LA Times: Is Disney Paying Its Fair Share In Anaheim

Darkbeer1

Well-Known Member
Now the question is, do all these same reviewers actually attend the film festivals and actually watch all the independents they review. Or are they limited in time and so have to watch it later when its released or not even attend the festivals at all.



Additionally with new distribution models like NetFlix independent films are not making the theater runs.

And Disney is pulling out of Netflix to start its own competing service.
 

c-one

Well-Known Member
No one is asking you to savor each one. Just the ones that look interesting to you, regardless of what so and so critic thought of it beforehand. As someone in the creative field, it really sucks knowing that people will turn their nose up at your offering before even setting foot in a theatre just because Mr. Stuffed Shirt "critic" found it not to be to his liking.

As for filmmaker and film critic being two different jobs, yes they are. Filmmaking is a studied and learned skill practiced over time, while film criticism is a totally subjective opinion that can just be pulled out of one's proverbial backside at a whim and emotionally swayed, yet somehow it's more readily valued than the efforts of the filmmaker.
I can promise you that writing is a studied and learned skill. And if your objection is subjective, backside-borne opinions, I'd be a lot more concerned with wannabe YouTubers, dead-end bloggers, and the people who pal around on review aggregators than the professional critics who've been making noise these past few days.
 

Hatbox Ghostbuster

Well-Known Member
I can promise you that writing is a studied and learned skill. And if your objection is subjective, backside-borne opinions, I'd be a lot more concerned with wannabe YouTubers, dead-end bloggers, and the people who pal around on review aggregators than the professional critics who've been making noise these past few days.
Ironically, you're talking to a writer...
And agree that the biggest problem is the wannabe review crowd.
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
Well, there was the time that the Redskins owner tried to sue (but ultimately gave up) the Washington City Paper for libel over an article that was chock full of unflattering facts.

There was the MLBPA head trying to get the media banned from clubhouses entirely before games. Which, maybe there is an argument there, but his effort wasn't successful.

That's just off the top of my head. Point being that I don't think sports fans are better off with less access to the teams and players they cover. It's the same story as this LAT thing; one person's unfair coverage is another person's unflattering-but-useful coverage.

All you have to do is look at the media protests that certain NFL players have taken in recent years. While they may be contractually obligated to be available to the media they don't have to answer questions. The NFL is actually taking a real look at their media access policy...
 

c-one

Well-Known Member
All you have to do is look at the media protests that certain NFL players have taken in recent years. While they may be contractually obligated to be available to the media they don't have to answer questions. The NFL is actually taking a real look at their media access policy...
And the narrative is almost always that the players are the ones being irresponsible, immature, etc. Rightly so!
 

Darkbeer1

Well-Known Member
And the narrative is almost always that the players are the ones being irresponsible, immature, etc. Rightly so!

The player signs a contract, that has a lot of rules the player agree to, including the possibility of suspension and torture of the remaining time on the contract. In return, they get some guarantees and a very healthy paycheck. But both the employer and employee agree in advance to the terms, and that includes speaking to the press while on the job, and behaving in a civil manner.

If someone doesn't agree with it, they don't have to sign and can look for other options.
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
And the narrative is almost always that the players are the ones being irresponsible, immature, etc. Rightly so!

In the end though is it really? Do we really need a reporter, who likely never played the game, second guessing a players decision on the field?

Its one thing for the media to be given access to a coach, who usually makes most decisions during a game. But having a reporter ask questions 10 minutes after a game about why specific plays did or didn't work and why didn't they make xyz decision isn't all that helpful.
 

Hatbox Ghostbuster

Well-Known Member
In the end though is it really? Do we really need a reporter, who likely never played the game, second guessing a players decision on the field?

Its one thing for the media to be given access to a coach, who usually makes most decisions during a game. But having a reporter ask questions 10 minutes after a game about why specific plays did or didn't work and why didn't they make xyz decision isn't all that helpful.
Ugh, most post-game interviews are so cringey.
 

Darkbeer1

Well-Known Member
Heck, the first time I met Don Coryell, the former San Diego Charger head coach was in a restroom at Jack Murphy Stadium, not the best time for an interview....

Also the first time I met Bill Walton was the Men's room at the San Diego Airport In a club lounge.

Much nicer to have the table and podium set up the NFL offers currently, and keeps the locker room private.
 

c-one

Well-Known Member
I won't argue in favor of cliche talking points interviews. But I won't say that athletes or teams shutting out all access is the answer. Great sports writing has contributed to my fandom of sports and the industry's place in American culture. And again, whether the writer played sports or made films is irrelevant and expertise comes in many forms, otherwise I'm not sure why there are so many people on this theme park board who aren't engineers or operations managers.
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
I won't argue in favor of cliche talking points interviews. But I won't say that athletes or teams shutting out all access is the answer. Great sports writing has contributed to my fandom of sports and the industry's place in American culture. And again, whether the writer played sports or made films is irrelevant and expertise comes in many forms, otherwise I'm not sure why there are so many people on this theme park board who aren't engineers or operations managers.

There is a reason why almost all sports shows now have former players on their broadcasts. When one has insight into the game being covered it gives a better perspectives than those that never played the game.

While I like Joe Fonzi and Mark Ibanez after local Bay Area football games, its the likes of Bubba Paris, Jeremy Newberry, and the great Jerry Rice that bring a different understanding of the game and why things happen.
 

Hatbox Ghostbuster

Well-Known Member
There is a reason why almost all sports shows now have former players on their broadcasts. When one has insight into the game being covered it gives a better perspectives than those that never played the game.

While I like Joe Fonzi and Mark Ibanez after local Bay Area football games, its the likes of Bubba Paris, Jeremy Newberry, and the great Jerry Rice that bring a different understanding of the game and why things happen.
Gotta agree there. Different than a one off movie review.
If I'm going to hear on-going analysis of a sport, I want to hear from guys who played it, not some schmo who watches tv.
MLB Network does it really well having loads of former big leaguers explaining plays, giving player breakdowns, and offering lots of in-studio demonstrations. Brings a whole new look into the game.
 

c-one

Well-Known Member
Some players are good analysts, some are very much not (Shaquille O'Neal, love you, please stick to commercials tho), but at any rate I think discounting the work of David Halberstam, Jackie MacMullen, Lee Jenkins et al is a mistake.
 

SuddenStorm

Well-Known Member
Ummm Yeah. Everyone knows that. What's your point?

Your post suggested that Disney's demands didn't make sense from the viewpoint of the theaters. If that's the case, the theaters don't have to accept Disney's demands, and not show Star Wars. But, if the theaters don't like Disney's demands but accept them, they shouldn't complain on social media (as I've seen some theater owners do on reddit) or accuse Disney of bullying the theaters, since Disney is obviously doing what's in it's best interest.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom