Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

What Should Disney Do?

13 posts in this topic

Posted · Report post

I think they need to protect their property or it opens them up to anyone doing anything they want there. Yeah, that's overstated, but it sure sets a dangerous precedent...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I don't know anything about this film maker and my guess is that Disney should let it go. It will be more of a refection on the director than on Disney. If they make noise about this, it will give more notice to the film. In the future, Disney has to be more vigilant and the fact that they were not surprises me. I have often heard that they tend to run their theme parks at least like monarchies if not dictatorships. How could they have missed so many opportunites to become aware of what this guy was doing? I thought their security was legendary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I think a huge disclaimer at the beginning about the fictional nature of the film and a deal to pay Disney part of the gate (not the profits) would be appropriate.This would serve to discourage any future ideas of monetary gain without paying the company that provided all the backdrop. And, vigilant removal of any Youtube postings.

Just my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I would bet that if Disney makes those demands it will bring just the sort of negative press they wish to avoid. But they would certainly be well within their rights to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I can't imagine protecting their rights would bring them a lot of negative publicity in this case. It's not like a situation where they're going after a daycare center that put their characters on a wall, especially if the daycare center says they didn't know that was wrong. In this case the filmmakers were fully aware that they were breaking the law and went out of their way to conceal their actions. If Disney lets them get way with it expect someone to try shooting a porno there, or other companies thinking they can use the parks as a backdrop for ads, etc. I doubt that the general public will feel much sympathy towards the film crew, and as a result, what might be a good film is likely to end up being locked away instead of shown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I don't know much about Sundance but I have read, over the years, that they do inspire many creative films. However, I am not sure what becomes of many of those films. Do they end up in theatres? Are they a part of mainstream films for that year? Or do they play in specialty theatres and become cult classics?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I don't know much about Sundance but I have read, over the years, that they do inspire many creative films. However, I am not sure what becomes of many of those films. Do they end up in theatres? Are they a part of mainstream films for that year? Or do they play in specialty theatres and become cult classics?

All of the above, Jim. Some films debut at Sundance and go on to great acclaim in mainstream cinema-- like MEMENTO, RESERVOIR DOGS, HOOP DREAMS, RIVER'S EDGE, SEX, LIES, AND VIDEOTAPE, THE BRAVE LITTLE TOASTER, and most recently, the Oscar nominated BEASTS OF THE SOUTHERN WILD. Some only wind up playing in specialty theatres. And still others may only find their audiences on the film festival circuit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

NPR did a story, today, on Sundance. Some in Utah want the state to stop providing money to support the festival. However, it turns out that Sundance generates anywhere from 80 to 90 million bucks in revenue for the region every year. The story also discussed the film in question. The person they interviewed seems to think that the film will never make it to the general theatre audience. He also referred to it as "guerilla" filming tactics. It was interesting and I'll bet you can find it on the NPR website.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

That New Yorker article was very interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

If it falls into the category of social commentary as the New Yorker claims, then I withdraw my comment about removing postings on youtube (unless the film makers themselves wish to do that). But I still think fair compensation to Disney for providing the backdrops would be appropriate (not punitive damages). That is just a monetary matter, not a freedom of speech issue. Again, just my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I wonder if the New Yorker scribe ever heard of the "Air Pirates Funnies" case in which Disney was quite victorious. Th efact that this film set out to make Walt Disney World seem dark and evil will certainly not be overlooked when deciding the merits of the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0