If that is your goal, I think you will find you will get more of the outcome desired by changing your tactics.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Disney (and others) at the Box Office - Current State of Affairs
- Thread starter Disney Analyst
- Start date
If that is your goal, I think you will find you will get more of the outcome desired by changing your tactics.
_caleb
Well-Known Member
My confusion had more to do with the poor wording of you post.
This kind of tactic is likely why you don't get as many responses to your "why" as you could if your goal is to encourage them.
_caleb
Well-Known Member
Hmm. What tactics do you recommend?
My post was edited to assist this specifically.
Your stated goal was to encourage conversation and that your "why" is sincere. I would avoid the kind of language that is bolded.
_caleb
Well-Known Member
I wouldn't have mentioned your post, but when I said I didn't understand it, you accused me of being disingenuous. And when I ask people what they like, you accuse me of gatekeeping.
So thank you kindly for the advice, but frankly, your posting style isn't something I want to emulate.
My advice was solicited. And now completely disregarded in your very next post when I responded with suggestions. You prove how disingenuous you are with your actions. I never said emulate me.
Disney Irish
Premium Member
In my opinion outside of the topic of Star Wars no poster is coming across as "gatekeeping" with regards to Disney.
People like what they like, and in turn people don't like what they don't like. Asking someone "why" is common especially when its in response to someone saying they didn't like something without giving specifics.
People like what they like, and in turn people don't like what they don't like. Asking someone "why" is common especially when its in response to someone saying they didn't like something without giving specifics.
The person did not ask why the person did not like something that made it gatekeeping.
In their post it was "Well, I am a fan" and "I would think any adult fan would like something Disney is doing right now."
That has many connotations that are easy to see as rude, even if not intentional.
Asking why they did not like a single thing of recent would have been a different situation.
There was no "why" proposed by this poster in the post to the user. It was an implication that they are not a fan in a passive way. Gatekeeping fandom in the form of insinuating an adult fan would have loyalty. Why was that even relevant?
They then solicited how to word things better to encourage response. Specific recommendations were given with words that come across rude, and the very next post, they dismiss it rudely. Actions that do not speak of encouraging conversation.
Snark is snark, we know I got it. Don't masquerade it as you were encouraging conversation when all actions prove otherwise.
Last edited:
Disney Irish
Premium Member
I read it differently than you.
We all come from different perspectives, yours is not the one absolute.
Right, but this statement should be true for pretty much everyone because of how many different and varied things Disney has their hands in. There is quite literally something for everyone by design, which has been the point in many of that poster's previous statements.
Don't like princess movies? Okay, maybe you liked Elemental. No? How about Echo or Ahsoka or Goosebumps or Poor Things or their nature programming? Or? Or? There's so much that there's bound to be something that a given person would like. Pretty sure that was the sentiment.
For sure it is not.
Where is the part asking why they don't like it?
Why was adult fan thrown in there?
At a certain point, there are objective truths to something reading as rude, passively, intentionally or not.
Also, when someone is solicited for advice, and then rudley shoved off, they don't really show good faith do they?
You ask someone for advice, and they give it, if you don't want to use it, you just don't.Then someone says they don't want to emulate you, which was never asked.
Last edited:
MrPromey
Well-Known Member
I think the thing with Disney and especially Marvel with SFX is that it's just gotten out of hand. I remember watching behind the scenes stuff for Guardian's 3 and while I loved the movie and am a fan of James Gunn's work with them, it was kind of shocking how in one scene they showed, how much was being left up to post and how sort of flippant he was about that aspect.
It felt almost like the live stuff for a major scene in the movie was being done as pickup shots by a second unit... Except James Gunn was the head of that unit doing that live filming that day.
They were expecting to go in and really make the scene with CG after the fact and he casually talked about it while they were filming.
While I appreciate the freedom that gives a director to essentially animate a "live scene" to exactly what they want; the smoke all goes just so, the sparks all fly with precision, things crumble on command and every piece falls just the right way, paper flies "randomly" just how you want it to while the camera lingers without a cut to catch it all, etc... It also feels like they've gotten spoiled by all of this and I think with the current state of things, when you're handing off even the most simple stuff to effects houses, besides inflating the budget, it really puts pressure on them delivering all this footage and something has to give, somewhere.
To me, these directors would do good to go study Jurassic Park. That was one of the first major motion pictures to convincingly use CG and the majority of it still holds up better than a lot of modern stuff done 30 years later. At the same time, there is a shocking amount of that movie that was practical effect that I think most modern audiences would have a hard time believing could have been "real".
I'm sure most people today would be shocked about how that t-rex was brought to life, for instance.
Last edited:
Definitely not true. You could be a fan of the theme parks but not movies or tv in the last ten years. Really hard to please? Sure. But why is that an antagonizing thing? We are back to saying you have to like someone and their performance.
Sportts fans often like teams and they have not had wins or good news for years.
The adult wording seems like a passive jab, intentional or not.
Why should it be true?
The thread is also pertaining to box office. Disney's releases this year clearly are not liked by many people. No one has to like anything Disney produced for theaters this year. Plenty did not. That poster maybe liked none of it either. It does not have to be a shock. Gatekeeping fandom.
That is loyalty gatekeeping. It is ok if no one liked anything that came out in theaters from Disney in 2023. No one has to take it personally.
Last edited:
Disney Irish
Premium Member
I think @brideck posted a pretty nice response that would answer most of this.
Only speaking for myself, it's more confusing to me than antagonizing, because what Disney has created over the past decade is not demonstrably different from the output of other major studios. Which must mean that, in general, the people we're talking about haven't really liked any movies or TV from the past 10 years? At all? That can't be true, can it?
And that is why I posted what you just quoted me. In a box office thread, it is fair to presume the poster meant he did not care for any of the films Disney released this year. The box office numbers and critics would say that is true for a lot of people.
Bob Iger knows and admits that is true for a lot of people.
To clarify, you were not a poster I had in mind with the antagonizing or passive aggression aspect.
The poster being quoted and met with such rudeness intentional or otherwise never said anything about not liking anything in the last decade, I could certainly have missed that. They specifically said they have liked one of the Star Wars Projects.
I think if Disney has pumped out something not very different from anyone else, while costing so much more, is pointing out a major aspect of the Disney box office problem.
Disney is producing things not all that demonstrably different from other studios the last ten years, but costing often three times as much?
Disney Irish
Premium Member
This thread, and many in this sub-forum, sway all over the place. So no one cannot presume what the poster meant.
Until stated otherwise, it is better to presume they did rather than insinuate right? They sway but many try to bring it back. We also can't presume they mean forever or ten years of not liking what Disney produces.