to stay afloat. While a new report indicates a lot of subscribers are still cutting their MoviePass subscriptions, the movie service has seen a spot of bright news: People are using their MoviePasses to see fewer movies.

Generally, if people are using a product fewer times per month, that’s bad for business. If that movie theater or mini golf place or local restaurant sees a downturn in customers, it’s bad for business. However, MoviePass has to pay for the tickets every time its users see a movie in theaters.

Which means the only way that MoviePass could start making money is if its users started seeing fewer movies per month, which actually does seem to be the trend at this point. According to data obtained by Business Insider, last spring the average MoviePass user was seeing 2.23 movies on average per month.

Six months later, MoviePass users were only averaging .77 movies per month, which means that some MoviePass holders are not even going to the movies every month.

This is actually how the business model was supposed to work in the first place. People would get the service, go a lot in the beginning and then sort of lose interest in the app over time. Unfortunately for MoviePass, one of the problems the company faced was that the $9.95 price drop came during a time a lot of people really wanted to go to the movies.

For example, February is often a dead month at the movies, but last February when MoviePass still had a high subscriber rate, both Black Panther and Fifty Shades Freed came out and did very well at the box office. This spring and summer also saw a ton of tentpole movies get released, least among them Avengers: Infinity War. We also saw Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom and Mission: Impossible — Fallout come out, among other big releases. More people headed to the movies during the summer this year compared to 2017.

People were really excited about going to the movies and MoviePass lost a lot of money as people saw numerous movies each month. To combat this, MoviePass instituted restrictions, including only giving users a limited number of screenings and movies to choose from each weekend. There were plenty of other changes as well, and now fewer subscribers seem to be using the pass.

It’s not all great news here. Parent company Helios & Matheson Analytics is still trading on the low side ($0.02) and a slew of subscribers keep leaving the service. For now that may be stymied by fewer users actually using the service they are paying for.

That’s something at least.

Comcast Is Raising Its Cable TV Prices Again

The metaphorical war between cable companies and the cord-cutting generation is seeing no signs of slowing down, It probably isn’t helping when the former decides to keep raising its prices, either. Such is the case with the mega-corporation Comcast, which is once again raising its “Broadcast TV” and “Regional Sports Network” fees just a year after an already sizable price increase. It’s causing some customer controversy, as the fees are are affecting contracted subscribers, and they’re not the only increases.

In total, Comcast’s “Broadcast TV” and “Regional Sports Network” fees are jumping up from $14.50 to $18.25 per month, with some exceptions. For the most part, those hikes are set to take effect on January 1, 2019 across most of the company’s regional U.S. markets. Some areas may not actually see the prices raised until later in 2019, according to Ars.

To go back to last year’s fees for Comcast’s “Broadcast TV” and “Regional Sports Network” distinctions, customers saw the former’s cost rise from $6.50 to $8.00, with the sports fee jumping from $4.50 to $6.50. The Broadcast fee will now be $10 a month, while the sports fee will top off at $8.25. The prices didn’t exactly double, but that’s quite an escalation after just two years.

As well, Comcast is raising the prices for renting its tech equipment, which had also just been raised up a year previous. The company’s “Internet/Voice Equipment Rental” cost is now at $13, raised up from $11. Last year, that cost jumped up one dollar, from $10 to $11. Of course, customers can avoid paying the monthly fee by purchasing their own modem.

Note that Comcast’s price changes won’t be exactly the same in every market. Costs will vary by city as determined by which TV stations are available. So while the $10 and $8.50 prices are where things top off, some markets’ customers may not have to pay that much.

Comcast, which was formerly in the hunt to buy out Fox, is coming under fire for these price increases, which aren’t a part of the price totals that the company advertises to customers. Those under contracts with Comcast will also have to suffer the rising costs, as well as consumers who signed up with Comcast’s promotional deal rates. It seems that no one is safe.

This statement from Comcast doesn’t seem to do much to soothe customers’ worries, starting off by talking about its unrelated Internet service.

We continue to make investments in our network and technology to give customers more for their money—like faster Internet service and better Wi-Fi, more video across viewing screens, better technology like X1 and xFi, and a better customer experience. While we try to hold costs down, price changes are necessary for a number of reasons, including the continually increasing costs associated with carrying the programming our customers demand, especially broadcast television and sports programming, which are the largest drivers of price increases.

Comcast’s price hikes come during a year where the company has faced lawsuits and paid out settlements specifically regarding its allegedly deceptive advertising and its standalone broadcast and sports fees. Just this month, the company agreed to pay out $700,000 to Massachusetts residents who were duped into expensive long-term contracts that negatively affected credit scores. In some cases, the non-disclosed costs raised the bill totals by 40%.

As well, two million California residents are part of a class action lawsuit against Comcast over the so-called hidden fees, which the company claims aren’t hidden at all. Comcast has said in the past that it would be more transparent about its price hikes and the reason behind them, but some may find their explanations lacking.

There’s a petition out there at Consumer Reports for unhappy customers to fill out in the hopes that cable companies will just announce flat rates to potential subscribers without any hidden fees tacked on. There’s also a push to get Comcast investigated for reportedly hurting its cable competition in unlawful ways.

While waiting to see how that pans out, check out all the great shows coming to broadcast and beyond with our fall TV schedule and our midseason TV schedule.

Blended From Around The Web