BLACKFISH

[englanddg]

Thanks for this. All useful info. But as I understand it, even if a consent form is signed, if what you have said is grossly misrepresented, you have a case. I am not a lawyer but I've been told that this is true.

Well, you are wrong.

You do not. Regardless of what you have "heard"...

If I present a consent form form to you, and you sign it without duress, criminal intent, or other mitigating factors, than you have given me the right to do whatever I want with the content you provided to me.

Basic...tort (contract / civil, since I suspect you have no idea what "tort" means)...law...

In most cases, these agreements allow the content rights both ways, so I could release a statement with my original purpose and even original footage after the fact to try and "set the record straight"...

But...like rumors in grade school, it's hard to say you don't pick your nose, smell your farts...etc after the rest of the school already heard you do. You've created a PR mountain for yourself to climb...by simply being forthright.

I know, it's difficult to have more than an emotional discussion where there must be a "bad guy" and a "good guy"...

Additionally, I get that many find it cumbersome to research or understand their own legal system. It's not as fun as watching TV and paying HR Block 200 bucks to file a 1040-EZ that takes 10 minutes to fill out online for free and they want their "refund" (interest free loan to the government) NOW so they agree to outrageous interest rate RAL loans...

Most people don't evolve beyond this level of thinking. I get that. But, this movie is simply grade school bully tactics. This works well for those who don't question anything. They "feel good" to know they are on the "right side" because of what basically amounts to rumors.

Granted, the facts become more solid. For example..."She wears funny pants, so she likes her own farts" becomes "The whales have killed before!"...but it's the same conceit. In the former, she probably did wear funny pants, but what did that have to do with her liking her own farts? In the latter, the whales did kill, but so do many other things. It's a matter of perspective. Something one should learn as they age / become educated.

I totally get it.

It's not your fault many are poorly educated in the liberal arts (and I don't mean graduated or certificated), and therefore turn to movies for your "edutainment".

But, enough of that. I'll add, to your point about "so sue me"...there is a criminal law exception for defamation.

While there are NO federal criminal defamation laws in the US. There are something like 15 states or so who do have them, but cases are extremely rare.

Anyhow, I'm not trying to be insulting, but Blackfish is insulting to the intelligence of the viewer. It's extremely well put together (you've seen me say that over and over again), but that doesn't make it a truthful representation.

Forrest Gump was also extremely well put together...but I wouldn't call it US History.

 

[englanddg]

All that being said, I do want to mention that @JPatton , while we may disagree, at least is serious about this.

He posted a while back a fascinating concept for the "Orca" habitat of the future. I loved the concepts, and thought it was well thought out. Of course it would need cooperation from the big bad evil Sea World, and financial considerations, otherwise it's a pot smokers pipe dream, but...kudos.

I truly appreciate those who come with solutions...not just gripes.

And, that's my point. The movie could have ended with this sort of thing.

Issue -> Investigation -> Discussion -> Solution(s)

Instead, it's merely propaganda. Lost potential to change anything.

 

[BuddyThomas]

I feel the need to point on here a scientific fact that seems to mistaken or just lazily put to the side. Technically Sea World only has one species of whale and less then 7 of them in captivity in the United States. The beluga whale. The killer whales are dolphins not whales despite their name . But does this change the argument. Probably not bit it should be taken into to consideration. Many people are against "whale" captivity but are okay with dolphin captivity but it's one in the same.
But point aside I agree with what was stated about the conservation efforts and sea world being for the good. Most intelligent humans would allow "mistreatment" of themselves if they knew it was for the betterment of their specie. I know I would. And I am sure many of you would say the same. It's an ethical question. The loss of one to save many. Or do you save one with the risk of lossing many.

Are you saying that you agree to spend the rest of your life locked in a glass case if it makes, ummmmm, say, aliens like human beings more? Will you be happy doing performances every day and being locked in a tight pen when not needed? Might that make you a little crazy?

At this point, we have the technology to create an enmersive whale or dolphin attraction without imprisoning either. Hi def film, live cameras in the wild, a state of the art attraction of some sort.......all of these could be great independently or combined.

Thus, "one" does not have to suffer "mistreatment" for the greater good.

 

[englanddg]

I am not looking to demonize at all. I've already said several times that I support Sea World's conservation efforts. In my mind there is but one issue here: whales (and frankly dolphins too) in captivity.

Ok, and see my other post response to you.

What is your solution? They are there, they continue to be there, and nothing (not a movie) is going to stop that.

So, what are you going to propose?

Or is this like Kony, where it "feels good" to belong...

 

[BuddyThomas]

Well, you are wrong.

You do not. Regardless of what you have "heard"...

If I present a consent form form to you, and you sign it without duress, criminal intent, or other mitigating factors, than you have given me the right to do whatever I want with the content you provided to me.

Basic...tort (contract / civil, since I suspect you have no idea what "tort" means)...law...

In most cases, these agreements allow the content rights both ways, so I could release a statement with my original purpose and even original footage after the fact to try and "set the record straight"...

But...like rumors in grade school, it's hard to say you don't pick your nose, smell your farts...etc after the rest of the school already heard you do. You've created a PR mountain for yourself to climb...by simply being forthright.

I know, it's difficult to have more than an emotional discussion where there must be a "bad guy" and a "good guy"...

Additionally, I get that many find it cumbersome to research or understand their own legal system. It's not as fun as watching TV and paying HR Block 200 bucks to file a 1040-EZ that takes 10 minutes to fill out online for free and they want their "refund" (interest free loan to the government) NOW so they agree to outrageous interest rate RAL loans...

Most people don't evolve beyond this level of thinking. I get that. But, this movie is simply grade school bully tactics. This works well for those who don't question anything. They "feel good" to know they are on the "right side" because of what basically amounts to rumors.

Granted, the facts become more solid. For example..."She wears funny pants, so she likes her own farts" becomes "The whales have killed before!"...but it's the same conceit. In the former, she probably did wear funny pants, but what did that have to do with her liking her own farts? In the latter, the whales did kill, but so do many other things. It's a matter of perspective. Something one should learn as they age / become educated.

I totally get it.

It's not your fault many are poorly educated in the liberal arts (and I don't mean graduated or certificated), and therefore turn to movies for your "edutainment".

But, enough of that. I'll add, to your point about "so sue me"...there is a criminal law exception for defamation.

While there are NO federal criminal defamation laws in the US. There are something like 15 states or so who do have them, but cases are extremely rare.

Anyhow, I'm not trying to be insulting, but Blackfish is insulting to the intelligence of the viewer. It's extremely well put together (you've seen me say that over and over again), but that doesn't make it a truthful representation.

Forrest Gump was

 

[englanddg]

If you don't know what Kony is...

http://invisiblechildren.com/kony/

Then read this...

http://gawker.com/5894041/invisible-children-founder-and-kony-2012-star-found-masturbating-in-public

I'm sure he cares about those kids...quite sure...

But, it's social media! It's a new world!

 

[Voxel]

Are you saying that you agree to spend the rest of your life locked in a glass case if it makes, ummmmm, say, aliens like human beings more? Will you be happy doing performances every day and being locked in a tight pen when not needed? Might that make you a little crazy?

At this point, we have the technology to create an enmersive whale or dolphin attraction without imprisoning either. Hi def film, live cameras in the wild, a state of the art attraction of some sort.......all of these could be great independently or combined.

Thus, "one" does not have to suffer "mistreatment" for the greater good.

If it meant that my family and species could have a better quality of life under global protection then yes. Yes I would. But then again I lived on sub. So cramped tight places aren't anything new.

 

[englanddg]

What an absolutely obnoxious post. Perhaps one of the most obnoxious, self-satisfying, condescending, holier than holy posts I've ever had the displeasure of reading. I hope you had fun with that. I think I have guessed your profession.

I doubt you have.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

I truly appreciate those who come with solutions...not just gripes.

And, that's my point. The movie could have ended with this sort of thing.

Issue -> Investigation -> Discussion -> Solution(s)

Instead, it's merely propaganda. Lost potential to change anything.

And there are other documentaries/articles/discussions which do just that for this topic, but unlike Blackfish, they won't get a round of applause at the Oscars on their way to Wal-Mart's $5 DVD bin. That's what's so disapointing to me.

Not that I have an axe to grind against Sea World (like AK, Marineland, or Bush Gardens Tampa, I'm not really into the theme/park zoo hybrid), it's just if you're going to do this sorta thing you could at least try to offer some pratical solutions and acknowledgements.

 

[englanddg]

And there are other documentaries/articles/discussions which do just that for this topic, but unlike Blackfish, they won't get a round of applause at the Oscars on their way to Wal-Mart's $5 DVD bin. That's what's so disapointing to me.

The first conceit is that those who judge this movie would even subject themselves to Seaworld.

They wouldn't.

 

[englanddg]

They see SeaWorld as an investment, at best. The unwashed masses take their kids there...

 

[Animaniac93-98]

The first conceit is that those who judge this movie would even subject themselves to Seaworld.

They wouldn't.

At least not now that the movie is out, because of its "shocking revelation".

 

[culturenthrills]

No, they're responding to peer pressure and Change.org petitions....

Which once again proves my point that the only one these artists are hurting their own fans here in Central Florida who just would like to see them, enjoy a beer and bbq.

If these activists truly cared about Orca's in captivity they would go after the places that have them in far worse conditions than SeaWorld.

 

[luv]

I doubt you have.

I can guess! Current and former!

Sea World is as crowded as ever. People like Sea World. I like Sea World. I love Shamu.

 

[englanddg]

At least not now that the movie is out, because of its "shocking revelation".

Right. Subtle, but exactly right.

 

[RandomPrincess]

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ManipulativeEditing

Some common forms of Manipulative Editing include:

• Missing or misused context is the single most common type of manipulative editing, and is at least an element of virtually every other kind. At the most basic level, it creates a relationship between two unrelated events, or removes a connection that should have been there. This one is much, much Older than Television, as people have been quoting their rivals out of context to make them look bad since time immemorial.
• Cherry-picking quotes from an interview or Confession Cam can turn a fair and balanced statement into a one-sided snark-fest. It's easy to cut off the buts and excepts that would soften a statement, and that's without deeper shenanigans.
  • The "Frankenbite" is where different soundbites are stitched together to create a new whole. Sometimes this is done with the best intentions; people ramble and digress, give examples, and in general do not speak in well-formed soundbites. Often, editors will cut out the unnecessary pieces of a sentence to get to the heart of the matter in a timely way. But it can be misused just as easily; splice together the start of one sentence with the end of another or remove a phrase to change the meaning. Or just take take the words needed, without their context. A hint for catching this one — if the scene shifts mid-sentence, there's no guarantee that all the words came from the same discussion. The phrases being spliced together may not even be talking about the same person or event.
• Cherry-picking scenes. Showing only certain parts of a relationship can easily create an illusion that has little to do with the reality. Imagine if your entire relationship with your best friend was to be summed up in ten minutes. Now imagine that the summation consisted of your combined worst ten minutes — your loudest arguments, your worst fights, your angriest moments ever. If someone who didn't know you or your friend saw only the summation, he might well conclude that you had once been friends, but were now mortal enemies.
  • Worst-side shooting. This is particularly present in Reality TV, which can have a demanding schedule, and the days can be stressful to the point of exhausting. If it's a Reality TV Show Mansion show, then the contestants are also in near-total isolation, with no phones, no laptops, no music players... They have nothing to interact with besides each other, twenty-four hours a day, for weeks on end. It's natural that tired, stressed people get upset and have fights over little things. Without being in that situation, it's easy to conclude that some or all of the people are petty and cruel, when in fact they are just acting like stressed, bored people in close proximity.
  • Invoking Poe's Law. Imagine if you were to do an impression of something that's intentionally done to look and/or sound silly. It's filmed, and the part where you indicate that you're doing an impression and laughing at yourself is left on the cutting room floor so it appears that you really are like that.
• Causal deletion. It's true that, sometimes, people do things for no reason. Most of the time, though, they have very good reasons — but if the reasons get left on the cutting-room floor, it looks like they don't. This can make even the most justified anger seem petty and immature. For example, if the producers are casting Bob as a bad guy and Alice as a nice girl, they might cut out several days of on-and-off sniping and backbiting on Alice's part, showing only the moment when Bob has had enough and shouts at her, making Bob look like an unreasonable, overreactive jerk.
  • Denial of information. Sometimes important information, like an alliance forming or paranoia setting in, gets removed, which makes some act seem like a snap decision when the people involved were actually mulling it over for hours, or even days.
• Pointed questions. Just because you don't see an interviewer, does not mean there isn't one there. An unseen, unheard interviewer may ask the person to talk about a particular subject or ask questions designed to provoke "better" sound bites, and then use only the most unflattering bits. In reality TV, this is often deceptively presented as if it were from the Confession Cam (which, theoretically, has nobody else in the room).
• Prompting. Sometimes the interviewee (often a contestant on a reality show) will simply be told "say this". It happens.
• Temporal shenanigans. Two events which took place days or weeks apart are shown to have happened nearly simultaneously, or close-together events get spaced out. This can add additional context that did not actually exist, or make emotions seem buried when they were actually dealt with much sooner. For example, if Bob says something about Alice just as Alice walks into the room, it's possible that Bob had actually said it several hours earlier, and Alice didn't hear it.
  • Switching around the order of events. This can be a tricky form of manipulative editing that makes the aftermath of an event appear to be its cause, or even make it seem like someone willed an event to happen (such as an injury) when they were talking or joking about it later. Combine this with cherry-picked comments for extra deception. For example, a shot of a worker looking at a piece of jury-rigged equipment and commenting, "That's not gonna hold for long," might be shown before the failure that necessitated the quick fix, making it appear that the worker predicted the failure and was ignored.
• Music. Take a shot of a guy staring off into space. Add music, and suddenly he is heroic, wistful, or on the verge of launching his career as an Ax-Crazy killer.

 

[englanddg]

Which once again proves my point that the only one these artists are their own fans here in Central Florida who just would like to see them, enjoy a beer and bbq.

If these activists truly cared about Orca's in captivity they would go after the places that have them in far worse conditions than SeaWorld.

No, if they truly cared (outside of their silly agenda, which I must say, is why I think @JPatton is not silly, he is the real deal...much disagreement, but much respect) they would propose a real world solution that addresses both the care of the animals whilst also the true financials involved.

The reality is (as Disney has learned the hard way), honest and wholesome care of animals isn't cheap. It's a lot of labor and other costs to do it "right".

Neither company has scrimped on either, to their credit. And, it is a credit that SeaWorld doesn't get (in the movie or often publically). NEVER in the film is it said they treat the Orca's well...rather, it is implied (quite well) that SeaWorld is abusing these animals for profit.

There it is...the evil PROFIT. And that is the crux of the purpose of the film. Not the Orca or their well being. Wake up.

One could easily make the argument that the whales currently in captivity would be better back with their pods, because a pod means family, and this rips at our national soul that we had the stain of slavery. What do you do with a whale that had that happen 30 years ago?

Of course the kneejerk response is, this stinks and it is wrong. And that's EXACTLY what the people who put this together intended. They don't even deny it. And, good for them. As I've said before, it was extremely well done!

But, to be adult about it. Lets look at the entire issue. It is not just the emotional one, nor is it purely about profits. Overwhelmingly (even guests at Sea World GASP) don't support the further capture of Orcas, that's (derpy derp moment for activists) how it became LAW!

But, they love the ones that are there. And yet, they are more than happy to skip that show for the roller coasters at Sea World and other exhibits. If the Shamu shows were the driver, they wouldn't build other shows and attractions. The fact is, they are not. They are part of an equation a potential park visitor does to see if they want to go. It's already a waning show. It was boring in the 90s, it's boring now. They want their high speed roller coasters, and "edutainment" shows like Shamu with thrills.

All that being said...Orca captures have been illegal for quite literally generations. That social/legal battle has already been won. So, that leaves me thinking, what is the point of this movie? Since that is what it seems to stress...

Immediate release of all the Orca's in captivity to the wild?

Of course, the obvious response is Keiko...(If you have to google what whale that is, then you really shouldn't respond without considering your points first)

What happened to Keiko anyhow? He was separated from his pod, and until he died reports were he still sought out human contact.

Like (as someone tried to discredit) a dog.

When someone here can prove to me that these animals are as sentient as humans, I'll listen. Otherwise, this is a useless discussion, and one I'll continue to defend.

Deaths are nothing new for animal keepers, plenty more to be mentioned than Orca deaths alone.

Keep at it, build your argument, and when you do, be sure you have sources and know what the heck you are talking about, not just some silly documentary.

 

[CaptainessKylie]

I 100% disagree with your false dichotomy. You're confusing the issue by talking about what pure breeds have become. The domestication of dogs happened because it was beneficial for both sides. They didn't drop some bombs to corner some wolves and keep them in a cage and *poof* dog. Sea World is sort of doing the opposite of domesticating; they've been breeding everyone with a whale that has killed multiple people... they're essentially creating "extra killer" whales.

Facts right first please, Tilli has been in the pool at the time of multiple deaths but only caused one death.

Yes what I referred to was pure breds, but its not only purebreeds that kill. Animals don't just become domesticated over night, it takes many generations. People like yourself want to justify keeping your dog at home, and how that is different from keeping an extra large dolphin in a tank. I can't deal with the hypocrisy of it all. Dogs are one example. The one that gets me is the people that keep birds in their home, in cages.

sigh, its all just very pot kettle black.

 

[OFTeric]

Facts right first please, Tilli has been in the pool at the time of multiple deaths but only caused one death.

Yes what I referred to was pure breds, but its not only purebreeds that kill. Animals don't just become domesticated over night, it takes many generations. People like yourself want to justify keeping your dog at home, and how that is different from keeping an extra large dolphin in a tank. I can't deal with the hypocrisy of it all. Dogs are one example. The one that gets me is the people that keep birds in their home, in cages.

sigh, its all just very pot kettle black.

I agree with this.

The way I measure people who work with animals is their intent.

Is the organization, providing the best possible care?

Does the organization improve their care when presented with the science?

Do the people who work with the animals provide a mentally stimulated environment?

When you look at SeaWorld over the past 50 years, you realize that how they cared for any of their animals back in 1965 is RADICALLY different from how they care for their animals now. Why is that? Because SeaWorld is an evolving Zoological institution that is constantly improving the health and well being of the animals in it's care as the information presents itself.

Back in the 50's and 60's a Dolphin would only live to be 20 in captivity. It was tragic and clearly not healthy. Over time SeaWorld has pioneered amazing programs, diets, social structures, positive interaction, and more to where we have no idea what their lifespan will be because a lot of the dolphins are in their late 40's now and will hopefully live a long and healthy life!

A massive success story in SeaWorld animal care, the Penguins in SeaWorld's care are now living twice as long as those in the wild.

It is incredible what their Animal Care team is capable of.

 

[flynnibus]

http://www.avclub.com/article/do-documentaries-need-to-be-fair-to-both-sides-of--86478

I think the author should have explored the fact that sensationalism sells... has invaded all other media formats.. so why would anyone be surprised to see documentaries sliding more towards shock/sensationalism and going 'extreme' to make their point. Offering counter points or balance would undermine the extremism they are painting.