• "Bohemian Rhapsody," the legendary six-minute single by Queen, is what many call the greatest song ever written.
• It's still one of the best-selling rock singles of all time, voted The Song of the Millennium in 2000, and recorded in the Guinness Book of Records as the No. 1 song of all time.
• The song and the band inspired the box-office hit biopic starring Rami Malek as Freddie Mercury. 
• Watch the video above to learn how this song that no one thought would be successful became the best rock song ever recorded.

Following is a transcript of the video.

Narrator: It's a song you've all heard at least once. And it was probably not like anything you've heard before. I'm of course talking about Queen's legendary single "Bohemian Rhapsody," a song that, even 40 years later, is one of the most influential and memorable songs of our generation. But have you ever wondered why this six-minute single that no one ever thought would be a hit became one of the most famous songs ever written?

"Bohemian Rhapsody" was a song long in the making, but it officially kicked into gear in the summer of 1975, when Freddie Mercury began writing it as an operatic piece titled, "Real Life." After the success of their last album "Sheer Heart Attack," Queen was given complete creative freedom and control over their next piece. And it's obvious that they took that creative freedom and ran with it.

Irwin Fisch: "Bohemian Rhapsody" had a very rare effect on people, which is that it was one of those songs where the first time you heard it, you hadn't heard anything like it. In my image is that it's the kind of song that makes you pull over to the side of the road, because you go, "What the devil is this?" Very few songs have done that, and that did.

Narrator: And he's right. "Bohemian Rhapsody" was different for its time and still is today. Unlike most pop hits that lasted around three minutes, it was a six-minute pop single that has an opera, an opera, right in the middle of the song.

Fisch: It actually in some ways hasn't been influential, because it was so fully realized that it was a little bit of, "Where do we go from here?" It managed to become a ubiquitous part of the culture and something that never gets off the radio and never stops in the karaoke bars and is used in movies, and it's all over the place because nobody has still done anything that sounds like that.

Narrator: One of the reasons why "Bohemian Rhapsody" sounds so different is in its structure. The song is neither an a cappella, a ballad, an opera or rock. It's actually all of them in one song. Fisch: It advanced a tradition of suites in pop music, meaning not a continuous song, not a verse, chorus, verse, chorus, bridge structure, which was the norm. A put together group of different songs, in essence. So if people refer to "Bohemian Rhapsody" as a song, that's a bit of a misnomer. It's actually three or four songs.

Narrator: "Bohemian Rhapsody" can actually be divided into five different sections: an a cappella introduction. Ballad. Opera. Hard rock. And finally a reflective coda. It was also highly unusual for a popular single to not include a chorus, while combining different musical styles and lyrics. It is by definition a mind-blowing genre bender.

Fisch: This innovation started around the mid-'60s. It started basically with the Beach Boys and the Beatles. Beach Boys with "Good Vibrations." The Beatles with "A Day in the Life." Epic songs that pieced together different ideas into a cohesive whole. Queen, in "Bohemian Rhapsody," took that idea and pushed it way over the top.

Narrator: And to see just how over the top they went, you need to look no farther than this operatic section of the song. The lyrics name characters from classical Italian theaters, quotes from the Quran, and the demon Beelzebub. And this section that sounds like it's been sung by a roomful of choir was actually just three people: Freddie Mercury, drummer Roger Taylor, and guitarist Brian May. It's not just the vocals; there's harmony everywhere, even in the instruments that almost sound like echoes. This technique was heavily inspired by a production method called the "Wall of Sound," developed in 1960 by producer Phil Spector. He put masses of musicians in one room, three keyboard players playing the same part but in various similar instruments, like the harpsichord or an electric piano, and recording them together to create a sound the likes of which had never been heard before. That was exactly what Queen wanted to accomplish.

Fisch: When people talk about what a great song "Bohemian Rhapsody" is, they're talking equally, or even more, about the production.

Narrator: To achieve the sound that they wanted, Queen used a technique known as reduction mixing, also called ping pong recording. Most of the pop songs you listen to today use a lot of audio tracks, each track reserved for different instruments and vocals, combining to make one song. But back then, technology limited the amount of audio tracks that could be used. For example, Beatles' legendary "Sgt. Pepper's" was recorded on an analog four-track record. And to fit more than four tracks in a four-track record, they would record all four tracks, then bounce all their tracks into one, record, bounce again, and repeat. The bounce tracks would combine all of the tracks into one, meaning if you raise the sound of that particular track, it would raise the volume of all the individual tracks within.

Fisch: Part of the great challenge of that process was that you had to make commitments to your mix, to the blending of everything as you went along, so you needed to have a lot of foresight and a great image of where you were going. By the time Queen made "Bohemian Rhapsody," we were up to 24-track tape. By today's standards, that's still not many tracks. They had so many vocals and they had so many layers of guitars. I've heard that they had about 180 individual tracks that got put onto a 24-track, two-inch tape.

Narrator: But of course this method of bouncing tracks came with its own challenges. Once it's done, you can't go back to just fix it, like we can do now.

Fisch: Two-inch, 24-track tape that they were working on, it was a physical process. It was a razor blade. It was an edit block where the tape would sit there. You would slice through the two-inch tape. You would cut out what you wanted to cut out. And you would splice it together with a little piece of white tape. Now it's very easy digitally. You chop it on the screen. If you made a mistake, you can fix it. Everything now is non-destructive. Everything they did then was destructive, so it took a lot of commitment and a lot of knowledge and a very, very intense, deep skillset to be able to piece that stuff together and have it sound smooth.

Narrator: Just how much tracking went into the song becomes more evident when you remove the instruments to just listen to the vocals.

Fisch: And before the Beatles and before the Beach Boys, a song was a song. It needed to be presentable on the piano. If you sat down and played "Bohemian Rhapsody" from start to finish on the piano, you probably would say, "Wow, that's really wild and interesting." But you probably wouldn't say that's going to be a hit that's gonna endure for 40 years. What made it that had a lot to do with the sound they created.

Narrator: And of course, it's hard to talk about "Bohemian Rhapsody" without talking about the man behind the song, Freddie Mercury, because this song was his baby, his brainchild. Unlike most of Queen's songs that were written collaboratively in the studio, this was a song that, according to the guitarist Brian May, was "all in Freddie's head" before it even began recording.

Fisch: Freddie Mercury talked about the song in an interview as "experimentation in sound." I think that could be taken to mean that the experiment was to see if he could get what was in his head, his sonic preconceptions, out there. I don't think it was the kind of experimentation where they went into the studio to just see what would happen, because he was famously buttoned-up and had the production and the notes and the arrangements and sound of the thing in his head. I think the experiment was really about seeing if something unique could be realized in the studio. An important reason that "Bohemian Rhapsody" resonates and has resonated for over 40 years is that it embodied something very intense, which is Freddie Mercury's personality and life. That record is an oral extension of Freddie Mercury's self-consciousness without shame. It's music in some ways the sensibilities are out of the closet. As a performer, there hadn't been a Freddie Mercury before Freddie Mercury.

Narrator: And perhaps beyond all the notes, lyrics and performances, what truly makes "Bohemian Rhapsody" great is that it embodies what every musical piece should be: the talent and the drive to push boundaries and create something that brings us together, even 40 years later. In a time where pop songs just all generally sound the same, maybe that's why we still can't stop listening to "Bohemian Rhapsody." With just this one song, Freddie Mercury and Queen became something that very few artists managed to achieve: a legend.

Join the conversation about this story »

• TV critics don't always get it right, and they've been particularly off-base on a few Netflix original series.
• Here, author Caroline Frost lists eight Netflix shows that critics hated but that are actually worth your while.

With Netflix's library of original content getting ever larger, it makes sense that people will tend to follow their favorite critics in deciding what to watch and what to avoid.

However, critics don't always get it right. Though shows like "The Crown" and "GLOW" have hit the spot with critics and viewers alike, plenty of other titles have left the critics cold while winning over the public.

Here are eight Netflix original shows that were dead on arrival according to their critic scores on Rotten Tomatoes, but that are actually worth your while. And it's not just me saying so, judging by their impressive audience scores.

SEE ALSO: The best blockbuster movie of every year since 2000

'Bloodline'

Critic score: 61%

Audience score: 81%

What critics said: After an absorbing start, this family drama set in the Florida Keys stumbles to an increasingly "muddled" denouement, with no one left to like, apparently. 

Reasons to love it: Even within a strong cast including Sam Shepard, Kyle Chandler, and Sissy Spacek, Ben Mendelsohn's charisma sets him apart and makes us root for him despite his role of official black sheep. The beachside family home is the stuff of gothic novels, the twists keep coming and, whenever the story lulls, the seascape along the Keys remains spectacular. 

'13 Reasons Why'

Critic score: 51%

Audience score: 71%

What critics said: While many critics joined in the general praise for the hit first season, nearly as many panned the second as a weak diversion from its initial strong premise. Some called it "unnecessary."

Reasons to love it: Beneath its glossy "90210"-like sheen, this goes further than any of its competitors in exploring the complex emotions of teenage years, with season two expanding on the show's initial mystery to give young grief the respect it deserves.

'The Good Cop'

Critic score: 52% 

Audience score: 84%

What critics said: This latest incarnation of the eternal cop duo, this time father and son, presents nothing new, only time-honoured cliches.  

Reasons to love it: The show brings some laughs, some mysteries, and a comforting, couch-sinking antidote to all the dark crime drama presented elsewhere. Plus, the chemistry between leads Tony Danza and Josh Groban makes for an easy watch. 

The three best-selling games of all time are all 100 million-plus sellers.

The list spans nearly four decades of video games, starting in 1984 and ending in 2013. It crosses every major game console released since the original Nintendo Entertainment System, and a wide variety of game genres. 

The most recent entrant to the 100 million-plus club — "Grand Theft Auto 5" — is the newest of the top three, and it's available on the fewest platforms: Just Xbox 360, PlayStation 3, PC, Xbox One, and PlayStation 4. Having passed 100 million copies sold in the past few months, it's the youngest of the three games. 

Here's the full list:

SEE ALSO: The 50 best video games of all time, according to critics

3. "Grand Theft Auto 5"

The "Grand Theft Auto" series is a juggernaut, but "Grand Theft Auto 5" is an especially big deal. 

The game was bold from the start: It launched on the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 in 2013 — the same year that the new Xbox One and PlayStation 4 launched. Instead of embracing those new consoles, Rockstar stuck with the previous generation. The game subsequently arrived on Xbox One, PlayStation 4, and PC. 

Of note: It's the only game on this list that is primarily a narrative-driven single-player experience. That said, a major part of "Grand Theft Auto 5" continuing to sell is the massive "GTA Online" component — an online version of the game that's wildly popular.

2. "Minecraft"

It's no surprise that "Minecraft" is on this list, with over 150 million copies sold— the game is on nearly every platform. Better still: It's essentially virtual Legos. 

You can play it alone, or with friends, and the concept is simple: Mine materials, then craft them into more useful materials. Maybe you build a house, maybe you go exploring, or maybe you do one of the many other things you can do in "Minecraft." 

It's a friendly, open experience that's accessible to nearly anyone. It can be played online, and it can even be played across competing game platforms. With over 90 million people still playing the game every month, "Minecraft" continues to be one of the most popular games in the world — that's in addition to those astronomic sales numbers.

1. "Tetris"

It's hard to overstate how big of a deal "Tetris" is. From its humble origins in Russia to a worldwide phenomenon that's spanned decades, "Tetris" is one of the most important games ever made.

It's also so, so good.

The concept is immediately clear to anyone playing "Tetris": Clear the board by creating lines using the randomized pieces that are falling from the top. Its raw puzzle nature is more akin to Sudoku or crosswords than most other video games. That simplicity lends itself well to accessibility — "Tetris" will run on nearly any computer or game console. It was just as good on the original NES as it is on a modern game console. And since it's a puzzle game above all else, it stands the test of time.

It's hard to quantify exactly how many copies have been sold of "Tetris."

It's been available on so many platforms across so many years that simply keeping track is difficult. A representative from The Tetris Company — the group that oversees "Tetris" on an ongoing basis — told us the following via email: "Billions of 'Tetris' games are played online every year, and over 500 million 'Tetris' mobile games have been downloaded to date." 

"Tetris" is famous for being the best-selling mobile game of all time — a record it achieved way back in 2010, before smartphones were ubiquitous — having sold more than 100 million digital copies at that point already. Our best guess puts the game's lifetime sales somewhere north of 200 million copies sold, but the truth is that it's hard to know for sure.

• Disney CEO Bob Iger said during an earnings call on Thursday that its upcoming streaming service will be called Disney+.
• Iger also said a prequel TV series to "Rogue One: A Star Wars Story" is being developed, starring Diego Luna as Cassian Andor.
• Iger confirmed that a Loki TV series is being made, spinning off from the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

Disney CEO Bob Iger revealed new details about the company's upcoming Netflix competitor in an earnings call on Thursday, including the service's name.

Iger said the name of the streaming service, expected to launch in late 2019, is Disney+. Disney revealed a logo for the service on Thursday:

Iger said a Loki TV series is in development for the service with Tom Hiddleston reprising his role, confirming a Variety report that Disney is making shows spinning off of the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

A new "Star Wars" live-action TV series is also being developed that will be a prequel to "Rogue One: A Star Wars Story," starring Diego Luna as his "Rogue One" character, Cassian Andor. The series will be a "spy thriller" that "follows the adventures of rebel spy Cassian Andor during the formative years of the Rebellion" and will go into production next year, according to the "Star Wars" official website.

Another "Star Wars" live-action series is currently being filmed from writer and producer Jon Favreau (director of "Iron Man" and "The Jungle Book") called "The Mandalorian." It will be the first live-action "Star Wars" TV series ever. It takes place between the original and new "Star Wars" trilogies, following a "lone gunfighter in the outer reaches of the galaxy." 

Iger said Disney is "in some discussions" to gain the TV rights back to old movies, but didn't specify which. During an earnings call in August, Iger said "a number of products" before 2019 would be affected by licensing agreements, suggesting that the streaming service would not include Disney's full catalog at launch. Bloomberg reported at the time that Disney was trying to buy back the TV rights to old "Star Wars" movies from Turner Broadcasting, but negotiations had stalled.

Other shows Iger touched on included an animated "Monsters, Inc." series and the return of the animated "Star Wars: The Clone Wars," as well as a live-action "High School Musical" show.

Exclusive movies to the service will include "Noel," starring Anna Kendrick as Santa's daughter, and "Togo," starring Willem Dafoe, about the 1925 serum run to Nome.

Beginning in 2019, all of Disney's movies will be removed from Netflix. That still leaves the fate of the remaining Marvel Netflix series up in the air, including "Daredevil," "Jessica Jones," and "The Punisher," which wrapped filming on its second season this year. Netflix recently canceled two of the series, "Luke Cage" and "Iron Fist." It could be due to waning interest in the shows, but it could also be due to Disney wanting to limit competition as much as possible and complicated negotiations with Netflix.

As Disney enters the streaming war, even with all of this content and more, it will face hurdles as it takes on Netflix. A Barclays analysis released last month saw Disney's other video services, ESPN+ and Hulu (which it will own 60% of after the Fox deal closes), as "reductive" until it figures out pricing and bundling strategies. Furthermore, the service will be launching during what Barclays called a "tough integration" during the Disney-Fox merger.

But Disney also has the assets to be a formidable player.

A Morgan Stanley analysis last month predicted that Disney+ would gain over 20 million subscribers by 2024 and become a $6 billion business. And a Parks Associates analysis this week sees Disney faring well in the streaming war, based on a pattern of services (like HBO Now and CBS All Access) gaining ground against competition with the "powerful attractiveness of original content."

You can sign up for Disney+ updates here.

Read more of Business Insider's coverage of Disney+ below:

• New data shows the winners and losers in streaming this year — and it's good news for Disney
• Disney is reportedly developing a Marvel TV series that raises questions about Captain America's fate in 'Avengers 4'
• Netflix canceled Marvel's 'Luke Cage' and 'Iron Fist' in the span of a month, and it could show a strategy shift
• Disney faces major hurdles as it takes on Netflix, and needs to figure out Hulu fast
• Morgan Stanley predicted how Disney's Netflix competitor will fare in the streaming wars
• Disney's Scarlet Witch TV show could finally introduce the X-Men to the Marvel Cinematic Universe
• A potential TV series gives new life to a fan theory that Loki didn't die in 'Avengers: Infinity War'

SEE ALSO: Interest in Netflix's 'Luke Cage' and 'Iron Fist' dropped dramatically over time, and its other Marvel shows could also be in trouble

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: How 'The Price Is Right' is made

• Robin Roberts starts her morning at 3:15 a.m. with a prayer, a meditation, television news, and gummy vitamins. 
• Roberts' day starts early, but her morning routine is pretty different from what you might see promoted by CEOs and productivity gurus. 
• It shows that a great morning routine is one that works for you. 

There are early birds, and then there's Robin Roberts.

The face of ABC's "Good Morning America" wakes up at 3:15 a.m., as she recently shared with New York Magazine's The Cut. 

About 15 minutes after waking up, Roberts watches television news for about 10 minutes. "Especially nowadays, by the time you go to bed and by the time you wake up, who knows what has happened," she told The Cut.

Then, she meditates for 20 minutes, followed by deep breathing. That's followed by more television news and a shower.

And she doesn't have coffee or eat breakfast either — just kombucha, water, and gummy vitamins. "I can't eat in the morning," she said. 

Before heading out for the day, Roberts says this prayer: "The light of God surrounds me, the love of God unfolds me, the power of God protects me, the presence of God watches over me; wherever I am, God is."

By 5 a.m., she's at work. 

Read more:How to design the ideal morning routine if you're a night owl

Roberts' routine suggests that not all morning routines need the onslaught of meditation, exercise, journaling, intention setting, a spinach-egg-white omelet, and so on.

We typically think of a good morning routine as consisting of a six-mile run (like Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey), keeping up with Asian and European bond markets while on the elliptical ("Shark Tank" investor Kevin O'Leary), or waking with the sun for breakfast (Virgin Group founder and chairman Richard Branson). 

But Roberts' routine suggests what many successful people already know — that you need to make a morning routine that works for you. As writer Benjamin Spall found when interviewing more than 300 highly successful people on their morning routines, you need to find a "sweet spot" that fits your body, your career, and your other responsibilities. 

As for Roberts, the highlight of her morning comes at 7 a.m. — when "Good Morning America" starts. 

"It is the best feeling to say 'Good morning, America' every day," Roberts told The Cut. "I mean that sincerely. It's a privilege, just getting to put a smile on people's faces."

Read the full story on The Cut »

SEE ALSO: A man who asked 300 successful people about their morning routines found early risers aren't nearly as intense as we're led to believe

DON'T MISS: Melissa McCarthy makes $12 million a year, wakes up at 4:30 a.m., and doesn't use her phone on the weekends

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Trump once won a lawsuit against the NFL — but the result was an embarrassment

• The pay-TV industry had a terrible quarter, shedding over 1 million traditional subscribers in Q3.
• This could lead to some major strategy shifts from both traditional-TV and digital-TV players, and AT&T has already hinted at some of its plans.
• Analysts at UBS expect AT&T to launch a new digital-TV service and reposition DirecTV Now as a low-cost skinny bundle.
• This means some channels, particularly those of Viacom, are in danger of being cut from DirecTV Now as AT&T focuses on profitability.

After a brutal quarter for traditional pay TV, which saw historic subscriber losses, TV networks are looking around nervously for which distributors can pick up the slack.

But the word from AT&T isn't encouraging.

In a note distributed on Monday, analysts at UBS took a close look at what AT&T management's recent comments indicate about the future of its TV business.

"AT&T has indicated it is shifting focus from subscriber growth to profitability and is reevaluating its programming lineups to offer skinnier bundles," according to the UBS note. AT&T launched its digital TV package, DirecTV Now, in late 2016, and has tolerated bad margins in favor of growth. The service now has almost 2 million subscribers.

But AT&T's sentiment has changed recently, and its goal is now to "stabilize EBITDA [earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization] trends in the Entertainment Group," according to UBS.

"AT&T's Entertainment Group is struggling," the analysts explained. They noted that AT&T Entertainment Group includes all the company's residential business — including DirecTV and local telephone companies that provide voice, video, and data services — and that EBITDA in the segment is down 17% year to date.

To return the segment to profitability, AT&T needs to cut costs, and a good place to do it is with DirecTV Now.

UBS expects AT&T to launch a new DirecTV digital-TV service that will be delivered through a branded streaming device and will be positioned as its "premium" offering and keep a large channel lineup similar to a traditional cable or satellite package.

"This service is expected to more closely mirror the satellite product and enable the company to take better advantage of addressable advertising while avoiding the cost of a satellite installation," analysts wrote.

In this process, UBS expects DirecTV Now to be repositioned as a "skinny bundle" of channels, allowing DirecTV to keep the price point the same but cut channels out of the package and get to profitability that way.

That means some channels, which get paid carriage fees by AT&T for every package they are included in, will feel the pain as they get dropped from some of its offerings. One "prime target" UBS sees for this is Viacom, which owns channels like MTV, Comedy Central, and Nickelodeon.

Here is how UBS analysts estimate AT&T will price its offerings:

AT&T's change in focus toward profitability is not unique in the young industry of digital TV, often referred to as vMVPD, or virtual multichannel video programming distributor.

On Thursday, BTIG analyst Rich Greenfield wrote on Twitter that all the vMVPDs were slowing to "focus on profits or lack thereof," except for YouTube TV, Hulu with Live TV, and FuboTV. He described the latter three as "playing the long game."

But whether these providers focus on short-term margins or subscriber growth, eventually their cost structures will have to come under control.

Even Hulu, which Greenfield said is focused on growth, has talked recently about creating packages that have a "positive margin." Morgan Stanley estimated last month that Hulu with Live TV did not break even on a gross-profit basis.

Any talk of margin improvement is bad news for networks. For some, they will have to make the choice of bringing their carriage fees down or getting cut out of the bundle. Others with "must-have" content will have a better position at the table. But one thing is certain: Tough negotiations are coming for everyone.

AT&T declined to comment.

If you have any thoughts or information on DirecTV, AT&T, or the future of digital television, contact the author at nmcalone@businessinsider.com.

SEE ALSO: 'People just aren't seeing the value': Pay TV's worst quarter on record could be the start of a terrible new trend

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Everything you need to know about 'Red Dead Redemption 2' — 2018's most anticipated video game

• In August 2017, the French wunderkind Kylian Mbappé signed to Paris Saint-Germain for €180 million, or about $200 million.
• According to an investigation published Wednesday by Der Spiegel, the German publication that first reported on the rape allegations against the soccer star Cristiano Ronaldo, Mbappé made several outlandish demands during contract negotiations.
• His demands included the use of a private jet at the expense of the Parisian club, Der Spiegel reported.
• While PSG denied the jet request, it reportedly conceded other things, including paying for the player's personal staff.

When you're worth €180 million (about $200 million), there's little you can't ask for.

A free private jet, however, is apparently one of those things.

According to an investigation published Wednesday by Der Spiegel, the German publication that first reported on the rape allegations against Cristiano Ronaldo in early October, the French wunderkind Kylian Mbappé, 19, made several prima donna demands during contract negotiations with Paris Saint-Germain in the summer of 2017.

Read more:The mother of the 34-year-old accusing Cristiano Ronaldo of rape says her daughter would 'completely disintegrate' when she saw him on a billboard after the alleged attack

PSG ended up signing the soccer star from AS Monaco that August for an eye-watering €180 million — the second-most expensive transfer in the sport's history — but left out some extras.

With other journalists from European Investigative Collaborations, Der Spiegel reviewed documents obtained by the whistleblower platform Football Leaks. The newspaper said they showed a series of high-value demands made by Mbappé, now the most valuable soccer player in Europe.

Mbappé and his father, who acts as his agent, reportedly demanded a €5 million signing bonus and a €50 million salary for the duration of his five-year contract — a sky-high figure that the club accepted.

But other demands they made did not make the cut.

Citing the documents, Der Spiegel reported that the Mbappés stipulated that if Kylian were to win the Ballon d'Or, the highly coveted award given to the male player deemed to have performed the best over the previous year, he wanted to automatically become the highest-paid player on the PSG payroll.

Furthermore, they asked that he be able to use a private jet for 50 hours a year at the club's expense.

PSG refused both requests but did, however, agree to pay €30,000 a month for the player's personal staff, including a caretaker, a bodyguard, and a driver, according to the report.

Der Spiegel reported that the biggest beneficiary of the deal was AS Monaco's owner, the Russian oligarch Dmitry Rybolovlev. But the club has firmly denied the notion that its owner received any personal compensation for the transfer.

Mbappé's reported demands may seem a far cry from his roots in the banlieues of Paris, but the young player has, importantly, been involved in charitable work.

After Mbappé blew the lid off the World Cup this summer, French news outlets reported that the star had waived his winnings from the tournament, estimated to be about $500,000, deciding to donate them to a charity he is deeply involved in that offers sporting opportunities to children who are hospitalized or have disabilities.

"He's a great person," the charity's general manager told Le Parisien at the time of Mbappé. "When his schedule allows it, he intervenes for us with pleasure."

The general manager added: "I sometimes even feel that he takes more pleasure to play with the kids than the kids themselves."

Mbappé's humility also shone through during the tournament. The Brazilian soccer legend Pelé tweeted, "If Kylian keeps equalling my records like this I may have to dust my boots off again..." — praise to which the wunderkind replied, "The king will always remain king."

For now, at least, it seems Mbappé's wages are being well-earned and well-spent.

SEE ALSO: Explosive pace, predatory finishing, and pinball soccer: Kylian Mbappé scores 4 goals in 13 minutes, breaking a 45-year-old record

DON'T MISS: The 21 most valuable soccer players in Europe right now, ranked

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Inside an intense training session where aspiring WWE wrestlers learn how to fight

After a brutal quarter for traditional pay TV, which saw historic subscriber losses, TV networks are looking around nervously for which distributors can pick up the slack.

But the word from AT&T isn't encouraging.

In a note distributed on Monday, analysts at UBS took a close look at what AT&T management's recent comments indicate about the future of its TV business.

"AT&T has indicated it is shifting focus from subscriber growth to profitability and is reevaluating its programming lineups to offer skinnier bundles," according to the UBS note. AT&T launched its digital TV package, DirecTV Now, in late 2016, and has tolerated bad margins in favor of growth. The service now has almost 2 million subscribers.

Click here to read more about a possible shake-up of AT&T's DirecTV business.

In other news:

Facebook says its new Portal device is not a 'data-gathering operation' despite previously acknowledging it might use your call info to target ads. Facebook previously acknowledged that it would collect information on calls to better target advertising.

$132 million later, Ev Williams says he is raising even more money for Medium.The site currently has 90 million unique users each month, and publishes 20,000 articles per day.

Disney revealed new details about its Netflix competitor, Disney+, including 'Star Wars' and Marvel TV shows.Disney CEO Bob Iger said a prequel TV series to "Rogue One: A Star Wars Story" is being developed, starring Diego Luna as Cassian Andor.

The parent company of IHOP and Applebee's wants to buy another chain. Here are 4 things the CEO says he's looking for in an acquisition target.Dine Brands CEO Steve Joyce is looking for a chain with mass appeal that the company can expand to 1,000 units and that fits with rising trends across the United States.

The Trade Desk reported third-quarter revenue of $118.8 million, a 50% year-over-year increase, reports AdExchanger. The company has maintained growth of 50% or more in the past two quarters.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Valedictorians rarely become rich and famous — here's why the average millionaire's college GPA is 2.9

• Paris Saint-Germain admitted that players were racially profiled in a statement on Thursday.
• Following allegations made by French news site Mediapart, PSG said that the head of its academy scouting department had acted on his own initiative to profile the players.
• Mediapart shared player evaluation forms obtained by whistleblowers at Football Leak, which had a field for ethnic "origin," the detailing of which is illegal in France.
• PSG condemned discrimination in its statement and said it had launched an internal investigation into how such practices could have existed. 

Paris Saint-Germain (PSG) has admitted that players in its academy were racially profiled between 2013 and 2018 in order to limit the number of black players.

French news site Mediapart made the allegations of ethnic monitoring after receiving player evaluation forms obtained by whistleblower platform Football Leaks.

The forms contained a field for ethnicity, the detailing of which is illegal in France.

In a statement posted on Thursday evening, the French club said that the profiling was the sole initiative of the head of the academy's scouting department.

The club's statement read: "Paris Saint Germain confirms that forms with illegal content were used between 2013 and 2018 by the training centre’s department responsible for player scouting outside the Ile de France region. These forms were introduced at the sole personal initiative of the head of this department.

"On being made aware of this at the start of October 2018, Paris Saint-Germain launched an internal investigation to understand how such practices could have existed and to decide on the necessary measures to be taken.

"As the emergence of the club's young talents proves, scouting at Paris Saint-Germain is decided solely on a skills and behavioural basis, both on the pitch and within the group."

"The Club's General Management at no time was aware of an ethnic monitoring within the scouting department or ever in possession of such a form. In view of the information mentioned, these forms betray the spirit and values of Paris Saint-Germain," the club's statement included in bold.

PSG general manager Jean Claude Blanc told BBC Radio 5 live he was "shocked" by the revelations and "felt betrayed."

Mediapart's report included details of a case in 2014 when a promising 13-year-old called Yann Gboho was listed as "West Indian" despite being French.

Serge Fournier, PSG's scout for the Normandy region reportedly told Mediapart that "PSG didn't want us to recruit players born in Africa, because one is never certain about their dates of birth.

"There should have been written 'white.' All the more so because all the players we recommended were French."

PSG reiterated in its statement that it is launching an internal investigation, with the help of lawyers, to understand how such practices were allowed to exist and decide on disciplinary measures.

"The fight against all forms of discrimination is a fundamental commitment of the Club, demonstrated both through the Paris Saint-Germain Foundation as well as the Club's work alongside recognized charities such as SOS Racisme, LICRA, Paris Foot Gay or Sportitude," the club added.

PSG are just one of a number of high-profile soccer clubs including Manchester City to come under scrutiny after being outed by the Football Leaks dossier.

SEE ALSO: 19-year-old French wunderkind Kylian Mbappé reportedly demanded a private jet as part of his $200 million signing to Paris Saint-Germain

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Inside an intense training session where aspiring WWE wrestlers learn how to fight

World War I ended 100 years ago Sunday. 

Beginning in July 1914, the Great War lasted more than four years and killed an estimated 8.5 million soldiers and 13 million civilians. 

And of the more than 65 million troops that were mobilized during the war, a handful of them were very famous, especially during the time period. 

Here are 10 famous people who served during the Great War.

SEE ALSO: The history of the US Army's uniforms since 1776, in images and depictions

1. Ernest Hemingway

Born in 1899, Ernest Hemingway was a leading American journalist and Pulitzer Prize-winning novelist.  

Turned away from the US military because of an eye defection, Hemingway joined the American Red Cross as an ambulance driver during the war. 

In 1918, Hemingway was injured by mortar fire in Italy, and his experiences during the Great War led him to write "A Farewell to Arms."

He received the 1954 Nobel Prize in Literature. Hemingway committed suicide in Ketchum, Idaho, in 1961. 

2. Humphrey Bogart

Born in 1899, Humprey Bogart was an American actor known for films such as "Casablanca" and "The Maltese Falcon."

In 1918, Bogart joined the US Navy, and spent most of his time during the war transporting troops back and forth between the US and Europe on the USS Leviathan, according to Military.com. 

There is some debate about whether Bogart's lip scar, which gave him a lisp, came during war-time. 

Some said a German prisoner punched him, others that it was caused by shrapnel from a German shell that hit the Leviathan. Bogart himself said it happened when he was a kid, and that Hollywood played it up to make him appear tough. 

Bogart died from esophageal cancer in Los Angeles in 1957. 

3. F. Scott Fitzgerald

Born in 1896, F. Scott Fitzgerald was an American writer most famous for the novel "The Great Gatsby."

In 1917, Fitzgerald dropped out of Princeton to join the Army and was commissioned as a second lieutenant.

But Fitzgerald never saw combat, as the armistice was signed shortly before he was deployed. 

Before the war ended, Fitzgerald was nervous that he would die in battle and often wrote in his spare time in the hopes of leaving a legacy. These writings were the groundwork for his later novel “This Side of Paradise.”

Fitzgerald was also friends with Hemingway, and the two writers spent much time as expatriates in Paris during the 1920s. The two friends were also part of what Gertrude Stein dubbed the "Lost Generation," a term she coined to define the generation that came of age during the Great War.

Fitzgerald died of a heart attack in Hollwood in 1940. 

Everyone and their grandmother knows all about Facebook. You can't not. The social network has more than 1.4 billion daily users across the globe.

It's an essential part of modern life.

Less well known is that in addition to Facebook.com, the California tech company has a second, stripped-down website you can use to talk to your friends.

And if that's all you want to do, it's a whole lot better than the original Facebook.

Take a look ...

First, let's look at Facebook's main website. It has a huge amount of functionality, with photos, groups, news, statuses, and so on.

But what if you want to just message a friend? That's relegated to about a quarter of the screen. The rest is just irrelevant annoyances.

Luckily for you, Facebook has a little-known alternative.

• Disney beat on both the top and bottom lines in Thursday's earnings report.
• Management said it would continue to invest big in its sports channel ESPN and the network's new streaming service, ESPN Plus.
• With more tech giants such as Facebook and Amazon bidding for top-tier sports streaming rights, an analyst says Disney will have a problem within a few years.
• Watch Disney trade live.

Disney is spending big money on sports programming, and it could be a problem as tech giants such as Facebook and Amazon enter the sports-streaming world.

In Disney's quarterly results out Thursday, the company said that its total operating income increased 17% but that operating income from its cable networks dropped 6% because of the consolidation of BAMTech, a service ESPN purchased from Major League Baseball Advanced Media.

Those cost increases in sports programming could be troublesome, according to Pivotal Research Group.

"The problem will occur within a few years when Facebook, Amazon and presumably Google bid for top tier sports rights in a meaningful way," Brian Wieser, an analyst at Pivotal Research Group, said in a note sent out to clients on Friday.

Facebook has been aggressively investing in live sports, and it has reached many high-profile streaming deals for events such as Major League Baseball games, World Surf League competitions, and Premier League soccer matches.

Similarly, Amazon has also won several streaming rights of high-level sports, such as National Football League games and Premier League matches in Britain. And Google's YouTube has fought with Amazon for regional-sports TV markets.

Facing all this competition, Disney's management told investors during Thursday's earnings call that it would continue to invest big in its sports channel ESPN along with the network's new streaming service, ESPN Plus, which has hit 1 million subscribers since debuting in April.

"The ESPN brand and ESPN business was so significant and so important to us that that should be our priority when we license sports to put it on ESPN," CEO Robert Iger said. "ESPN will also be called upon to use some of its licensing capabilities to serve as ESPN+."

CFO Christine McCarthy added, "The continued ramp up of ESPN+, which includes investments in sports rights, will have an adverse impact on operating income of about $100 million for the first quarter."

More sports-streaming competition will lead to bigger investments, and lower margins, Wieser concluded. He has a price target of $95 for Disney — 20% above where shares were trading Friday.

Shares were up 3% on Friday and 7% this year.

Now read:

• Disney pops after revealing ESPN's new streaming service has reached 1 million subscribers
• Disney slumps as ESPN continues to struggle

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Trump once won a lawsuit against the NFL — but the result was an embarrassment

• "The Girl in the Spider's Web" director Fede Alvarez talked to Business Insider about why he decided to take over the franchise after David Fincher walked away following "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo."
• He explained why he recast the role of Lisbeth Salander with Claire Foy. It was previously played by Rooney Mara.
• Alvarez, who previously made the "Evil Dead" remake and the box office hit "Don't Breathe," also touched on why he thinks he's a failure if everyone likes his movies.

On paper, it seems almost like career suicide to take over a franchise that was once overseen by an auteur like David Fincher. But in a short time, Uruguayan filmmaker Fede Alvarez has proven he’s never looked to play it safe. 

You only have to go back to his feature debut to see that. In 2013, he remade one of the most iconic horror movies of all time, Sam Rami’s “Evil Dead,” and didn’t get kicked out of town for doing it.

Now following his 2016 hit horror, “Don’t Breathe,” he returns to the pressure of taking on a well-known property. With Fincher walking away from making a sequel to his 2011 thriller “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo” — the first American adaptation of the popular Millennium book series from the late Swedish author Stieg Larsson — Sony has enlisted Alvarez to give the franchise a reboot. “The Girl in the Spider’s Web” (opening in theaters Friday) skips to the fourth book in the franchise and replaces Fincher’s moody dark thriller vibe for an action suspense story and a new lead. Claire Foy, known best for her Emmy-winning performance as Queen Elizabeth II on Netflix’s “The Crown,” takes over playing the franchise star Lisbeth Salander from Rooney Mara, who played the role in Fincher’s movie.

In “Spider’s Web” Foy still plays Salander as a computer-hacking renegade who avenges abused women, but unlike “Dragon Tattoo,” she's now the center of the story with journalist Mikael Blomkvist (played by Daniel Craig in the Fincher movie, though he didn’t come back for this one either) in the background. And this time, the stakes are higher, as Salander must retrieve a program that can access the world’s nuclear codes before her evil twin sister, Camilla (Sylvia Hoeks), gets it.

Business Insider talked to Alvarez about making a soft reboot for a franchise that barely got off the ground, why he never met with Rooney Mara to see if she wanted to continue playing the Salander role, and the reason he’ll feel like a failure if everyone likes the movie.


Jason Guerrasio: What fascinated you about the project when it came to you?

Fede Alvarez: It was the character of Lisbeth Salander above all things. Obviously, it's a very special character. It's one that when I saw it for the first time, probably the first Swedish movie, you fall in love right away. She confronts you with all your prejudice in a way because when you see her you never expect to really encounter the character you will eventually in the story. It's someone that's as three dimensional as they get. That's one part and I think the other part is it wasn't the second book or third book, it wasn't a continuation of the last American movie. It was the fourth book by a different author (David Lagercrantz took over the series following the death of Larsson) and it's been eight years since the last movie. It was the right moment to say I can just do whatever I want to do with it and I can make it my own film. 

Guerrasio: So when they came to you they said they wanted to focus on the fourth book? That's how it was pitched to you?

Alvarez: Yeah. If they'd said they wanted to make the second book, I would have said no. No way. I would never have even tried to continue Fincher's story with my eye because we make different movies. I make pulpier movies. If someone wants a very dark classic thriller then they should go and rewatch his movie. 

Guerrasio: In regards to Lisbeth, what were you walking into? Was Rooney still going to be involved?

Alvarez: Sony deferred to me, in a way. If I remember correctly, if they brought back Rooney they would basically bring back the whole cast. If you bring one you bring back the whole universe. And casting is a big part of the director's job and I never make a movie where I don't write it. I write all my films. So with that approach I also have to cast the movie. I cannot take someone else's cast. It would be wrong for me to just use actors that are someone else's vision of the characters. In some franchises it's totally necessary but for this I didn't believe it was. 

Read more:The highest-paid TV stars make over $1 million per episode

Guerrasio: That all being said, Rooney commented in the past that she was still interested in playing the character, did you talk to her and get a sense if you two could work together?

Alvarez: No. I never had that conversation. I think she would not have done it without Fincher. That's my feeling.

Guerrasio: Tell me how you came to casting Claire as your Lisbeth.

Alvarez: Normally the process is to start auditioning people. Have them come in for readings. At least that's how I do it. To really open it up to anybody. Even looking at the young actors who just landed in Hollywood. And I think we did some of that in the beginning of this. But then I saw Claire in "The Crown" and I felt right away that this is the actor to play this role. 

Guerrasio: That's interesting, even her playing the Queen of England, all prim and proper, you could see that she could play Lisbeth Slander?

Alvarez: Yeah. Because a director should not look at the superficial. You don't look at the clothes or how they speak or move. You look beyond that, you have to. And what I saw is this is someone that is really trying to keep feelings to her own and trying to be secretive of how she really feels because as the Queen she's not allowed often to express how she really feels. I felt the person to play Lisbeth Slander, a character that doesn't open up and doesn't share feelings, you need an actor who has a technique and has a craft that is so good that you're able to have a window into her soul. 

Guerrasio: I will be honest, the casting of Mikael was very strange for me. I would assume you would want a known actor for that part. Can you explain why you went with lesser-known Swedish actor Sverrir Gudnason for the role?

Alvarez: In the first movies, both the American and Swedish, although Lisbeth Salander is the most interesting character in them she's not the lead, the lead is Mikael Blomkvist. He's your way in, he's the character you love and know and understand everything. Lisbeth is a muse, is someone that he's following. But those movies are not about her. So for such a feminist icon as Lisbeth I felt like we cannot do that to her again, this has to be her movie. She has to be in the front. Do we need Mikael in the movie? Yes. You can't adapt a Millennium book without him, but I wanted to make sure he would not overshadow her. And that's when you write off any big star. The star would not just take that screen attention but the star will usually demand more screen time and perhaps even ask to change the story so he's more present in the movie. And that's not what I wanted. I wanted Mikael Blomkvist to be what many female co-leads have been for too long, the damsel in distress. I wanted him to be that. He's the one stuck with the kid in the end while she goes out and saves the world. [laughs]

Guerrasio: A conscious decision, but did you have to sell that to Sony?

Alvarez: Not really. No. I've been lucky that all the movies I've made I managed to make them with total independence and creative freedom. I just work with studios and producers that trust me and my decisions and support what I do. I don't go to those other Hollywood movies that you are just hired to do your part and it's more studio control. I don't do that. I've never done those and I'm going to keep trying to avoid those. 

Guerrasio: This is not the first soft reboot you've done. You also directed the 2013 “Evil Dead.” Did you take anything from that experience and put it into making “The Girl in the Spider's Web”?

Alvarez: With “Evil Dead,” people loved it or hated it and that's something I do with my movies. I never try to please the whole theater. If I do I think I've failed, that I played it too safe. I always expect some portion of the theater to walk out pissed. Either feeling offended or the movie did something that rubbed them the wrong way. I always look for that. What I learned from that was if I'm faithful to the spirit of the material then eventually it would be okay. The perception of “The Girl in the Spider’s Web,” at the moment because of the comparisons, you always start on the wrong foot. That's what it was for “Evil Dead.” You start on the wrong foot because of people's expectations. I feel if my heart is in the right place people will eventually appreciate it. 

Guerrasio: Did the aura of Fincher hang over you at all while making this? Meaning, you didn't write something a certain way or shoot something a certain way because you felt Fincher would do it that way.

Alvarez: No. Now, he is an executive producer on this film, but I have never met him or had any conversation with him. That's unfortunate, because I'm a big fan of his work. But no. Directors tend to have a singular vision of how things should be, at least I am. I feel there's only one way to do it and I try to capture that. So there's really no time to think like that. I knew that the tone would be so different and the style and plot that I didn't have to worry about that. So even if a shot is similar accidentally, or even on purpose a shot looks like a Fincher shot, hey, that's a good problem to have. [laughs] He's a master of the craft. But in the context of the movie, it's not a Fincher movie. 

SEE ALSO: Disney is reportedly developing a Marvel TV series that raises questions about Captain America's fate in "Avengers 4"

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: How 'The Price Is Right' is made

• Comic books have had to adapt to a rapidly evolving industry in recent years, and Amazon's digital-comics service, Comixology, could lead the way forward.
• Since Amazon acquired the company in 2014, Comixology has introduced an Unlimited subscription program with over 15,000 digital comics, and Comixology Originals, books that are exclusive to the service.
• CEO David Steinberger doesn't rule out that the original comics could be developed into TV series or films in the future, as Amazon has first-look rights, but the focus right now is on comics.
• According to Sensor Tower, the Comixology app has been installed by 7 million Google Play and App Store users since 2014.

Amazon is a media and retail giant, but one industry it has sunk its teeth into that often goes overlooked: comic books.

The company acquired digital-comics service Comixology in 2014, when it was just a seven-year-old company with an iPhone app. Since then, it has launched a subscription service called Comixology Unlimited, that gives access to thousands of digital comics for $5.99 a month, and launched "Comixology Originals" this year, a selection of creator-owned original comic books exclusive to the service.

As services like Amazon Prime Video and Netflix change TV-viewing habits, the comic book industry — which has for over eight decades been a mostly print industry — has had to adapt to unreliable sales and a changing media landscape, as well.

According to ICv2, a comic-industry analysis site, comic and graphic novel sales were down 6.5% in 2017. The industry has slightly rebounded in 2018, but sales are still down 1% as of August compared to that time in 2017, according to industry-research site, Comichron. 

In response to a shifting status quo, DC Comics, home to some of the biggest characters in pop culture like Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman, launched its own streaming service this year, called DC Universe, with original TV series and a vast comic catalog.

READ MORE: A DC Comics exec gave us a rundown of its upcoming streaming service, and addressed the controversy over the violent 'Titans' trailer

Disney, which owns Marvel Entertainment, is launching a streaming service late next year called Disney+ and is already developing Marvel TV projects for it that would spin off from the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

Image Comics, which publishes "The Walking Dead" and other creator-owned comics, launched comics subscription service Image Direct in 2015. And Dark Horse Comics, whose most popular property is "Hellboy," announced this year a service called Dark Horse Direct, which will focus on selling merchandise.

"The goal is getting our products into as many hands a possible,” Melissa Lomax, the director of e-commerce for Dark Horse, told The New York Times in July.

If you apply that philosophy to the entire comic-book industry — getting the products into as many hands as possible — that's what Comixology is all about, according to CEO David Steinberger.

"Our mission at Comixology is to make everyone on the planet a comics fan," Steinberger told Business Insider. "We now lead digital comics worldwide for Amazon."

Even though the publishers mentioned each have their own online services of some kind, they still see the value of working with Comixology. DC is the only major publisher that doesn't have its books on Comixology, which has a library of over 15,000 digital comics available for its Unlimited subscribers. And all of those comics are available on Amazon's other reading platforms like Kindle Unlimited and Prime Reading.

But if it sounds like Amazon could disrupt the comics industry like it has others (like the book business), many creators disagree.

Creators say Comixology helps the comic business

We've seen other media adapt to changing times: TV with Netflix, music with iTunes then Spotify, and so on. Comic giants like Marvel and DC have also embraced movies to supercharge their businesses. But actual comics have a loyal, often old-school customer base, some of whom fear a company like Amazon could be the end of the industry as they know it. 

This debate came to a head when comics website The Comics Journal published an opinion piece called "A Plague Comes to SPX" in September, and criticized Amazon and Comixology for attempting to "decimate" the industry. But comic creators and industry experts came to Comixology's defense.

Some background: Comixology sponsored the programming at this year's Small Press Expo in Bethesda, Maryland and offered free copies of its comics history book, "Hit Reblog," which collects early web comics. The Comics Journal wrote "Amazon has proven time and again to be a straight-up reprehensible company" and "Comixology Originals and 'Hit Reblog' is doing what the tech industry almost always does — taking something that already exists and making it worse."

Spike Trotman, a cartoonist with a Comixology Original mini-series called "Delver," tweeted in response, "deciding Amazon's sponsorship of SPX-- which, again, they've *already been doing for years anyway*-- is somehow the first step in their nefarious SPX takeover plot isn't just alarmist as hell, but utterly discounts decades of precedent." (You can read the full thread here.)

Comics journalist Brigid Alverson wrote in a blog post, "Comixology Originals pays creators to make original comics, which makes a lot of sense in that context, because some of those young creators will grow up to be wildly successful authors, making lots of books that people will buy on Amazon. That’s the sort of long-term thinking that frankly, we could use more of. I don’t think this is part of Jeff Bezos’ strategy, of course, but I do think the Comixology folks are strongly motivated by a love of comics as both a medium and a business."

Richard Starkings, creator of the Comixology Original "Elephentmen," which had previously been published by Image, told Business Insider that it's "inevitable" for the comics industry to flirt with digital, and that it will only help the print business. 

"The beauty of Comixology is that your catalog can stay in digital for a long, long time, especially if you’re the rights holder," Starkings said. "We didn’t used to have that. The beauty of digital, everything stays."

He added: "20 years ago there were 10,000 comic book shops. We have maybe 1,600 to 2,000 now? But I think you’ll see a growth in comic-book stores. You have to be close to a hobby to enjoy it and once you’re enjoying it you want more of it."

The future is now

Steinberger wouldn't reveal how many subscribers Comixology has (except that "half of our new buyers are coming in through the Unlimited program, which is what we want"). But mobile-app analysis company Sensor Tower provided Business Insider with a look at how many times the Comixology app had been installed since 2014 on Google Play and the App Store.

According to Sensor Tower, the app has been downloaded 7 million times in the last four years, with the US accounting for 41% of installations. India is the app's second-largest market at 11%.

This past year saw 2.1 million installations (October 2017 to October 2018), which is 22% higher than the previous period between October 2016 and October 2017. Most of that increase came internationally, particularly in India.

There aren't many similar apps to compare this to, but it falls in the ballpark of the apps for Marvel and DC Comics, which have been downloaded 8.2 million and 4.2 million times, respectively, according to Sensor Tower.

As Comixology beefs up its unlimited plan and original comics, an increase is likely — especially with Amazon in its corner. Amazon has zeroed in on video in recent years, going to head-to-head with Netflix as a streaming service with Amazon Prime Video, and distributing some critically acclaimed films like "Manchester By the Sea" through Amazon Studios.

It makes sense that Amazon would take advantage of the original stories in Comixology's library and develop them into TV or films in the future. Amazon has first-look deals on every Comixology Original.

"I think part of the reason creators like to work with us is that there is a direct line to being able to be looked at for something in Prime Originals," Steinberger said.

Does Starkings ever imagine his comics adapted for the screen?

"You ask any creative that question they’ll always give you same answer: Yes," he said.

READ MORE: Disney revealed new details about its Netflix competitor, Disney+, including 'Star Wars' and Marvel TV shows

Amazon isn't the only major company that could move the industry in a new direction. Netflix acquired comics publisher Millarworld last year in an exclusive deal to develop TV shows based on Millarworld comics (which are included on Comixology), and even Spotify partnered with Nerdist to offer "Archie" motion comics this year ("I have yet to see [a motion comic] that makes reading better or tells a better story ... But I love the idea that we and others get to experiment," Steinberger said).

Comixology doesn't see these emerging platforms as competition, but partnerships — its main focus is comics, and making them accessible for readers new and old. That means comics of all kinds, and Comixology is in the process of translating over 30 volumes of Japanese manga for the Unlimited service that have never been released in the English language before. The real competition would be with a platform that wanted to host an exclusive library of original comics digitally, like DC Universe.

The comic business is in a constant state of flux, but with more and more companies investing in the industry, the future —and the present — look bright.

"The first time I ever saw someone reading a comic in public was on a subway train in New York, and it was on an iPad," Starkings said. "When I saw that, I thought ‘the future is now,’ and that was five years ago. To me it’s not the future, it’s the past and the present."

If you have any tips or insight on Comixology, contact the author at tclark@businessinsider.com.

SEE ALSO: 'Venom' gives Sony an edge over Disney in its fight to keep 'Spider-Man,' according to industry experts

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Everything you need to know about 'Red Dead Redemption 2' — 2018's most anticipated video game

• On Disney's fourth-quarter earnings call on Thursday, CEO Bob Iger said he saw "price elasticity" around Hulu with Live TV, the company's digital-TV bundle.
• Industry analysts disagree.
• Pay TV just had its worst quarter in history, and consumers are increasingly driven by price competition.
• Comcast, which owns 30% of Hulu, is also a consideration.
• Analysts say the cable giant could sell off its Hulu stake and focus its attention elsewhere.

Price hikes may soon be coming to Hulu.

Disney CEO Bob Iger talked streaming services on the company's fourth-quarter earnings call on Thursday and noted he plans to invest to compete more heavily in the market. Subscription-cost increases would likely come with that investment.

"I also think there's some pricing elasticity, too, but notably on the multichannel front," Iger said in response to an analyst question about Hulu. "And I think there's an opportunity to improve — or, I should say, increase our pricing there."

Hulu offers streaming options from a base $7.99-a-month subscription that includes ads and access to a full content library to a $39.99-a-month plan that comes with multichannel, live TV.

Pricing elasticity on a product that costs $39.99 a month?

Wall Street and media analysts who monitor the industry don't think Iger's comments connect with the market dynamics they've seen.

"His comments are illogical given what we know about consumer media consumption these days," Alex DeGroote, an independent media analyst, told Business Insider. "The market is experiencing downside pressure on all fees."

The pay-TV industry reported its worst quarter to date in the third quarter of 2018. And while vMVPDs, or digital-TV packages, previously helped to soften declining subscribers, their subscriber growth slowed. As a result, pay TV had a historically bad quarter, losing more than 1 million subscribers for the first time.

"Q3 is a record month for cord-cutting in the US. This shows where consumers are headed. Bundling is increasingly unattractive," DeGroote said.

Amid the competitive over-the-top, or OTT, TV market, consumers are more motivated by price than by content when choosing a vMVPD, Greg Williams, an analyst at Cowen, told Business Insider. Cowen conducts a survey each quarter surveying a statistically comparable portion of the US population to understand consumer behavior.

"Our survey work shows customers adopt OTT for price, by far. Content and experience are distant second and third place. OTT is not about technology/experience, it's about price," he said.

Where does that leave Comcast?

Iger said Disney's decisions would be made with an "eye toward being fiscally responsible" to Hulu's minority shareholders. Hulu, a US streaming service with 20 million subscribers, shares ownership three ways: 60% Disney, 30% Comcast, and 10% AT&T.

Comcast has a decision to make.

It currently has ownership of two OTT services through its stake in Hulu and its newly acquired Now TV, Sky's OTT platform. If Comcast chooses to stay a minority stakeholder in Hulu, it forces Disney to continue on its two-path solution with Hulu and Disney+ as separate entities. But that also means Comcast would directly compete against itself. Williams thinks Comcast could still sell its Hulu stake, especially in light of comments made by management that Comcast will push Now TV into new countries.

Comcast bought Sky for $39 billion, leading some in the industry to say it overpaid for the British broadcaster. Selling its Hulu stake could help defray this cost.

"Comcast needs to reduce its leverage following the Sky deal," DeGroote said. "Being a minority Hulu holder is unsatisfactory and uneconomic."

The cable giant has made it clear that it isn't looking to join the list of companies offering OTT services. Perhaps another option will emerge.

AT&T's WarnerMedia has approached Comcast to discuss the possibility of working together on WarnerMedia's forthcoming streaming service, The Information's Jessica Toonkel reported. Among the topics reportedly discussed was the opportunity to license NBCUniversal films and TV.

"They could build the anti-Hulu," Williams said.

SEE ALSO: 'People just aren't seeing the value': Pay TV's worst quarter on record could be the start of a terrible new trend

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: 4 lottery winners who lost it all

"Pokémon: Let's Go" is the newest Pokémon role-playing game, and the first entry of the main series to arrive on the Nintendo Switch.

Launching this November, "Pokémon: Let's Go" presents a more interactive version of the Pokémon world, showing wild pokémon running around for the first time in a main-series game, and adding new ways for players to bond with their Pokémon partners.

"Let's Go" takes clear cues from the mobile game "Pokémon Go" and appears to be more accessible for fans interested in the core Pokémon games. Veterans of the series may be disappointed by the limited number of Pokémon and some missing features, but "Pokémon: Let's Go" offers plenty of new gameplay improvements.

"Pokémon: Let's Go" takes place in the same region as "Pokémon Red & Blue," with the original 151 pokémon.

"Pokémon: Let's Go" returns to the Kanto region from the first games in the series, "Pokémon Red & Blue." This means that the original 151 pokémon will also be making a return, too, along with their Alolan variations from "Pokémon Sun & Moon" and a new legendary Pokémon, Meltan. Players will explore updated 3D versions of the same cities, forests and destinations from "Red & Blue," and battle against the classic gym leaders like Brock and Misty. The notorious Team Rocket will play the role of villain once more.

There are key differences between "Let's Go Pikachu" and "Let's Go Eevee."

While the gameplay and story of both versions of "Pokémon: Let's Go" is the same, there are a few key differences. Most obviously, the version of the game you pick will determine your partner Pokémon: Pikachu or Eevee. Each version of the game will also have some exclusive wild Pokémon, and the version will determine how frequently some types of Pokémon appear.

The confirmed exclusive Pokémon in "Let's Go: Pikachu" include Oddish, Sandshrew, and Growlithe. "Let's Go Eevee" has wild Bellsprout, Vulpix and Meowth. There are certainly more exclusive Pokémon to be found in both games. In order to catch all of the Pokémon in either game, you'll need to trade with someone who has the opposite version to obtain the other set of exclusive Pokémon.

Bonding with your partner Pokémon will unlock special abilities, and you can customize their appearance.

Forming a bond with your Eevee or Pikachu is a key part of the game: Players will be able to customize their partner's outfit, play with them and give them treats. Improving your friendship with your partner Pokémon will unlock special abilities that can be used both in and out of combat. Your partner will constantly follow you throughout the Pokémon world and will react when spoken to. 

• The popular Alamo Drafthouse chain will not be showing Netflix's "Roma."
• The Oscar contender will be one of the first original Netflix movies to have an exclusive theatrical run before it streams.
• After weeks of negotiations between Netflix and Drafthouse to show the movie at its Brooklyn, New York location, the theater chain finally felt the streaming giant put too many "restrictions and guidelines" on them, a source close to the negotiations told Business Insider.
• The movie will instead be shown at New York City's IFC Center, and is locking other locations to show the movie across the country.

Netflix wants to keep its powerhouse directors happy going into Oscar season, but one of the first theatrical runs for its original movies with a big name helmer has hit a snag.

Alamo Drafthouse, one of the most prominent independently owned movie chains in the US, will not be showing Netflix's Oscar contender, "Roma," a source close to negotiations between the chain and streaming giant told Business Insider. A source close to Netflix confirmed that Alamo Drafthouse had passed on the movie.

At the end of October, Netflix began to dramatically change course on how it released Oscar-contending movies. Reports surfaced that for the first time Netflix would stop its "day-and-date" model — in which the movie premieres in theaters and on Netflix the same day — and give exclusive theatrical runs of around 1-3 weeks for not just Alfonso Cuarón's "Roma," but two other of its anticipated movies, the Coen brothers' "The Ballad of Buster Scruggs," and Susanne Bier's "Bird Box" starring Sandra Bullock. 

Alamo Drafthouse was one of the reported chains in the mix to show "Roma." But Netflix's terms on how the movie would be released, and how often, led to the popular chain passing on the anticipated title, according to the source.

While "Buster Scruggs" and "Bird Box" are reportedly getting around one-week runs at select theaters before they are available to stream on Netflix, the company wants to pull out all the stops for "Roma," which out of the three has the best chance to win Oscars in the major categories, including best picture.

Along with around a 3-4 week run for the movie, Netflix is specifically looking for theaters that can show the movie with Dolby Atmos sound or in 70mm.

As even four weeks is shorter than the traditional 90-day window that the major chains like AMC, Regal, and Cinemark want movies to be shown in theaters, Netflix knows it cannot go to them. That leaves the streaming giant to depend on the mid-level chains and independently owned arthouses.

Alamo Drafthouse and Netflix had been in discussions for weeks about showing "Roma," specifically at the chain's Brooklyn, New York location, which could show the movie in 70mm. It's one of the only theaters in the city that can pull that off.

Netflix was stringent on its terms, according to the source, which included that "Roma" have a full four-week run with all the screenings show in 70mm. The company also planned to four-wall the theaters, meaning Netflix would be renting the theater from Drafthouse. (It plans to do this at all the locations where the movies will be played.) This is an unconventional move in the industry, where typically the movie theater splits the box office with the distributor.

Though Drafthouse was willing to show "Roma" at its Brooklyn location, it does not four-wall. Also, the 70mm projector at the location is in its biggest auditorium, meaning that for four weeks the movie would take up its prime space, with Drafthouse unable to schedule in any other titles. That's a tough ask in a time of year when every weekend a new big movie is about to hit theaters.

"Just way too many restrictions and guidelines," the source told Business Insider.

"Roma" will now be screened in New York at Manhattan's IFC Center beginning November 21, IFC confirmed to Business Insider. That theater does not have capabilities to show the movie in 70mm.

Alamo Drafthouse is not the only theater, outside of the majors, to pass on the Netflix offer. Business Insider has reached out to multiple arthouses that said they eventually passed on showing "Roma" due to the terms of Netflix. These include some that would have gotten the movie following its exclusive theatrical run, after the movie began streaming on Netflix December 14.

"Terms are not too high, but higher than it should be for a movie that's streaming at the same time," one theater owner told Business Insider.

Other theaters told Business Insider they would love to show the movie but don't have a venue that can accommodate Netflix's terms.

"It's complicated by Netflix’s insistence that theaters have Dolby Atmos, an extremely expensive sound system that very few theaters can afford," another theater owner said.

SEE ALSO: Sinemia has emerged as a cheap MoviePass alternative, but it has hidden fees and awful customer service

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: How 'The Price Is Right' is made

• In 2013, several video game companies were targeted by denial-of-service (DoS) attacks that limited access to their online services and forced them offline in some cases.
• The attacks triggered an FBI investigation centered on the Twitter account @DerpTrolling, which had announced the attacks in advance.
• Austin Thompson, 23-year-old, a native of Utah, pled guilty to one count of damage to a protected computer, which carries a prison sentence of up to 10 years, and a maximum fine of $250,000.

SEE ALSO: A horrific video from 'Red Dead Redemption 2' has become a flash point for what's acceptable on YouTube

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Watch Apple's October 2018 event in 8 minutes

• A 50th-anniversary re-release of "The White Album" contains a trance-like, 13-minute version of the Beatles' "Helter Skelter."
• Even longtime fans of the band, which broke up in 1970, will have their expectations reset by the band at its most avant-garde.
• It's one of the most interesting pieces of music I've heard all year.

As with most children of the late 1960s and early 1970s, I grew up with the Beatles as a sort of force of nature, but because the group broke up in 1970, I experienced the whole thing secondhand. It's fair to say, however, that I was a Beatles obsessive; my senior-year thesis in high school was about the Fab Four.

In my later years, I've been back and forth with the band. The older I get, the more I like the gritty stuff and the very early songs, inspired by American rock-n-roll. The pop songs and the epic productions of the group's second, studio-focused period in the late 1960s now turn me off a bit. 

Friday brings something special: a extended, 50th anniversary re-release of the so-called "White Album," which first appeared in November of 1968 on double vinyl and has become widely regarded as a document of the Beatles' cracking apart. In many ways, it was the final "true" Beatles album, followed by the goofy soundtrack for the film "Yellow Submarine" and the out-of-order releases of "Abbey Road" and "Let It Be."

Read more: 40 years ago, Led Zeppelin released its most difficult album — and it's still hard to listen to

By the end of the sixties, the group's various combative, creative urges — and in retrospect, the creativity was sort of ridiculous — had become unmanageable, and they weren't limited to the oft-debated souring of the John Lennon-Paul McCartney partnership; George Harrison and Ringo Starr were also suffering. 

And yet, as the re-release of "The Beatles/The White Album" proves, the guys could make monumental magic. The remixed re-issue contains a massive amount of new music, much of it loose, outtakes rather than polished performances.

Then there's the 13-minute version of the Beatles' most disturbing song, "Helter Skelter," made infamous by its association with Charles Manson and the Tate-LaBianca murders of 1969.

Composed by McCartney as a response to the aggressive sonic experiments of Pete Townshend and The Who, "Helter Skelter" originally came in once cut down at about four-and-a-half minutes and has been scrutinized ever since the needle first hit wax as a prototype of punk, heavy metal, noise, and the Beatles' influence on indie rock. 

There had always been tales of an extended version of the song, clocking in at almost half and hour. The 13-minute take that's on the re-release sounds like the Beatles giving rude birth to the Velvet Underground and Sonic Youth. Ringo thumps an interrupted kick-snare drone, Paul seems to stick with single bass pulse, Lennon scratches brute chords, and Harrison provides icepick fills with what sounds like a Telecaster going through a small amp turned up. McCartney's singing is restrained and borderline sickly. There's an edge of total exhaustion. It just dies at the end in a fade-out of George string bends, the weary culmination of a long, smoggy nightmare.

A disturbing and brilliant version of an already disturbing and brilliant tune

It's trancelike. It's deeply troubling. It about a million miles from "Love Me Do." As with the Rolling Stones when they go back to the wellspring of the blues, it demonstrate that the avant-garde Beatles — channeling the darkness that was gathering at the end of the 1960s and, to my ear, referencing extended, textural tunes from the period, such as "East-West, "also a 13-minute jam by guitarist Mike Bloomfield and the Paul Butterfield Blues Band — were the group at its finest.

The Beatles evidently wrapped this "Helter Skelter" take in the bleak, wee hours of the morning. It's the kind of thing that's hypnotic yet shattering to listen to. I can only imagine what it was like to actually make the music, especially given that it was tough to record very long takes back then on analog tape.

For me, it's exquisite. And yes, a completely new Beatles song, so different from the familiar version of "Helter Skelter" as to set a new standard. A strange gift from a distant past, recorded when I was a year old. The Beatles were so good that we take their contribution to culture for granted. But almost 50 years after they called it quits, they can still shake us up like nobody else.

SEE ALSO: The dinosaurs of rock had an amazing year in 2017 — here are the best albums

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: 'Bohemian Rhapsody': The 6-minute rock single that changed the face of music

• Funko Pops are collectible figurines of characters from almost any comic, show, movie, or video game that you can imagine. They have big bobble heads and large black eyes. 
• Funko Pop fan, Anthony Peeples has nearly 1,000 of these toys in his New York apartment and his collection could be worth thousands of dollars.
• In the video above, Anthony shows us his collection and tells us why he loves collecting "Pops."
• WATCH NEXT: We got our Beanie Baby collections valued >>

Following is a transcript of the video. 

Anthony Peeples: We have between 800 and 1,000 Funko Pops, give or take. I'm Anthony Peeples. I'm a Funko Pop Collector. I'm feeling high-five fantastic, and I hope you are as well.

Narrator: Funko Pops are everywhere. They're those small plastic figurines with giant heads and big round eyes. There are pops of pretty much every character you can think of. And fans are obsessed. The company did half a billion dollars in sales in 2017. And has already surpassed that in 2018. Anthony, who goes by the nickname GeekyPeeples, has taken his obsession to another level.

Peeples: Funko Funatics is definitely a common term that we all use to refer to ourselves.

Narrator: Anthony and his partner, Raul, have been collecting Pops since 2015. And they can be found all over their home.

Peeples: They're displayed in all the various places that we can find room in our New York City apartment. We have one room that is our room that we've kind of transformed into a Pop den. My DC wall is dedicated to "Batman the Animated Series," which was very important to me in my childhood growing up. I'm a big Marvel boy, so I collect a lot of the Marvel lines. I have one wall dedicated to Freddy Funko, the Funko mascot. The other wall is kind of, "storage." It's a slow process so I'm building the room up.

Narrator: His kitchen is decorated with Pops that are food related.

Peeples: A friend of mine, he actually displays his Mr. Freeze Pops in the freezer.

Narrator: And when we visited in October, his living room was decorated with Halloween-related Pops.

Peeples: So all of the Pops that are horror based, or fun, or scary. And we also have Pops displayed in our bedroom.

Narrator: Anthony keeps track of his Pops using several online apps. Which estimate that his collection could be worth thousands of dollars, based on market value. But the prices can change over time. His first Pop was a Storm figurine given to him as a gift from friends.

Peeples: And then from there, it just took fire in side of me and I just wanted to collect as many as I can. I actually still have that Storm, it's right there on the wall. I keep it right where I can always see it.

Narrator: His collection includes many rare Pops that were released as limited editions. Including some ultra rare ones called Chase Pops.

Peeples: A Chase Pop is a Pop that you can find, kind of like the golden ticket that Willy Wonka was giving out. It's very rare, and there's only a certain limited amount of them. And they also have a special sticker on them. Also, if you collect comics, it's like a variant cover.

Narrator: In 2017, he went to the grand opening of the Funko Headquarters in Washington. And got his hands on one of his most prized figurines.

Peeples: It's the Emerald Freddy. It has the flagship sticker on it, which was also very rare. I also have another very rare Pop. The blue chrome Batman from San Diego Comic Con. I slept for four days in front of the San Diego Convention, and I ended up getting into the booth. I cried a lot because I was so happy and so excited. The chrome Batman is worth a lot of money. I've seen it go up right now, currently, as high on Ebay as $800.

Narrator: He and his partner also placed in a lip-syncing contest at a Funko Event. And chose two giant Robin and Joker Pops as prizes, that he estimates are now worth about $1,200 each.

Peeples: I do also have just a couple rare Proto Pops.

Narrator: These are basically prototypes of Pops before they're massed produced. Anthony doesn't just collect Pops, however, he also organizes events with fellow collectors, including fundraisers for charity.

Peeples: I host here in New York, periodically, events that I call Peeples Pop!Swap. Those events have been major, major moments where I've gotten to meet so many collectors and have so many wonderful friends because of that.

Narrator: In addition to swapping, Anthony often sells Pops to help fund his trips to various conventions around the world to buy new ones.

Peeples: Cause it's very expensive. The expenses do mount up.

Narrator: He's active in the official Funko Forum, a message board for fans. So he always knows where to be to get the rare Pops for cheap.

Peeples: I try to get them as close to the retail value that they come out for. Narrator: But he will occasionally have to pay upwards of $100 for some that he missed to complete his set. He has a few basic tips for Funko hunters.

Peeples: So it's best to just be on your game. Know your information. Know where the Pop is you want. Know how much it's going to cost. And be prepared to line up and hopefully score some wonderful Funko Pops.

Narrator: And he says he has no desire to stop collecting anytime soon.

Peeples: Whether I collect Funko Pops or not, the one thing that is a constant, is that the people I've met and the relationships I've established from being in the Funko Pop community, they're not going anywhere in my heart. I will keep in contact whether I collect Funkos or not.

And there's a story behind each one.

Some people identify themselves as "I'm a fiend!" and they'll be wearing the fiend patch. Or they're a Funkero. There's Jersey Funko and there's Chicago Funko. So many across the country and they identify themselves in that way. But we're all Funatics, we're all Funko Funatics. 

Join the conversation about this story »