In Defense of Bob Chapek

[BrianL]

Not to answer for Liquidice, but every company has an Agenda/angle, Disney has definitely waded into controversial waters in some instances. Whether or not they should be considered controversial is a completely different conversation, the fact that they are doing this through very limited time slots in their movies, shows, ect. is still ground breaking for a company this day in age (as sad as that is). I assume the THEY he was referring to is Disney the company. I think you could say that Disney has a more liberal leaning agenda, it's not like they are out there pushing conservative ideals.

This is true, but it's WHY they are doing it that is the heart of the mater - and WHY they are doing it is because they think they will make more money if they do than if they don't. That's it.

 

[Aluminum Falcon]

This is true, but it's WHY they are doing it that is the hear tof the mater - and WHY they are doing it is because they think they will make more money if they do than if they don't. That's it.

That is debatable, not taking sides would probably net them more money in the short term, in the long term they may want to be a leader, and can see the writing on the wall with how things are trending socially, and want to be ahead of it to avoid criticism in the future. It all comes back to money, it's just hedging your bets for the future IMO

 

[BrianL]

I haven’t seen said video. I still dislike the prequels. Weird to think some random YouTube video submarined that entire franchise for decades.

Oh, it did though. It changed plenty of people's minds - people I know. Suddenly everyone was talking about what a joke the movie was, and I was just like, the same movie we saw 6 or 7 times? The same movie with Darth Maul and that awesome lightsaber fight? Why am I not supposed to like it? Because a side character was mildly annoying? George Lucas is...a hack? What now? It was pretty crazy!

 

[BrianL]

That is debatable, not taking sides would probably net them more money in the short term, in the long term they may want to be a leader, and can see the writing on the wall with how things are trending socially, and want to be ahead of it to avoid criticism in the future. It all comes back to money, it's just hedging your bets for the future IMO

Well, their assessment may or may not be correct - that's debateable for sure - but they do think that it is and that it will make them more money. Future research may lead to changing actions, but that is the only reason they are doing it.

 

[Pickles516]

It's also really tough when people straw man their arguments. Like saying a law that forbids teaching small children explicit sexual information is "you do not think it's ok for kids to know gay people exist".

No straw man here. Just painting with broad strokes based on the arguments I’ve seen because nobody seems to want to state what their position is.

 

[Aluminum Falcon]

Well, their assessment may or may not be correct - that's debateable for sure - but they do think that it is and that it will make them more money. Future research may lead to changing actions, but that is the only reason they are doing it.

i agree with that in this case, i would just say that there are companies out there who make controversial things part of their mission particularly because of a moral or ethical stance, those companies will still attempt to capitalize on their stances, but the root of the stance is not purely financial, In Disneys case, i could see it as primarily financial, but not completely without a moral/ethical element to it. It just doesn't have to be one or the other

 

[gorkt]

I mean, WDW has always been ahead of their time in terms of LGTBQ rights. Gay Days have been a thing since 1991. Why are people so surprised that they would support that community?

And what explicit sexual information is being taught to 1st through 3rd graders? Like, anywhere? THAT'S your strawman. If that were actually happening, parents would have squashed it long ago. Unless you consider "gay people exist" as sexually explicit.

 

[BrianL]

I mean, WDW has always been ahead of their time in terms of LGTBQ rights. Gay Days have been a thing since 1991. Why are people so surprised that they would support that community?

And what explicit sexual information is being taught to 1st through 3rd graders? Like, anywhere? THAT'S your strawman. If that were actually happening, parents would have squashed it long ago. Unless you consider "gay people exist" as sexually explicit.

To be clear, "Gay Days" is not an official Disney event, but startes as a seperate event out in Anaheim where attendees did go to Disneyland on a specific day. Disney has generally welcomed their business though and has more and more offered special items, etc. on those days. They have been supportive of their employees with partner benefits for a long time though and were ahead of most companies on that, though Hollywood in general has always been ahead of the curve on that stuff.

 

[Liquidice]

What agenda? Showing dif types of ppl? Who is they? What is this agenda you keep mentioning? You honestly sound like a conspiracy theorist, it's very strange. Say specifics instead of being so vague. "Agenda".

I'm trying my hardest not to be very specific and start a huge political debate - which is against the rules. I think I'd rather just leave it be rather than get in trouble with the mods

Lets get back to the topic at hand - which is why Chapek stinks ... or doesn't.

 

[Liquidice]

Ah I see. You are watching you tube to get your opinions and reviews. That explains a lot. The algorithm is training you (and the rest of society - not just you).

https://jasonpargin.substack.com/p/a-case-study-in-freaky-youtube-algorithms

I somehow feel like I've suddenly been pigeonholed into a particular demographic because I watch youtube.

 

[Liquidice]

That's been a huge problem for a long time. Remember when the prequels came out? When we first saw The Phantom Menace, I and all of my friends thought it was great - we loved it! We saw it several times. It seemed plenty popular, despite critics not being on board. The fans were all excited about the movie and the merch etc. Then one day, everyone suddenly hates it - vehemently. It has ruined Star Wars and George Lucas is a joke! Why? Because some very long, intricate, and now infmaous video picked the movie apart bit by bit, criticizing every little thing about it and telling viewers why they are wrong to like it. And that was it - now it was cool to hate on it, and people have - relentlessly - for decades. The ST took some of the heat off the prequels finally and they are finally starting to get some respect!

My friends and I hated Episode I from the day it came out.

TV, magazine and newspaper reviews of Episode I were also pretty bad in general. They said the acting was terrible and the plot turned Star Wars into a political movie instead of a Space opera.

Clone Wars also featured a lot less Jar Jar Binks because people didn't like Episode I because of Jar Jar.

I always thought the Prequels were always generally not liked - and this was before YouTube and before most people used the Internet.

But maybe it has to do with what you grew up with? I grew up watching the Original trilogy.

 

[Liquidice]

Correct, there is a negative bias, particular on YouTube, because it is human nature to click on negative thumbnails and clicks=$$. I don't really even read reviews much anymore because they are so tainted. It's the same with clickbait everywhere. It's tough to resist.

I was fine with the last few Star Wars movies. I particularly liked the first of the new series. Were they as good as the originals, no, but thats my genX bias showing probably. I wonder how the original ones would fare in todays media climate. I can see it now:

STAR WARS: DARTH VADER IS LUKE'S FATHER? REALLY!?!

I personally liked The Force Awakens as well, I'd honestly rate it higher than most of the prequel movies. I think the trilogy itself probably would have been more well received if Last Jedi didn't try to subvert expectations and then Disney tried to fix things with Rise of Skywalker.

 

[Pickles516]

I'm trying my hardest not to be very specific and start a huge political debate - which is against the rules. I think I'd rather just leave it be rather than get in trouble with the mods

Lets get back to the topic at hand - which is why Chapek stinks ... or doesn't.

I mean…if you’re going to start alluding to agendas without specifying what that agenda is, it kind of leads people to make assumptions or at least speculate as to what you’re talking about. If you don’t want to be specific and would rather “leave it be”, then why don’t you do just that? Participation in this thread isn’t compulsory. You can absolutely “leave it be”, but as long as you continue to participate in the thread, people are probably going to keep asking you exactly what you’re on about.

 

[Jonfw2]

I'd like to suggest we get back to bashing/defending Chapek at this point. This has gone way too far down a very specific rabbit hole.

 

[BrianL]

My friends and I hated Episode I from the day it came out.

TV, magazine and newspaper reviews of Episode I were also pretty bad in general. They said the acting was terrible and the plot turned Star Wars into a political movie instead of a Space opera.

Clone Wars also featured a lot less Jar Jar Binks because people didn't like Episode I because of Jar Jar.

I always thought the Prequels were always generally not liked - and this was before YouTube and before most people used the Internet.

But maybe it has to do with what you grew up with? I grew up watching the Original trilogy.

Well, it was liked in my circles, and was making a boatload of money too! Yeah, people didn't like Jar Jar too much, but it wasn't enough to ruin the movie...until it was. I definitely grew up watching the OT too. People my age are supposed to only like the OT (and even then really only the first two). The thing is, all STar Wars movies are basically cartoons - and I LIKE cartoons!

Star Wars fans are so weird. "I hate Ewoks. I hate Jar Jar. I hate Kylo." Guess what - you hate Star Wars.

 

[Jonfw2]

Star Wars fans are so weird. "I hate Ewoks. I hate Jar Jar. I hate Kylo." Guess what - you hate Star Wars.

Sounds like Disney was the perfect company to buy them!

 

[Pickles516]

I'd like to suggest we get back to bashing/defending Chapek at this point. This has gone way too far down a very specific rabbit hole.

Isn’t the lack of specificity actually the issue here? It’s a weird look to say really vague and possibly outlandish things in order to draw ire from others, and then revert to “no, no, let’s stay on topic” when someone asks them to clarify. It’s akin to kids going “I’m not touching you, I’m not touching you” and then acting shocked and running to teacher when they get smacked.

 

[Liquidice]

I mean…if you’re going to start alluding to agendas without specifying what that agenda is, it kind of leads people to make assumptions or at least speculate as to what you’re talking about. If you don’t want to be specific and would rather “leave it be”, then why don’t you do just that? Participation in this thread isn’t compulsory. You can absolutely “leave it be”, but as long as you continue to participate in the thread, people are probably going to keep asking you exactly what you’re on about.

I don't think it would help prevent me from being in trouble with the mods if I clarified, just to stop assumptions - but you're right, I'll drop the agenda talk like TsWade2 Like was said previously it isn't really helping change anyone's opinion anyway. I'm not sure it is really pertinent to the topic anyway.

Back on topic, Chapek - and why he stinks or doesn't stink - I still think he's a bad CEO and the changes that have occurred in the parks lately imho may be profitable in the short term, but I worry it won't be in the long term and as a Disney customer, I definitely don't feel like they have been pro-consumer lately. I do hope that extending his contract for 3 years allows him to start implementing changes that he thinks are important for the long term and not just associated with making profits in the short term though ...

 

[Jonfw2]

Isn’t the lack of specificity actually the issue here? It’s a weird look to say really vague and possibly outlandish things in order to draw ire from others, and then revert to “no, no, let’s stay on topic” when someone asks them to clarify. It’s akin to kids going “I’m mot touching you, I’m not touching you” and then acting shocked and running to teacher when they get smacked.

It's been going on all day on a thread I started for a totally different topic and clearly it's gotten nowhere- as any sane person could have expected. So I'm simply requesting that we move on.

 

[Pickles516]

It's been going on all day on a thread I started for a totally different topic and clearly it's gotten nowhere- as any sane person could have expected. So I'm simply requesting that we move on.

It’s just interesting to me that nobody says “ok, time to move on” when people start bringing up the vague agendas, but are quick to move the conversation along when people point out that what their saying doesn’t make much sense.