http://www.mediabinge.com/mb/articles/showarticle.php?ID=1132
Who emailed Jim?
Who emailed Jim?
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Jim Hill and Grizz's Call to Arms
- Thread starter FigmentJedi
- Start date
Enderikari
Well-Known Member
Wow... Thanks Jim!
yensidtlaw1969
Well-Known Member
Now Grizz and I are one in the same 
!
!
WDWScottieBoy
Well-Known Member
So now I know why people on here disagree with Jim Hill so much. I couldn't even stand to read 1/10th of the page because all he's doing is putting down Grizz saying he's wrong. I'm sorry but I've backed Grizz in everything he's done and I'm not going to let this guy get the end of it. Grizz has VERY good points in his thread and has no room for arguments. I'll take this article and throw it out the window as it's truly disturbing to read something like what he said. I apologize Grizz for what has happened.
Wilt Dasney
Well-Known Member
Jim shouldn't be so quick to criticize a guy who could eat him. :lookaroun
I PM'd the thread to him when I first posted it. He's offline and probably
A.)Reading the Article
B.)Finished reading the article,sharpened his claws and ready to maul things.
A.)Reading the Article
B.)Finished reading the article,sharpened his claws and ready to maul things.
yensidtlaw1969
Well-Known Member
Again, we are one in the sameTahu said:
.:lookaroun
obviously, the person who sent Jim a copy of the link was good intentioned, but when an egomaniac like Jim Hill spots someone encroaching on his turf (ie- ripping Disney a new one), he's gonna get defensive. This article served as nothing more than to make Grizz look bad... and is one of Jims worst.
This is what happens when 2 egos collide.
This is what happens when 2 egos collide.
cherrynegra
Well-Known Member
I wouldn't worry Grizz fans. I'm more than sure that Grizz is prepared and willing to defend his and others' position. It's all part of living in a democracy. Everyone is entitled to their opinions. Even if you don't agree with them.
General Grizz
New Member
Oops? :lookaroun
(Jim Hill knows me!!! . . . but let me assure you that I am not fighting to save the Land's balloons/fountains/etc., but rather I support any change that IMPROVES the pavilion).
P.S. I still like Jim Hill.
(Jim Hill knows me!!!
. . . but let me assure you that I am not fighting to save the Land's balloons/fountains/etc., but rather I support any change that IMPROVES the pavilion).P.S. I still like Jim Hill.
WDWScottieBoy
Well-Known Member
General Grizz said:Oops? :lookaroun
(Jim Hill knows me!!!
And that's one thing Jim Hill will never understand about you. He sees some competition and will make sure that he sounds "better" than you. I'm still staying with you and agree with your thoughts. Keep up the good work Grizz!
jcraycraft
Member
Jim paints a picture that Grizz does not what / like change ..... but we know better :sohappy: Standing strong with you!!!!
AEfx
Well-Known Member
Um, love ya tigsmom, but gotta disagree with you.tigsmom said:
It's not if you agree on the topic or not, it's the way in which Hill made his "point".
He spent an entire several-page long article making backhanded insults against Grizz, using him as the ultimate poster-child for the very minor point he felt he had to rant and rant about.
It was terribly mean spirited (as much of Hills work is), and it doesn't matter which viewpoint you agree with (the Land should remain the same, or it should be updated), it is the absolute vicious way in which it was done.
It is because of this I can't believe sometimes I still go to his site, and usually it's just to check the archives - there are a few decent articles in there about the creation of certain rides, but his general attitude just turns me off. He writes endless articles bashing Disney products, like going back to some film script 14 drafts ago and finding some line that was cut out for whatever reason and frames an article about "what could have been?". Any entertainment journalist worth their salt does not review or make assertions about the final product based on a early draft - it's just not fair to the creators.
Like several other internet columnists, I just wonder why he bothers anymore, since his attitude is so negative all the time and really is about as anti-disney spirit as I can imagine. Even in this article, where he actually had something nice to say about the company (a very rare occasion on his site), he turns the rest of it into a flaming rant against a Disney fan that was truly uncalled for (Grizz didn't even contact Hill himself) and accomplished nothing but making Jim Hill look like an utter jerk.
I understand his point, and to be honest, I agree more with Hill than I do with Grizz on the Land; however, as usual, Hill spouts off his mouth for no reason - he could have easily written a mirror of that article, supporting the same theories but using it as a calm discussion different viewpoints and not the "these people make me so mad!" childish rant it came out as.
Why for?
Jim Hill has an attitude problem and continually takes the low-ground, and the only thing that makes his writing worth anything is the occasional tidbit behind-the-scenes - the rest of it comes off as the rantings of a mean old man who has lost sight of why he does what he does in the first place. Go pick out ten articles at random from his site that he has written, read them, and you will see what I mean.
Your thoughts?
AEfx
General Grizz
New Member
! (sorry. . . Your thoughts? :lol: )AEfx said:
Honestly, I think Jim could have tried contacting me before painting a portrait of me (I wonder if he actually went through our 14-page discussions, because he has misquoted me). . . but, alas, what's a bear to do?
I'll still visit Jim's site. Can't say I dislike him anymore as I never knew the guy. . . but he's still got some great info.
I truly appreciate the support, but I hope this doesn't turn into any type of "rivalry." That's just childish. :wave:
AEfx
Well-Known Member
I've held these views about Hill for awhile, anyone who pays attention to the patterns in his writing can see it. I have to admit to being floored late last night when I came home from work, cooked myself a little late dinner, and about spat it out when I wandered over to JHM and saw that article. It's typical Hill - but to see it directed at someone that I like and respect really bothered me.General Grizz said:
I also have to note the extreme irony in some of his statements, saying that "you" are the type of guy that PO's imagineers.
'scuse me? Gee, yeah, a guy who loves the Land so much he doesn't want to be gutted is really something compared to a guy who continually, week after week, writes articles that say unflattering things about people on nearly every level of the company, not to mention his "oops, you didn't hear this from me..." rumors he constantly releases? Sure, we love his "inside" info - but for him to get fired up over you is just the height of hypocrisy.
AEfx
Testtrack321
Well-Known Member
The interesting thing is that it seems Jim came away seeing this as a "save the parks as they are now" campaign, and not a "make the parks better than an airport termanal" that Grizz has. I've never been 100% behind Grizz, I'd admit that first, but I think Jim got the wrong impression out of Grizz.
I'll still read Jim, and I still respect him. Plus, sometimes reality is what is needed, for both Jimmy boy and Grizz.
I'll still read Jim, and I still respect him. Plus, sometimes reality is what is needed, for both Jimmy boy and Grizz.
Steamboat_Kevin
Well-Known Member
lol rob posted my picture below 
Computer Magic
Well-Known Member
Like WdWScottieBoy, I had hard time reading Jim’s article, as all the negativity turned me off his article. I have no strong opinion on what the Land should look like, my point is geared toward the way Jim wrote his article.
Sometimes I agree with Grizz and other times I don’t. But Grizz comes across as respecting everyone opinion.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but it’s the way that it's stated is what’s most important. Jim was way too negative. Any good points Jim may have had was lost by bashing Grizz.
I was going to post some of Jim negative quotes, but that is not what I’m about. I like to keep topics positive.
So I will leave with Grizz’s parting comments
Who is the bigger person (or Bear) here?
Sometimes I agree with Grizz and other times I don’t. But Grizz comes across as respecting everyone opinion.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but it’s the way that it's stated is what’s most important. Jim was way too negative. Any good points Jim may have had was lost by bashing Grizz.
I was going to post some of Jim negative quotes, but that is not what I’m about. I like to keep topics positive.
So I will leave with Grizz’s parting comments
General Grizz said:<O
General Grizz said:I'll still visit Jim's site. Can't say I dislike him anymore as I never knew the guy. . . but he's still got some great info
<O
</O
I truly appreciate the support, but I hope this doesn't turn into any type of "rivalry." That's just childish.
Who is the bigger person (or Bear) here?
Wilt Dasney
Well-Known Member
General Grizz said:
Eh, it's really not about rivalry, Grizz, it's just about him being a total hack. This is just one in a long line of examples. He may be a reliable source of info, but his "analysis" of practically everything is such a joke. With the way he writes, it wouldn't be a stretch at all for him to start a piece with a pile of popcorn that sat on the ground for 10 minutes last Wednesday in Adventureland and extrapolate it into a scathing indictment of everyone in Showkeeping across property. His bigger ideas may be valid in a lot of instances, but the details he uses to illustrate them are just laughable, all too often. If he had tried to contact you beforehand, he might have gotten some information to ruin his cartoonish argument, so for his purposes, he was right not to.
But you're right not to let it upset you. It's too silly to get upset over, really.