Page 7 of 23 FirstFirst ... 4567891017 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 338
  1. #91

    • Senior Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    8,890

    Re: "Escape from Tomorrow" movie filmed in Disneyland secretly

    Quote Originally Posted by bfdf55 View Post
    People visiting Disney parks are photographed by thousands of other guests, not just Disney. If there was no intent to make a profit, would the production values or cost of the effort be an issue?
    You're not taking into account Moore's background in the business: this guy has been trying to sell his screenplays to the movie industry for ten years. He invested heavily in his film, including scoring it with a huge orchestra. There is no possibility that he had "no intent to make a profit" directly or indirectly -- and in the film business, the indirect profits of publicity and notoriety can far outweigh direct profits.


    Quote Originally Posted by bfdf55 View Post
    If the film hadn't been shown at Sundance, would there be an issue?
    Yes, there would. It is inconceivable that a filmmaker with Moore's background would sink that much time and money into a production and not attempt to get exposure for it somewhere. Exposure -- and the profit to his career that results from it -- is his motive, and likely his reason for filming illegally in the theme parks owned by one of the top media empires in the world. As Meville noted in a previous post, "would anyone care about this movie if it were filmed at 6 Flags? Doubt it. He can complain about Disney all he wants, without the 'corporation' he would have nothing for a subject."


    Quote Originally Posted by bfdf55 View Post
    I got the impression that Moore wasn't intent on making a profit from the film and that he could accept it just being shown for free. If that were the case, what would make it any different from any other video shown on YouTube for example?
    The "pure motives of the amateur auteur" angle that Moore is hyping (and which his fawning film reviewers are falling for) is a blatantly hypocritical, transparently cheap dodge. What he did has nothing in common with independent films or amateur videos on YouTube -- his film is all about profiting him and his career. The reality of how the film business works is that profit does not result from only ticket sales or video sales; in fact, direct sales is often near the bottom of the list of profit generators.


    Quote Originally Posted by bfdf55 View Post
    If Disney takes too a hard handed stand on this, it may well propel the film into the popularity it may not achieve on it's own.
    On the contrary, Disney has nothing to lose by prosecuting Moore to the maximum. They have nothing to lose by funding a class action suit on behalf of the unwilling extras that Moore ripped off. They have nothing to lose by launching an information campaign within the industry to warn potential backers of Moore's future projects that if they fund Moore as a result of the notoriety of this film, they too may be liable for prosecution.

    Regardless of what Disney does or doesn't do, Moore will welcome all the popularity he can get -- and in a world where big corporations are automatically evil and the internet is the new Wild West, his playing the role of "artistically pure outlaw" is bound to get him plenty. Another reason why in the long term, Disney has nothing to lose (and, along with the rest of the film industry, has everything to gain) by prosecuting him to the max.
    Last edited by Mr Wiggins; 01-21-2013 at 08:09 PM.
    "With the acquisition of Marvel and now of Lucasfilm,
    Disney may have finally found the grail. You don't need
    imagination or art. All you need is a brand."

    - Neil Gabler


  2. #92

    •   
    • Minion
    • Online

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    2,831

    Re: "Escape from Tomorrow" movie filmed in Disneyland secretly

    Quote Originally Posted by bfdf55 View Post
    Originally Posted by bfdf55
    People visiting Disney parks are photographed by thousands of other guests, not just Disney. If there was no intent to make a profit, would the production values or cost of the effort be an issue?

    I mentioned that before. If the film hadn't been shown at Sundance, would there be an issue? I got the impression that Moore wasn't intent on making a profit from the film and that he could accept it just being shown for free. If that were the case, what would make it any different from any other video shown on YouTube for example?"



    None of those points answered my questions above.
    Yes, they answered your question fully - you just didn't like the response, it seems. To spell it out further.

    a. You asked if it would be an issue if this film was not shown at Sundance. Yes, it would be an issue, because he still used people as unknowing extras for a film - not a documentary, not a news clip, not a youtube documentation of his family trip. For a film/artistic project. You can't just take people's likenesses and use them as you will. Even if he had done this film as a senior thesis and it was only going to be shown to his film class he would have needed to INFORM the public and get consent to use their images.

    Webisodes on YouTube, student films, indie films - they all have release forms, even if they're only showing up online and never make a cent.

    b. You asked if it would be an issue since he's not profiting from this financially. Again, even if it were a student film it wouldn't matter. It doesn't absolve him of the legal and ethical requirement to tell people what he is doing and get their consent to use their likenesses.

    Also, the fact is that he IS profiting from it. He's already had a ton of press due to his publicizing his shooting methods (oh look at the edgy artiste who pulled one over on Disney). He's received name recognition. He's received more attention than his peers at Sundance, and all of that sets him up to profit and benefit his future.

    c. Nobody cares about his production values or the cost of production. They care that he used people's likenesses for an artistic project without their consent, knowledge and compensation.

    For all those who think this is no big deal - I wonder how you all would feel if your likeness were used in a film without your consent, especially if it were a film where you found the subject matter objectionable.
    Last edited by Malina; 01-21-2013 at 08:45 PM.

  3. #93

    • MiceChat Moderator
    • ♠ Pirate Wizard ♠
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    The Nebuchadnezzar
    Posts
    1,579
    Blog Entries
    63

    Re: "Escape from Tomorrow" movie filmed in Disneyland secretly

    If if he didn't do it for actually cash profit, he definitely did it to further his failing career. He's admitted to being a struggling screen writer so he figured taking a pop shot at disney and doing something nobody could ever do thru proper approval, even for indie films, would increase his chances of getting his name out there.

    He took advantage of the system and the public, in a family environment usually with children everywhere, for professional gain in a big way.

    Not cool.

  4. #94

    • Not on the Jedi Council
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    676

    Re: "Escape from Tomorrow" movie filmed in Disneyland secretly

    Failing career is kinda harsh. The reality is that the studios make only about a dozen films each per year, and the odds of anyone working in film keeps getting smaller and smaller.

  5. #95

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    161

    Re: "Escape from Tomorrow" movie filmed in Disneyland secretly

    If anyone wants specifics, look up California Civil Code seciton 3344. Here's paragraph a)
    '3344. Use of Another's Name, Voice, Signature, Photograph, or Likeness in Advertising or Soliciting Without Prior Consent.
    (a) Any person who knowingly uses another's name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness, in any manner on or in products, merchandise, or goods, or for purposes of advertising or selling, or soliciting purchases of products, merchandise, goods or services, without such person's prior consent, or, in the case of a minor, the prior consent of his parent or legal guardian, shall be liable for any damages sustained by the person or persons injured as a result thereof. In addition, in any action brought under this section, the person who violated the section shall be liable to the injured party or parties in an amount equal to the greater of seven hundred fifty dollars ($750) or the actual damages suffered by him or her as a result of the unauthorized use, and any profits from the unauthorized use that are attributable to the use and are not taken into account in computing the actual damages. In establishing such profits, the injured party or parties are required to prove his or her deductible expenses. Punitive damages may also be awarded to the injured party or parties. The prevailing party in any action under this section shall also be entitled to attorney's fees and costs.'

    There's also a lot of case law, such as Kareem Abdul-Jabbar v. General Motors Corp., 85 F.3d 407 (9th Cir. 1996).

    The federal Lanham Act may come into play too.

    As others have mentioned, one of the main keys is whether it is for commercial purposes. Otherwise it can very well be Fair Use. But the bottom line is, if the people violating these provisions don't have deep pockets, there is not much to be done about it.

  6. #96

    • Senior Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Splash Mountain
    Posts
    7,926
    Blog Entries
    5

    Re: "Escape from Tomorrow" movie filmed in Disneyland secretly

    Quote Originally Posted by orbitalpunk View Post
    If if he didn't do it for actually cash profit, he definitely did it to further his failing career. He's admitted to being a struggling screen writer so he figured taking a pop shot at disney and doing something nobody could ever do thru proper approval, even for indie films, would increase his chances of getting his name out there.

    He took advantage of the system and the public, in a family environment usually with children everywhere, for professional gain in a big way.

    Not cool.
    Unless he did something to make the kids look like bad people..whats the harm? Like I said before I'd love to make movies in Disney can't....but I have idea's but since the company doesn't want to "hurt" there image in anyway they don't ever allow anyone to film in the parks any more

    Not like the people who own the company now built the parks..they just run them now and preach about magic and dreams but if a fan wanted to make a film about the parks they'd send him packing

  7. #97

    • Senior Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    8,890

    Re: "Escape from Tomorrow" movie filmed in Disneyland secretly

    Quote Originally Posted by JerrodDRagon View Post
    ...whats the harm?
    The answer to your question is in the quotes below.

    Quote Originally Posted by Malina View Post
    ...If someone tapes you or photographs you for anything that is going to be used in a commercial manner/used to benefit the maker that is not news reporting, they are required to a) get your permission, b) inform you how the recording will be used.

    Example: if you happen to be filmed in the park by Disney or show up in a Disneyland brochure, Disney actually has a release form on file for you already. If you look at the ticket/terms of entry it says that by entering the park, you are consenting to be photographed or videotaped by Disney, for Disney related purposes. You know what Disney is about, you have knowledge of who is taping you and for what purpose, etc.

    In the case of this film, that didn't happen. The people were not told they were being filmed by an outside party, they weren't told what it was about, and they were not given a chance to opt-out. They had not consented to be filmed by that filmmaker, who was not affiliated with Disney, for his commercial/artistic purposes. If their faces are seen on camera, this filmmaker violated their rights.

    http://www.newmediarights.org/guides...deo_recordings
    Quote Originally Posted by Steveman View Post
    If anyone wants specifics, look up California Civil Code seciton 3344. Here's paragraph a)
    '3344. Use of Another's Name, Voice, Signature, Photograph, or Likeness in Advertising or Soliciting Without Prior Consent.
    (a) Any person who knowingly uses another's name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness, in any manner on or in products, merchandise, or goods, or for purposes of advertising or selling, or soliciting purchases of products, merchandise, goods or services, without such person's prior consent, or, in the case of a minor, the prior consent of his parent or legal guardian, shall be liable for any damages sustained by the person or persons injured as a result thereof. In addition, in any action brought under this section, the person who violated the section shall be liable to the injured party or parties in an amount equal to the greater of seven hundred fifty dollars ($750) or the actual damages suffered by him or her as a result of the unauthorized use, and any profits from the unauthorized use that are attributable to the use and are not taken into account in computing the actual damages. In establishing such profits, the injured party or parties are required to prove his or her deductible expenses. Punitive damages may also be awarded to the injured party or parties. The prevailing party in any action under this section shall also be entitled to attorney's fees and costs.'

    There's also a lot of case law, such as Kareem Abdul-Jabbar v. General Motors Corp., 85 F.3d 407 (9th Cir. 1996).

    The federal Lanham Act may come into play too.

    As others have mentioned, one of the main keys is whether it is for commercial purposes. Otherwise it can very well be Fair Use. But the bottom line is, if the people violating these provisions don't have deep pockets, there is not much to be done about it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Malina View Post
    ...On private property, owners can set any rules they wish about how photos and video are used, if they can be taken, etc.

    Things like sporting events, concerts, et al always, ALWAYS have a notice on your ticket, at the door, etc. that you may be taped for broadcast/the artist's use etc. Same if you're in the audience at a talk show or at a parade. If you ever pass a film set, you will ALWAYS see similar signs.

    Films made for artistic/commercial purposes on private property are very different. You do need permission to show anyone who is recognizable on film or TV programs. You can't just decide to film people and then put them in your film. The laws are very very clear on that. Even if you look at amateur photography contests (that you can profit from in some way) take a food look at the rules: you have to get model releases for anyone clearly seen in the photos....
    ------------------------------------

    Quote Originally Posted by JerrodDRagon View Post
    Not like the people who own the company now built the parks..they just run them now and preach about magic and dreams but if a fan wanted to make a film about the parks they'd send him packing
    Regardless of what you or I may think of the current Disney Corporation, they are the legal owner of their IPs, and the laws protecting their rights to those IPs are quite clear.
    "With the acquisition of Marvel and now of Lucasfilm,
    Disney may have finally found the grail. You don't need
    imagination or art. All you need is a brand."

    - Neil Gabler


  8. #98

    • Junior Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    11

    Re: "Escape from Tomorrow" movie filmed in Disneyland secretly

    This film existing will have no impact at all on the way people view the parks. They are way too big and influential for that to happen. It won't do anything to their sales, it won't tarnish their image. It just can't. Fair enough if he associates the park with the memories that he does, and that he wanted to artistically express that. Understandable about not asking some of the people in the film if they wanted to be or not, but I think that's kind of a non-issue at the moment. I believe Disneyland is just a valid as a setting for something as anything else is, and it is an achievement whether you like it or not. I'm intrigued to see it, I think Disney needs a bit of button pushing every now and then. Should be interesting.

  9. #99

    • Tom Bricker
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    580

    Re: "Escape from Tomorrow" movie filmed in Disneyland secretly

    Is there a clip that I'm missing, or is everyone just assuming that the "likenesses" of normal park-goers were used in the full movie? I spotted no non-actor likenesses in the trailer.

    Given that Moore had the skills to clandestinely make a film on Disney property, I wouldn't put it past him to have the skills to put this together in a manner such that no guest likenesses are present. With shallow depth of field, I don't think it would be that difficult to accomplish.

  10. #100

    • -
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Uijeongbu
    Posts
    6,542

    Re: "Escape from Tomorrow" movie filmed in Disneyland secretly

    Quote Originally Posted by JerrodDRagon View Post
    since the company doesn't want to "hurt" there image in anyway they don't ever allow anyone to film in the parks any more
    As the parks are Disney’s property, the company has the right to allow or not allow commercial filming of its property. Disney states its policy on such commercial filming quite clearly in the FAQ’s on the official website. We as park goers have no choice but to respect that right. I’m sure most business owners would want to control what does or does not get filmed on their property.

    Quote Originally Posted by HatboxGhost View Post
    This film existing will have no impact at all on the way people view the parks. They are way too big and influential for that to happen. It won't do anything to their sales, it won't tarnish their image. It just can't.
    So it is ok to completely ignore their right to control how their IP is represented as long as it is a big business? No matter how large or small an organization is, it is not for others to decide how it or its IP’s are depicted.
    "You can cut me off from the civilized world. You can incarcerate me with two moronic cellmates. You can torture me with your thrice daily swill, but you cannot break the spirit of a Winchester. My voice shall be heard from this wilderness and I shall be delivered from this fetid and festering sewer."

  11. #101

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    232

    Re: "Escape from Tomorrow" movie filmed in Disneyland secretly

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Wiggins View Post
    You're not taking into account Moore's background in the business: this guy has been trying to sell his screenplays to the movie industry for ten years. He invested heavily in his film, including scoring it with a huge orchestra. There is no possibility that he had "no intent to make a profit" directly or indirectly -- and in the film business, the indirect profits of publicity and notoriety can far outweigh direct profits.




    Yes, there would. It is inconceivable that a filmmaker with Moore's background would sink that much time and money into a production and not attempt to get exposure for it somewhere. Exposure -- and the profit to his career that results from it -- is his motive, and likely his reason for filming illegally in the theme parks owned by one of the top media empires in the world. As Meville noted in a previous post, "would anyone care about this movie if it were filmed at 6 Flags? Doubt it. He can complain about Disney all he wants, without the 'corporation' he would have nothing for a subject."




    The "pure motives of the amateur auteur" angle that Moore is hyping (and which his fawning film reviewers are falling for) is a blatantly hypocritical, transparently cheap dodge. What he did has nothing in common with independent films or amateur videos on YouTube -- his film is all about profiting him and his career. The reality of how the film business works is that profit does not result from only ticket sales or video sales; in fact, direct sales is often near the bottom of the list of profit generators.


    Don,t know, but sounds like a valid point to me.

    What would a person's background really have to do with what they were able to video in the parks? If the result hadn't been shown publicly - which seems to be one of the major issues - and if he had not been in the movie industry, and he had managed to end up with the same film quality as the film in question, what would be the outcome?

    What if the person filming this had been a total amateur, and made a DVD of his efforts to give to his fiends?

    Some people probably use their Disneyland pictures to make their Christmas cards with. Seems like there could be a lot of situations where personal use of videos/photos from park visits could be objected to.

  12. #102

    • -
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Uijeongbu
    Posts
    6,542

    Re: "Escape from Tomorrow" movie filmed in Disneyland secretly

    Quote Originally Posted by DLFan1995 View Post
    What if the person filming this had been a total amateur, and made a DVD of his efforts to give to his fiends?

    Some people probably use their Disneyland pictures to make their Christmas cards with. Seems like there could be a lot of situations where personal use of videos/photos from park visits could be objected to.
    Totally different situations.
    "You can cut me off from the civilized world. You can incarcerate me with two moronic cellmates. You can torture me with your thrice daily swill, but you cannot break the spirit of a Winchester. My voice shall be heard from this wilderness and I shall be delivered from this fetid and festering sewer."

  13. #103

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    236

    Re: "Escape from Tomorrow" movie filmed in Disneyland secretly

    By what people are saying. If I watch this movie and I see myself or my family on the screen. I can sue both the filmamker and Disney for at least $750.00?
    If so I think I found a way to buy a premium pass.
    Now I just have to find a way to see if we are in the movie....

  14. #104

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    232

    Re: "Escape from Tomorrow" movie filmed in Disneyland secretly

    Quote Originally Posted by calsig31 View Post
    Totally different situations.

    I know it's different situations and this has no bearing on the initial subject, but WHAT IF? And if the situation was different but the person had filmmaking skills but was NOT in the filmmaking industry? It appears that there could be a lot of "what if"s.

  15. #105

    • New Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    29

    Re: "Escape from Tomorrow" movie filmed in Disneyland secretly

    How dare someone violate the rules at a Disney Park. By the way, anyone know if they are enforcing the fastpass times yet. I need to know before I decide on whether to purchase my next park ticets.

Page 7 of 23 FirstFirst ... 4567891017 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. [Idea] Armchair Imagitition II: Escape from the Tower!
    By jesterjack in forum Disneyland Resort
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-25-2010, 10:07 AM
  2. Whats your favorite disney song from a classic movie
    By rob3gd in forum MiceChat News Archive
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 08-27-2009, 07:11 AM
  3. Escape From The Haunted Mansion
    By Lost Boy in forum MiceChat Main Lounge
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 11-15-2008, 07:24 PM
  4. Escape From Critter Country: an idea to alleviate congestion
    By BigThunder in forum Disneyland Resort
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 08-22-2006, 08:27 PM
  5. New toys from upcoming Pixar movie 'Cars' released.
    By OogieBoogie in forum MiceChat News Archive
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-04-2006, 01:17 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •