Streaming Services: First 2023 POWER RANKINGS (And what's up with Prime?)
- Thread starter Snarf Zagyg
- Start date
Snarf Zagyg
Notorious Liquefactionist
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.
Last edited:
Whizbang Dustyboots
Gnometown Hero
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
Legend
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.
Last edited:
Snarf Zagyg
Notorious Liquefactionist
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
Legend
Well it is the company that tried cutting Scarlet Johansson's cut of the profits, not so long ago.
Snarf Zagyg
Notorious Liquefactionist
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
Legend
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
Gnometown Hero
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
Notorious Liquefactionist
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.
trappedslider
Legend
Can you please let me enjoy b
In the grand scheme of things from the money side of things the brand in question is still making money, which is what matters otherwise like i said they would have cut ties/their losses.
I'll keep that in mind next time I see a new edition of LotR or a star wars book.
EDIT: So i found out I was still subbed to netflix when i got notified someone logged into my account from a different state,i logged in changed my password and canceled it lol. I may find a new documentary to watch but i doubt it and nothing else they have has gotten my eye
Snarf Zagyg
Notorious Liquefactionist
Well, when the abomination that was the live-action Lion King made more than 1.6 billion at the box office (yeah, surprised me too), and Little Mermaid is already over $185 million, you can't really blame 'em.
Ryujin
Legend
We'll see how that goes over the long term and whether it's just a matter of degree.
Snarf Zagyg
Notorious Liquefactionist
Not really. It truly is a difference from the top down.
Chapek may or may not have been bad at a lot of different things, but one thing was well-known; he had zero background in, or understanding of, the issues with the creative side. Iger, despite other issues, was always firmly on the creative side of the business- he was "of the Business."
I think what people might misunderstand is just because someone is "of the Business" doesn't mean that they are going to start producing awesome stuff you like. Hollywood, the industry ... they make crud all the time. Heck, I like A24, and even they are known to make some stinkers. And when you get to the bigger studios, you know ROI is going to be on their minds ... it's just that basic stuff, like talent relations, won't get messed up under Iger. People forget this now, but the beginning of the end wasn't just messing things up with Johansson, or trying to force Pixar and Imagineers to move to Florida right when Florida was becoming politicized .,.. it was also stuff like firing Peter Rice without the usual practice of setting up a deal. Just stupid things.
TheSword
Legend
And this is the problem that I have. The accusation of hate.
Instead of acknowledging that some men can use protective legislation in bad faith to abuse people. While explaining that it’s a small risk worth taking overall to protect the wider trans community and ensuring that proper safeguards are in place and explaining what those are. Instead you target the person, accused them of hate… as you’ve just don’t to me and try and shut down the discussion. No one learns anything. Other than raising a point gets your shot down.
I’m a openly gay man. When a customer came up to me today and said he didn’t approve of the pride flags in my business and said he would be keeping his children away for the month I explained why pride was important and told him we openly supported LGBT issues all year round and that he should make his decisions accordingly.
The battle for rights come by visibility and persuading people not by shutting down debate.
Snarf Zagyg
Notorious Liquefactionist
The only person shutting down debate about Rowling is ... Rowling, who repeatedly uses threats of legal process against others to stifle accurate comments against her (and, of course, a legal system in the UK that privileges wealthy litigants when it comes to speech claims).
Given the sharp increase in anti-trans and anti-gay activity, I don't think it's that surprising that people do not want their money going to an individual who advocates, platforms, and funds anti-trans activity. To the extent that you wish to keep stating that her rhetoric is not harmful, is not hateful, and that it is appropriate to keep misgendering individuals in order to make rhetorical points ...
I will reasonably disagree with you.
Whizbang Dustyboots
Gnometown Hero
Who the hell is chasing you around, forcing you to have this discussion? You are the one who is making this a major thrust of this thread.
Are you seriously suggesting that Lord of the Rings and Star Wars have not peaked, years or decades ago?
Again, you are allowed to like something that is past its prime. But just liking something doesn't magically make it be on a creative or commercial upswing.
Whizbang Dustyboots
Gnometown Hero
Well, it depends if you think that movie studios should be full of people trying to make art or just creating doodads to sell for money. Even inside most movie studios, that's not a settled issue.
The good news is that Disney can likely only do this stunt once with each of their franchises, unless they decide to do CGI versions of their traditionally animated cartoons, which seems unlikely to be a commercial success.
Snarf Zagyg
Notorious Liquefactionist
Scene: Somewhere in Burbank, within the next decade......
Disney CEO: I wonder how we're going to make more money. I like money. Have I mentioned that recently?
Underling: Yes, you've mentioned that you like yachts, and money buys yachts.
Disney CEO: We just finished releasing all those films. Heck, we even did a live-action version of Fantasia! But ... what was I saying.....
Underling: ...you like money?
Dinsey CEO: Yes! Exactly! I like money. How can we get more money? What would be new, and daring, and innovative ... but most importantly, would leverage our IP in order to get more money?
Underling: How about we take all those live-action movies we just made ... and make them ... animated films?
Disney CEO: What? Like ... an animated Lion King? Is that even possible? Do you think it would make money?
Underling: Uh ...... yes, I think it is possible, and I think it would make money.
Disney CEO: Perfect. I love it when I have great ideas! Stock bonuses for everyone, and by everyone, I mean me!
Similar Threads
