Three’s company.

Cinemark has now joined Regal and AMC in supporting Paramount’s planned merger with Warner Bros. Discovery, which means that the world’s three largest exhibitors have all given their blessing to a union that other theater owners fear will leave them with fewer movies to screen.

In a blow to the state attorneys general who are holding up the deal, in part because they argue it will hurt exhibitors, Cinemark called for “an expedited resolution of the proposed Paramount Skydance and Warner Bros. Discovery merger.” It added that “prolonged uncertainty runs the risk of diverting time and resources away” from producing the next wave of blockbusters — in other words, clock, she’s ticking.

Cinemark’s endorsement has been rumored for more than a week. It comes less than two weeks after Regal CEO Eduardo Acuna announced that he was throwing his lot in with David Ellison. AMC chief Adam Aron was the original defector, shifting his support behind the deal last spring during CinemaCon after claiming that Ellison’s experience producing “Top Gun: Maverick” and some “Mission: Impossible” movies were evidence he would be able to make good on his promise to deliver 30 movies annually to theaters.

Skeptics note that many of the movies from the studios for the next three years have already been greenlit. They question if Paramount and Warner Bros. can keep up that pace in perpetuity while servicing nearly $80 billion in debt (yes, the studios could use the cash flow, but movies are expensive and risky investments).

However, Paramount’s recent decision to put those commitments in writing has alleviated Cinemark and others’ concerns. The company has pledged to not only make 30 films annually over three years, but to also adhere to an exclusive 45-day theatrical window and a 90-day window before movies debut on streaming. Those terms are as good as any they are getting from any other studio at this point, making it an offer Cinemark couldn’t refuse. Plus, no one is coming close to producing as many films as Paramount says it will post-merger.

“We have consistently stated we would look favorably upon media consolidation that increases the quality and output of films released into theaters with sufficient marketing campaigns and theatrical windows, and that is backed by firm commitments to ensure follow-through,” Cinemark’s statement said. 

But the big three chain’s moves left exhibition industry trade group Cinema United and its chief Michael O’Leary in an awkward position. After all, O’Leary came out swinging against the merger at the behest of his members, initially saying he wanted it to fail. “If Paramount buys Warner Bros. and production drops, there’s no question that theaters will close,” he predicted in an interview with me last spring.

So where does that leave some of the smaller chains that comprise O’Leary’s membership — think B&B Theatres, Harkins, Marcus, and other family owned and operated companies that may look at all this consolidation in more existential terms. Well, on Thursday, Cinema United backtracked, writing a public letter signed by its leadership that urged Ellison and California Attorney General Rob Bonta to “discuss all possible avenues for resolving the state of California’s pending challenge to Paramount’s proposed acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery.” In other words, time to get off the barricades.

In return, Cinema United urged Bonta and the other AGs to make sure that Paramount stuck to its promise not only in terms of the number of movies it releases, but to also ensure they didn’t jack up the cost to show their films and continue to allow them access to their library titles.

It’s something of a face-saving move. But what choice did Cinema United and members who weren’t sold on the merger have? The combined market share of AMC, Regal, and Cinemark robbed them of much leverage. The tide had turned. That left them with a stark choice: Go with the flow or be left behind.

Former Fox 2 news anchor Taryn Asher, fired in November for alleged “outbursts” and “unprofessional workplace behavior,” was caught on camera in a leaked newsroom video this weekend calling her supervisor a “bitch.”

Video of the heated exchange between Asher and her supervisor while filming a PSA segment for the station in 2023 was published Saturday by Deadline Detroit, dropping nine months since Asher’s dismissal and as she battles in court over claims of workplace discrimination.

The video begins with her having a conversation with someone apparently named Trace offscreen and quickly devolves when the unseen individual walks away after correcting Asher’s prompter reading. It begins with Asher appearing to cut off the individual mid-sentence.

“Could you let me finish, please?” the off-camera Trace says.

“Finish what?” Asher responds.

“What I was trying to say.”

“Go ahead!” Asher says, as Trace appears to say “it’s alright” while walking away.

“I don’t think you are, you’re walking out really angry,” Asher shouts off-camera. “Bitch! Jeez, oh Pete’s.”

A co-worker is heard off-camera asking, “What the hell is going on in here?”

“Can I please finish what I’m going to say?” Asher mimicked in a mocking town. “What the f–k? Grow up!”

Watch the minute-long exchange below:

A co-worker then approaches the anchor and attempts to calm her down, but she keeps the rant going right up until the end of the video.

“I am so done with her antics, telling on me every five seconds,” Asher said. “I’m done!”

Asher was given a notice of suspension and warning for the outburst back in December 2023, according to local reports. She was pulled from the air permanently in November 2025 and was sent a letter of termination in May of this year.

Asher sued her former employer for gender discrimination in June, claiming that she was treated less favorably than her male anchor colleagues. She re-filed the lawsuit in July in an attempt to work for a local rival network.

In a counter court filing on Friday, Fox 2 maintained that Asher was dismissed for newsroom “outbursts” and “unprofessional” behavior, citing instances of “shouting at other employees in the newsroom about the order of guest interviews” and confronting “an employee whom she believed had complained to management about her.”