CAPTAIN MARVEL starring Brie Larson (3/8/19)
5 5

2,696 posts in this topic

82,347 posts
Just now, WeR138 said:

Maybe some of the lawyers on the boards could chime in, but other than Disney using their Gazillion dollars to intimidate someone into stopping this sort of activity, I don't believe there was anything illegal done.

Not that I am some massive Disney fan that believes in all that it does as 'for the fans' (e.g. taking legal action against schools for painting cartoon characters on their walls), but if it is 'affecting commerce' there are actual laws about this. Though many times it is most probably about labor impacts and outside entities influencing workers.

Affecting Commerce Law and Legal Definition

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
82,347 posts

No surprise here.

So this film is at the level of Avengers, Captain America and Iron Man?

Avengers01.PNG.cfe26e232937a16b2ec70d5faa299ce4.PNG

Captain_America01.PNG.f43316fb4bd50cf1f673f418fefcebf0.PNG

IronMan01.PNG.8e6f8dc414f11d4606210ffae1a9616e.PNG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,169 posts
3 minutes ago, Bosco685 said:

Not that I am some massive Disney fan that believes in all that it does as 'for the fans' (e.g. taking legal action against schools for painting cartoon characters on their walls), but if it is 'affecting commerce' there are actual laws about this. Though many times it is most probably about labor impacts and outside entities influencing workers.

Affecting Commerce Law and Legal Definition

I just think that if there was some way for Disney to stop this from happening, in the legal venue, their army of lawyers would have already done it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,112 posts
Posted (edited)
38 minutes ago, WeR138 said:

What violation would they be investigating?

Internet Fraud is an FBI investigatable offense.  

 

Edited by Chuck Gower

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
82,347 posts
7 minutes ago, WeR138 said:

I just think that if there was some way for Disney to stop this from happening, in the legal venue, their army of lawyers would have already done it.  

I thought the same after The Last Jedi and a group clearly coming out claiming the attacks. Though I figured we may not hear of all the details going on behind the scenes.

Could they be from countries where the American legal system has no influence? That could be the problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,169 posts
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, Chuck Gower said:

Internet Fraud is an FBI investigatable offense.  

Is it illegal to have multiple accounts and post the same negative review on all of them.  I don't think it is, but I don't know. But lawyers that work for multi-billion dollar corporations know.

Before I get roasted for being a movie review troll, let me state that I would love for this movie to do well, I'm just thinking out loud.

Edited by WeR138

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,112 posts

They are outright claiming to be using the internet to commit fraud. They're not doing it directly TO Disney... the nonsense they're up to isn't having an effect on their business. They can 'claim' they ruined Ghostbusters, but really that just wasn't a good idea of a movie int he first place, or that TLJ 'only' making a billion dollars was because of them (and thus it's a victory), but the truth is... Disney doesn't even notice them. Completely insignificant, and ineffectual to Disney.

However, they ARE hurting Rotten Tomatoes reputation through internet manipulation and it could have an effect on their bottom line. I don't even look at their site anymore - they've been compromised and haven't fixed the problem. If enough people do that, or they can show a decline in business due to this, it is very much an actionable offense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,185 posts
5 minutes ago, Chuck Gower said:

They are outright claiming to be using the internet to commit fraud. They're not doing it directly TO Disney... the nonsense they're up to isn't having an effect on their business. They can 'claim' they ruined Ghostbusters, but really that just wasn't a good idea of a movie int he first place, or that TLJ 'only' making a billion dollars was because of them (and thus it's a victory), but the truth is... Disney doesn't even notice them. Completely insignificant, and ineffectual to Disney.

However, they ARE hurting Rotten Tomatoes reputation through internet manipulation and it could have an effect on their bottom line. I don't even look at their site anymore - they've been compromised and haven't fixed the problem. If enough people do that, or they can show a decline in business due to this, it is very much an actionable offense.

Is IMDB open to the same thing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,530 posts
2 hours ago, Chuck Gower said:

Of course, Sam Jackson is black, and the people I hear complain about 'he plays the same guy in every movie' are generally older white dudes.

As a (slightly) older white dude, I could see that Sam Jackson usually plays the "same guy in every movie'' but I don't think that's a bad thing.

As one review put it about a decade ago, "When you cast Denzel Washington, most often he could be replaced by a white actor - a la Tom Cruise or Brad Pitt - and you wouldn't notice the difference. But when you cast Samuel L. Jackson, you never forget that his character is black."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
82,347 posts
7 minutes ago, WeR138 said:

Before I get roasted for being a movie review troll, let me state that I would love for this movie to do well, I'm just thinking out loud.

I didn't interpret your questions in any other way than a discussion about the topic. :foryou:

Now if you question if Captain Marvel's green suit is better than the final design...

 

emotion01.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,185 posts
Just now, Gatsby77 said:

As a (slightly) older white dude, I could see that Sam Jackson usually plays the "same guy in every movie'' but I don't think that's a bad thing.

As one review put it about a decade ago, "When you cast Denzel Washington, most often he could be replaced by a white actor - a la Tom Cruise or Brad Pitt - and you wouldn't notice the difference. But when you cast Samuel L. Jackson, you never forget that his character is black."

Sam Jackson made enough of an impression as Fury in The Winter Soldier that I wanted a Fury solo film.

Tom Cruise is pretty much the same in every movie, Denzel has far more range IMO. No one could have topped him in Training Day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,530 posts

Saw this last night. Thought it was surprisingly good.

I'd put it as an above-average MCU film - better than Thor / The First Avenger / Iron Man 2 / Doctor Strange, but not as good as the better films they've produced. And not in the same league as Wonder Woman.

Really excited that they included Monica Rambeau as well. She's the Captain Marvel I grew up on in Avengers / West Coast Avengers in the 80s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,112 posts
4 minutes ago, bane said:

Is IMDB open to the same thing?

Any business that is attacked through the internet for the purpose of fraud would be open to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
82,347 posts
Just now, bane said:

Tom Cruise is pretty much the same in every movie

I know a lot of people see it this way. But when you look at his performances in War of the Worlds (a deadbeat dad that slowly turns it around), Oblivion (a replicant going through the motions of life) or even Edge of Tomorrow (slacker military officer that through multiple lives becomes a hardened warrior) this felt like different performances, IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
82,347 posts

Jeez! What did Thor (2011) do wrong to buck the trend? I love that movie.

Cinemascore_MCU01.thumb.PNG.1263dd865e658e11007fea3a3b935d29.PNG

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,530 posts
5 minutes ago, Bosco685 said:

Jeez! What did Thor (2011) do wrong to buck the trend? I love that movie.

Cinemascore_MCU01.thumb.PNG.1263dd865e658e11007fea3a3b935d29.PNG

 

Thor looked surprisingly low-budget with its Earth scenes. Like, three people in a desert frustrated with a Destroyer... as if someone crossed "The Terminator" with an episode of that '90s TV show "Renegade."

That said,Thor 2 was (by far) the worst MCU film so far. I actually fell asleep in the theater for 20+ minutes and didn't feel like I missed anything. Couldn't tell you who the villain was to this day.

I mean, because I'm a comic geek I vaguely recall its being Malek, but

a) coudn't tell you anything about him and

b) all I remember is the villain being The Nothing from The Neverending Story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30,032 posts
19 minutes ago, Bosco685 said:

I know a lot of people see it this way. But when you look at his performances in War of the Worlds (a deadbeat dad that slowly turns it around), Oblivion (a replicant going through the motions of life) or even Edge of Tomorrow (slacker military officer that through multiple lives becomes a hardened warrior) this felt like different performances, IMHO.

it's the performance in collateral that i always think of as being off his usual road.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,936 posts
46 minutes ago, WeR138 said:

Maybe some of the lawyers on the boards could chime in, but other than Disney using their Gazillion dollars to intimidate someone into stopping this sort of activity, I don't believe there was anything illegal done.

I am not a lawyer.  

 

Ok with that out of the way. To find the RT ratting stuff illegal you would likely need to prove a large number of reviews were coming from one group ( or a very few) or individual, and that group would need to be submitting the majority of the negative reviews.  Essentially, one person can't cast thousands of votes.  Especially, if it was coming from another corporate entity especially one in the industry.

 

The problem here is if it is coming from 1000's of individuals with no demonstratable connection, expressing their opinion would be protected under their 1st amendment right to free speech. RT provided a open forum, and they used it to express their opinion, which is protected. RT can legally close the forum, however since they are under no obligation to provide it as a price company.

 

The legal problem stems from is there any way to prove where the reviews a are coming from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
82,347 posts
2 minutes ago, Straw-Man said:

it's the performance in collateral that i always think of as being off his usual road.

That's a really good point. Collateral is such a great movie, loaded with strong actors. But his performance as Vincent was so un-Cruise like.

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
5 5