Does anyone want a thread for people who are happy for Harry and Meghan? Thread 4

[Mummy195]

Hope you don't mind Dave.

Sorry Roussette I didn’t mean to @ you.

Mummy - yes that was (from a legal POV) interesting in the way the judge worded his remarks about the fact that parts of the claim could be reinstated at a later date. This leads me to believe that they weren’t properly pleaded in the first place.

I’m surprised at this as although mistakes are sometimes made in pleadings, it shouldn’t happen that they are struck out for not being properly pleaded.

I was just stirring.

@CanIHaveAPenguinPlease I don't usually name change because I quite like bumping into familiar MNs (even if they don't "know" me) but I think the ability to do so is important for the reasons you say.

The alternative is to post inaccurate information about yourself to throw people off the scent but I would never be able to sustain that and anyway it seems disingenuous.

I do wish the AS feature didn't allow searching by username as I think it encourages "stalking", rather than just benign following.

Anyway, I digress...

I think that is so so unfair mummy. Like anyone would even think about the narration but then they find out who is narrating so pile on with a nasty review sounding like you're Mark Kermode or whatever. Horrible.
She's donating her fee to charity, that's ignored obviously.

That just sums it up in my book.

Mummy I don’t think you ever answered my earlier question as you why you thought Meghan wouldn’t get a fair trial? I asked whether you were questioning the impartiality of a judge? Apologies if you did respond & I missed it or I misunderstood what you were trying to say.

@Mummy195 who knows, but the reason there are always a lot of reviews already on sites prior to a film’s release is because they’re out on for preview audiences precisely to get response / reviews. Occasionally a film will be changed / edited to meet overwhelming response to preview audiences. It’s a pretty fundamental stage of Releasing a film (& was this ever intended to be a theatrical release? Do Disney wildlife movies tend to go to cinema? I don’t think so which siggests even more it was a preview audience)

@HermanHermit you have now made me think of peter Noone

Reading back it on it all and what he said some time after, I think it was genuinely an oversight. It’s the only time I believe in a very long career that he appears to have done something racist and I can’t believe he’d knowingly have done something so overt.

not defending?

Ah well that’s surely a good thing?!

I don't think that's defending, Samcro. No-one's saying it wasn't a crass thing to do, but people are saying it was uncharacteristic and likely inadvertent.

I'm not a DB fan by any stretch, so no skin in this game.

MN are quite vigilant about name changing on the same thread I think? Sock puppets are considered bad form here, isn't that what Tsuki was banned for (The poster that claimed to be African)? I can normally recognise writing styles as I've been marking essays for a long time and there are certain 'tells'.

Mummy195 I can't find anything about the BBC still working with Danny Baker, what made you think they had reemployed him?

Roussette
It was a high quality documentary with great cinematography, the score from Ramin Djawadi (he of Westworld, GoT etc.). I find MM's voice a bit deep, not that annoying winy like voice we usually hear from say Paris Hilton, Kim K etc.

Tsuki was good. they posted some clever stuff. I doubt they were banned for being a troll. just her veiw didn't sit well on those threads.
the BBC have form for employing racists and disablist people so it wouldn't surprise me if he was back,

It seems the judge is fine with acknowledging the lies, but want that aspect to be presented differently. Well, that would be up to their legal team to see how they frame things.

There is nothing to suggest the papers were lying. It's an allegation, one that has been struck.

The judgment states that allegations of dishonesty and malice are irrelevant to the claim. What could potentially be reintroduced is allegations of dishonesty and malice in determination of damages.

Herman
Movies that get previews in theatres are the ones that are usually pre-marked for big screen release. Plenty of documentaries get big screen releases at the Imax usually or somewhere else. Not too sure when this one would have had it's theatre release, but it most probably was not in April.

I'd missed that Samcro, although there was largely disbelief that he had knowingly done something so overt, but I just think he is so arrogant that he believes he's beyond reproach.

Movies that get previews in theatres are the ones that are usually pre-marked for big screen release.

Untrue in North America. Also, Elephants was released on Disney+. I don't believe it was ever intended to be released in theaters.

I doubt they were banned for being a troll. just her veiw didn't sit well on those threads.

Er, other posters were told repeatedly that they could not make her unwelcome or ask her not to post, and that they would be deleted or banned if they did. MN supported her posting. I'm sure you don't want to believe that a pro-Meghan poster was banned for a legitimate reason, but that's your own bias.

And no one has defended Baker's tweet or disagreed with his sacking. What's been discussed is his own assertion that he hadn't 'intended' it to be racist or offensive. There is agreement, however, that it was.

The deliberate negative reviewing of Elephants is something that's been done on a number of occasions now where prominent women are involved in a project - such as the female cast reboot of Ghostbusters. Known tactic usually by misogynistic men, regardless of the names on the screen.

i have no idea if they were banned or not. like a lot of posters they might have been and NC and come back....who knows.
i found their posts interesting as they gave a different view on things,

To be fair, @ButteryPuffin, that Ghostbusters reboot did suck. Bridesmaids, which was largely a female cast, was praised.

Ah, Winterlife, I loved it! Different strokes...

I think too it was shown though that the negative reviews were orchestrated. I'd have to look it up but it really wasn't honest audience responses.

They were pretending to be someone they weren't Samcro, even taking offence with other posters (as an African woman), claiming to be an authority on a life she knew nothing about in an attempt to make other posters look ignorant. I'd say that's a troll.

Surprised you could not find it Ethel as it's right at the top of the google search. I don't know something about the headlines. DevonLive says back on BBC.

Infact I remember ppl were criticising the BBC for it at the time.