MCU's THE ETERNALS (11/6/20) 8 8

[JollyComics]

40 minutes ago, Xenosmilus said:

Ehh, I think stolen is too strong a word for that scenario.  Based on how you presented the issue I'm sure that 95% the reason that they choose a deaf actress was because it came from Jolie.  Good idea's are cheap, implementation and execution of those good ideas into practice are whats hard.

Well, both knew each other for three years. Antoinette Abbamonte taught her children in sign language while she babysat them.  It seemed that she trusted Jodie.  Yes, I agreed with you about the ideas are cheap AND unprotected.  That was too bad for her not keeping it for herself - no documented or no trademarked.  Obviously, Lauren Ridoff has more experience in TV/Filming and better resume than her - she is perfect for a diverse movie and much younger than Antoinette.  More likely the lawsuit may be dismissed - insufficient evidence and no witness.  Like I said before, see what happens in the court - however the civil lawsuits are taking 2-3 years to enter the courtroom. The judge may reject it right away. It's California.

Edited January 25, 2020 by JollyComics

[Xenosmilus]

4 minutes ago, JollyComics said:

Well, both knew each other for three years. Antoinette Abbamonte taught her children in sign language while she babysat them.  It seemed that she trusted Jodie.  Yes, I agreed with you about the ideas are cheap AND unprotected.  That was too bad for her not keeping it for herself - no documented or no trademarked.  Obviously, Lauren Ridoff has more experience in TV/Filming and better resume than her - she is perfect for a diverse movie and much younger than Antoinette.  More likely the lawsuit may be dismissed - insufficient evidence and no witness.  Like I said before, see what happens in the court - however the civil lawsuits are taking 2-3 years to enter the courtroom. The judge may reject it right away. It's California.

I'm no lawyer but I would think she'd have to prove 1) that she could have implemented the idea into practice herself and 2) that the idea cost her money.  She would then have to prove that having a deaf actress playing a male comic book character increased box office sales. IDK just seems like a frivolous lawsuit to me.

[@therealsilvermane]

Here’s a news article about it.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7782039/Angelina-Jolies-deaf-employee-claims-actress-stole-idea-film-Eternals.html

That reminds me of an indie film “Little Noises” starring Crispin Glover in which an aspiring but untalented writer steals the poetry of his deaf friend, passes it for his own work, and  becomes a success from the stolen work.

You don’t really get that from the trailer, though.

[Xenosmilus]

1 hour ago, @therealsilvermane said:

Here’s a news article about it.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7782039/Angelina-Jolies-deaf-employee-claims-actress-stole-idea-film-Eternals.html

That reminds me of an indie film “Little Noises” starring Crispin Glover in which an aspiring but untalented writer steals the poetry of his deaf friend, passes it for his own work, and  becomes a success from the stolen work.

You don’t really get that from the trailer, though.

This example is apples and oranges to me.  Your example is plagiarism.  The Jolie case is more like someone saying, a cure for cancer would be good, then someone hearing that made a cure for cancer. Implementation/execution is more difficult than the idea and the person who came up with the idea deserves no credit.

Edited January 26, 2020 by Xenosmilus

[@therealsilvermane]

7 minutes ago, Xenosmilus said:

This example is apples and oranges to me.  This is plagiarism.  The Jolie case is more like someone saying, a cure for cancer would be good, then someone hearing that made a cure for cancer. Implementation/execution is more difficult than the idea and the person who came up with the idea deserves no credit.

Well, a fresh idea is gold, actually. It’s said in moviemaking that a good screenplay is the hardest part of the process. 
I’m not a lawyer either, but I think the plaintiff in this case is probably up against a wall because she didn’t copyright the her deaf hero in some form before talking about it with Ms. Jolie, if that’s what happened. If there are emails showing correspondence then that’s some hard proof. Disney ought to give some kind of story credit. A deaf superhero is a big deal.

[Xenosmilus]

23 minutes ago, @therealsilvermane said:

Well, a fresh idea is gold, actually. It’s said in moviemaking that a good screenplay is the hardest part of the process. 
I’m not a lawyer either, but I think the plaintiff in this case is probably up against a wall because she didn’t copyright the her deaf hero in some form before talking about it with Ms. Jolie, if that’s what happened. If there are emails showing correspondence then that’s some hard proof. Disney ought to give some kind of story credit. A deaf superhero is a big deal.

I see your point and maybe I'm biased. I am in the science field and see cases of IP (intellectual property) come up all the time.  I don't think you can copyright a general idea such as this instance. In the sciences even if you do file for a patent and get it approved you have to show that you are working on the idea (i.e. spending money on it and doing the research).  If you are not, you lose the patent, hence I made the  point about the plaintiff actually implementing the idea. If she can't show that then she'll have no case.

Edited January 26, 2020 by Xenosmilus
Drinking beers, grammar and spelling IS bad LOL

[fantastic_four]

On 1/25/2020 at 6:40 PM, JollyComics said:

Yes, I agreed with you about the ideas are cheap AND unprotected.  That was too bad for her not keeping it for herself - no documented or no trademarked.  Obviously, Lauren Ridoff has more experience in TV/Filming and better resume than her - she is perfect for a diverse movie and much younger than Antoinette.  More likely the lawsuit may be dismissed - insufficient evidence and no witness.

If this lawsuit were to win there would be no end to the idea-stealing claims people could make.  Unless there's some sort of hard evidence those articles aren't mentioning I can't imagine that case not being dismissed.

Is there any part of copyright law that covers pure ideas that haven't been published in any form at all?  EVERYTHING I've ever heard about copyright law starts from earliest date of putting ideas to print and sending that print out in some way.  What law would the lawyer even be citing here?

Edited January 28, 2020 by fantastic_four

[JollyComics]

1 hour ago, fantastic_four said:

If this lawsuit were to win there would be no end to the idea-stealing claims people could make.  Unless there's some sort of hard evidence those articles aren't mentioning I can't imagine that case not being dismissed.

Is there any part of copyright law that covers pure ideas that haven't been published in any form at all?  EVERYTHING I've ever heard about copyright law starts from earliest date of putting ideas to print and sending that print out in some way.  What law would the lawyer even be citing here?

I will learn little more information from my deaf community especially Deaf Hollywood community (LA/West Hollywood that surround Deaf West Threate).  You have a good question. I really hope that Antoniette documented something with time stamped somehow before her idea was taken.  It's now between her and her lawyers.  Antoniette did share her idea with Jodie few times.  You can find the third paragraph in the article - https://meaww.com/angelina-jolie-accused-steal-idea-the-eternals-deaf-superhero-former-employee-antoinette-abbamonte

[@therealsilvermane]

[theCapraAegagrus]

Ah, yes, 2020. We're still taking 60p quality images...

[@therealsilvermane]

16 minutes ago, theCapraAegagrus said:

Ah, yes, 2020. We're still taking 60p quality images...

I’m sure the images were taken with a hidden smart phone waist high and moving as the person quickly put the phone back in their pocket before anyone saw them.

Edited January 29, 2020 by @therealsilvermane

[theCapraAegagrus]

4 minutes ago, @therealsilvermane said:

I’m sure the images were taken with a hidden smart phone waist high and moving as the person quickly put the phone back in their pocket before anyone saw them.

Losers.

[@therealsilvermane]

7 minutes ago, theCapraAegagrus said:

Losers.

But also winning enough to be in a position to view these still classified images.

[Shoomanfoo]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/screenrant.com/marvels-eternals-set-photos-black-knight-plot-rumors/amp/

 

Not new tid bits but I just read it...

some screen shots of Black Night with Sersi confirming some sort of relationship.

[Bosco685]

 

[@therealsilvermane]

[@therealsilvermane]

[Bosco685]

13 hours ago, @therealsilvermane said:

It is good to see the studios catch up with society finally, no matter the characters or companies.

V For Vendetta, 2005 (Valerie Page)

Sin City, 2005 (Lucille)

Watchmen, 2009 (The Silhouette on V-J Day)

Gotham TV Show, 2016 (Renee Montoya, Barbara)

Batman v Superman: The Ultimate Cut, 2016 (background characters on ferry)

Deadpool 2, 2018 (Negasonic Teenage Warhead, Yukio)

Birds of Prey, 2020 (Renee Montoya, Ellen Yee; Roman Sionis, Victor Zsasz)

 

[@therealsilvermane]

9 hours ago, Bosco685 said:

It is good to see the studios catch up with society finally, no matter the characters or companies.

V For Vendetta, 2005 (Valerie Page)

Sin City, 2005 (Lucille)

Watchmen, 2009 (The Silhouette on V-J Day)

Gotham TV Show, 2016 (Renee Montoya, Barbara)

Batman v Superman: The Ultimate Cut, 2016 (background characters on ferry)

Deadpool 2, 2018 (Negasonic Teenage Warhead, Yukio)

Birds of Prey, 2020 (Renee Montoya, Ellen Yee; Roman Sionis, Victor Zsasz)

 

It is admirable, but a couple things how the situation seems to be different for Marvel Entertainment (as owned by Disney).

The above comic book movies are mostly rated R, except for the Blu Ray Ultimate Cut Batman v Superman background gay kiss and the Gotham show. You did leave out Batwoman which is a more significant step towards normalizing LGBQT in comic book movie properties. 

Disney World and Disneyland have long been adored by the gay community as the parks have had Pride Days and gay weekends (official and unofficial) since the 80's. However, their films clearly haven't represented the LGBQT community as well.

Disney doesn't have the luxury of making Rated R movies as their target audience is families. Unfortunately including scenes of gay romance in their movies would most likely stir much controversy with more conservative leaning families, not to mention conservative media. Comicsgate, which is a loose organization opposed to progressivism in comic books, was formed in part because Marvel revealed fan favorite Iceman/Bobby Drake to be gay in 2015. Comicsgate and its supporters, which are many like Hydra, have had a history of harrassing Marvel Comics creators for advancing what they call an "SJW agenda." Sometimes those attacks have been overwhelming. Carol Danvers' Captain Marvel eventually became the poster child for Comicsgate's attack of "wokeness" in the comics. Why I'm not exactly sure. That hate for Captain Marvel carried over to her movie, also fueled in part by Brie Larson's stance on diversity in film criticism and film journalism.

MCU films, which feature a heterosexual romantic relationship for lead characters in most films, seem to just mostly avoid romance when it comes to secondary characters and thus avoid opportunity to have these secondary characters be either gay or straight. Part of that, I'm sure is because of the "global-ness" of Disney properties. Homosexuality is almost a crime in Russia and China where Disney has a large footprint. America itself is still in large part a conservative nation and still views gay marriage as a controversy in many states. Disney, a family targeted company, has to tread lightly in these matters.

This is why having one of the Eternals, Phastos, be openly gay in the movie and actually kiss his partner is a huge step for mainstream comic book movies, not to mention Disney. This will be different from the above examples you posted and will be a bigger deal. I'm sure comicsgate-affiliated Youtube hate channels like Quartering and Geeks n Gamers as well as conservative media will be on the attack the way they attacked Captain Marvel, but hopefully a great story and a billion at the box office will drown out that hate. Kind of the way Captain Marvel did, for at least a little while.

 

Edited February 16, 2020 by @therealsilvermane

[Bosco685]

4 minutes ago, @therealsilvermane said:

It is admirable, but a couple things how the situation seems to be different for Marvel Entertainment (as owned by Disney).

The above comic book movies are mostly rated R, except for the Blu Ray Ultimate Cut Batman v Superman background gay kiss and the Gotham show. You did leave out Batwoman which is a more significant step towards normalizing LGBQT in comic book movie properties. 

Disney World and Disneyland have long been adored by the gay community as the parks have had Pride Days and gay weekends (official and unofficial) since the 80's. However, their films clearly haven't represented the LGBQT community as well.

Disney doesn't have the luxury of making Rated R movies as their target audience is families. Unfortunately including scenes of gay romance in their movies would most likely stir much controversy with more conservative leaning families, not to mention conservative media. Comicsgate, which is a loose organization opposed to progressivism in comic books, was formed in part because Marvel revealed fan favorite Iceman/Bobby Drake to be gay in 2015. Comicsgate and its supporters, which are many like Hydra, have had a history of harrassing Marvel Comics creators for advancing what they call an "SJW agenda." Sometimes those attacks have been overwhelming. Carol Danvers' Captain Marvel eventually became the poster child for Comicsgate's attack of "wokeness" in the comics. Why I'm not exactly sure. That hate for Captain Marvel carried over to her movie, also fueled in part by Brie Larson's stance on diversity in film criticism and film journalism.

MCU films, which feature a heterosexual romantic relationship for lead characters in most films, seem to just mostly avoid romance when it comes to secondary characters and thus avoid opportunity to have these secondary characters be either gay or straight. Part of that, I'm sure is because of the "global-ness" of Disney properties. Homosexuality is almost a crime in Russia and China where Disney has a large footprint. America itself is still in large part a conservative nation and still views gay marriage as a controversy in many states. Disney, a family targeted company, has to tread lightly in these matters.

This is why having one of the Eternals, Phastos, be openly gay in the movie and actually kiss his partner is a huge step for mainstream comic book movies, not to mention Disney. This will be different from the above examples you sighted and will be a bigger deal. I'm sure comicsgate-affiliated Youtube hate channels like Quartering and Geeks n Gamers as well as conservative media will be on the attack the way they attacked Captain Marvel, but hopefully a great story and a billion at the box office will drown out that hate. Kind of the way Captain Marvel did, for at least a little while.

 

Don't get your MCU hackles up, and take a moment to read.

3 hours ago, Bosco685 said:

It is good to see the studios catch up with society finally, no matter the characters or companies.

Studios. Like in more than one company. Though it is always clear where your bias leans.

Adding a bunch of disclaimers to make it THE FIRST isn't necessary. Though it took the Disney and MCU leadership longer to get there in a film.

Edited February 16, 2020 by Bosco685