Streaming Services: First 2023 POWER RANKINGS (And what's up with Prime?)

[TheSword]

duplicate

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Not convinced that’s what she’s done. Again that kind of polorizing language prevents reasonable discussion. It all sounds a bit Orwellian.

Well, luckily it's all documented! Or perhaps you prefer this source? For future reference- stating facts is not polarizing, or Orwellian, or "purethink" (as she puts it), just accurate. To be clear, comparing people that advocate for trans rights (human rights) to Death Eaters seems a bit more polarizing to me. I wonder who did that?

To put this in perspective, though, there is some irony in the idea we are literally about to begin Pride Month and there are people that are demanding a reasonable discussion about giving more money to a person who repeatedly and publicly advocates against some of the most disempowered and marginalized people in society, all the while threatening legal action to prevent that reasonable discussion of her own words.

ETA- finally, I am always unclear on what the reasonable discussion is supposed to be? There isn't any doubt that Rowling advocates, repeatedly, publicly, and unashamedly, against trans people and their allies. There isn't any doubt that she donates her time, money, and platform to that cause. So, if the reasonable discussion supposed to be, "Trans people, should they be allowed to exist as, you know, people just like the rest of us with rights and stuff ...." then I'm not entirely sure that it will be possible to have a reasonable discussion about that.

If the reasonable discussion is supposed to be, "Can you please let me enjoy by wizard books without reminding me that my money goes to support something bad," then that's certainly an opinion and you're welcome to have it.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

It's a multi-media franchise at this point like star wars is. The books themselves are still selling strongly (the illustrated editions and the MinaLima Editions being the most recent offerings, not counting the spin-off books)

Asking fans to keep repurchasing the same books is also a sign of decline. At some point, even the most ardent fan will say "you know, I already have ten copies of this series" and stop purchasing.

I came to this conclusion myself when I realized I had two leatherbound editions of the complete Hitchhikers Guide and didn't need to talk myself into getting a third. (I now just have my favorite leatherbound edition and Kickstarted the big book of Douglas Adams' previously unseen notes and writings.)

 

[TheSword]

Well, luckily it's all documented! Or perhaps you prefer this source? For future reference- stating facts is not polarizing, or Orwellian, or "purethink" (as she puts it), just accurate. To be clear, comparing people that advocate for trans rights (human rights) to Death Eaters seems a bit more polarizing to me. I wonder who did that?

To put this in perspective, though, there is some irony in the idea we are literally about to begin Pride Month and there are people that are demanding a reasonable discussion about giving more money to a person who repeatedly and publicly advocates against some of the most disempowered and marginalized people in society, all the while threatening legal action to prevent that reasonable discussion of her own words.

Free speech for her, money for her, pain for everyone else. Got it.

I’m not demanding anything. I just think we should be disagree more agreeably. Phrases like hate speech used to discuss having an opinion in a current debate is Orwellian. The article also posted a correction starting that she said activism not the people had things in common.

Hate speech is a pretty specific thing (at least in the UK) and what JK writes doesn’t sound like hate speech. She’s just part of a debate about conflicting rights where she’s taking a position based on her experiences as a feminist and an abused woman. I don’t ageee with her about everything but some of her points deserve to be discussed.

People will form their own opinions but for the records the article you linked seems pretty biased by the way. Shallow, poorly explaining it’s points and seems to rely on who liked what tweet and which celebrities said what in response. When it isn’t deliberately misrepresenting what she has said. Her targets as far as I can see are people who shut her down or men who might abuse legislative protection to abuse women. That’s not transphobia.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

The article you linked is extremely biased by the way, shallow, poorly explains it’s points and seems to rely on who liked what tweet and which celebrities said what in response. When it isn’t deliberately misrepresenting what she has said. Her targets as far as I can see are people who shut her down or men who might abuse legislative protection to abuse women. That’s not transphobia.

That's mighty vague of you! Also, I linked TWO sources. Two. One was wikipedia. Put sure, I am positive you simply want to discuss how reasonable JK Rowling is.

That sounds like a fun conversation. Discussing how reasonable it is that someone discusses actual marginalized people to Death Eaters.

Finally- the part I bolded? The repeated claims that she's not targeting trans women, just women dressed up like men ....

I can't even. That's the problem. That's the hate. I can't even imagine someone saying that to the people I know, let alone the people in this community and demanding a reasonable conversation about it. But if you want to die on the hill that she is not transphobic, feel free.

Thanks.

 

[Ryujin]

I'm guessing it has more to do with paying residuals than a tax break but I could be way off base.

Well it is the company that tried cutting Scarlet Johansson's cut of the profits, not so long ago.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Well it is the company that tried cutting Scarlet Johansson's cut of the profits, not so long ago.

That was a Chapek maneuver. Iger is much better with talent.

The residuals issue is just something that is becoming more common with streamers; unless there was already a deal to buy out residual rights from the beginning (something Netflix did with a lot of their projects), we are looking to a cost/benefit analysis.

What really will anger most creatives is when they feel they are getting affirmatively screwed out of money or if their projects get cancelled close to completion (like Batgirl).

 

[Ryujin]

That was a Chapek maneuver. Iger is much better with talent.

The residuals issue is just something that is becoming more common with streamers; unless there was already a deal to buy out residual rights from the beginning (something Netflix did with a lot of their projects), we are looking to a cost/benefit analysis.

What really will anger most creatives is when they feel they are getting affirmatively screwed out of money or if their projects get cancelled close to completion (like Batgirl).

Talent or creatives, it reveals the culture of the company. That doesn't tend to change drastically from leader to leader. It simply illustrates that the bottom line is more important than the art, and to what degree.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

It simply illustrates that the bottom line is more important than the art, and to what degree.

The fact that they're redoing all of their cartoons as not-particularly-good live action remakes -- they're redoing seven year old Moana next -- spells that out pretty clearly.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Talent or creatives, it reveals the culture of the company. That doesn't tend to change drastically from leader to leader. It simply illustrates that the bottom line is more important than the art, and to what degree.

On this, I completely, 100% disagree.

One of the very first things Iger did was get rid of the structure put in by Chapek and oust the people at the top in order to put creatives back in control of the creative area.

To understand Disney, you really have to understand what's going on with that particular corporation over the last five years.