Early 'Fantastic Four 2' Review Lands Theater Projectionist in Hot Water

This is really stupid. As a former projectionist who also wrote advance bad reviews of films I projected (though not on the scale of AICN's exposure), I don't understand the legality of this. Unless Morrison continually signed an agreement saying that he would not write about the films on the internet (as audiences are made to do at preview screenings), then maybe he should be relieved of his job. Otherwise, he did nothing wrong. If I were him, I'd sue the theater chain. Too bad all the chains got rid of the union projectionists, because this would never have happened if one of them was involved.

Reply

What rules did the guy break? He had signed no confidentiality agreement.

Reply

What rules did the guy break? He had signed no confidentiality agreement.

Reply

1. Why did he admit to it? I'd simply say no, didn't write it.

2. How did he cross Fox? He hurt their investment? By printing his point of view? No. You can't blame Memflix or any other reviewer if a film fails. The film will fail all on its own. One person cannot destroy a film.

This is about a big corporation thinking they have a right to stifle free speech. Memflix wrote his review and he had EVERY right to write that review. They cannot demand he remain quiet.

3. Professional critic? Oh for f^cks sake, have a pop tart and get over yourself. Anybody can be a movie critic and we all are. Ass clowns like Medved write reviews. It doesn't take a film major, let alone a college grad to express an OPINION about a damned movie.

Reply

1. You give critics too much power. Many films are critic proof and a movie like FF is certainly critic-proof. Also, the embargoes are by choice. Just as car mags and such have access to vehicles early, movie reviewers to get this access sometimes and just like car mags, they can choose to ignore the embargo.

2. AICN is a joke. It has been since Knowles sold out to get inside info on Armageddon. Since then everybody with a half-brain knew that Harry had lost all credibility. He sold out and now he makes fat dough while studios either blatantly buy him off (see his recent HD-DVD fiasco) or use his site like gardening soil.

3. Again, he shoulda kept his trap shut and said he didn't post the review. It's not like Fox will get a subpoena and find all his email accounts. Then again, copping to it at least his real name is known. Maybe he found a touch of celebrity, if just for one day. It's not like he lost a job at Boeing...he was a projectionist. How many projectionists become famous for even one day (Tyler Durden is not an acceptable answer)?

Reply

Yeah, how the fuck did Fox figure out who he is. When did he sign some kind of confidentiality agreement....and more to the point, why doesn't Fox or any studio just learn how to make a better fucking movie.

Its not like people aren't going to go see the movie anyway.

Reply

A guy does not deserve to lose a job for having an opinion. Have we all gone crazy for a second? Sure movies are big business...but it's just a movie. Stop a guy taking his minimum wage home to his kid just because he went online and said that a multi-million dollar movie wasn't good? Oh, those poor Fox babies.

Let me guess, if he said it was good they couldn't have cared less? I'm just glad he didn't post his comments on somewhere like IMDB, Fox would've had his ass thrown in jail for such horrendous crimes.

Reply

Nice article!! I quoted you, and I agree 100%

http://therecshow.com/2007/06/14/fantastic-four-and-the-rise-of-mcweeny/

Reply

I read this article about an hour ago and I was so angry that I had to write something. Sadly you've caught me on a day where I've been reading American Journalism Review's article on Shield Laws and Confidential Sources. I think Morrison has a case to sue both Fox and Malco. It is a 1st Amendment issue.

The questions that I want to have answers for are: Did Fox ever use any of Morrison's quotes? Did anyone in authority at the theater Morrison was working at know he was writing reviews? Did AICN "out" Morrison to Fox so they could trace him to the Memphis Theater? Is AICN talking with the ACLU to make this a case? If not, is Morrison? If Morrison was brain dead and wrote a glowing review of FF would Fox have done the same thing?

If Fox used Morrison's quotes they endorsed his behavior in writing. If a supervisor at Morrison's theater knew he was writing reviews, it could be an interpretation that Malco (the chain) endorsed his work.

AICN should be backing up Morrison in words and in legal support. If not, I would expect AICN writers to leave in hordes. Any other website, magazine, etc..that is covering this story should also throw their support for Morrison. If not they are approving of Fox's censorship of the press and should expect themselves to be next.

It is less a question of whether Morrison signed an agreement when he went to work for Malco, but more a question of is Morrison a member of the press and entitled to all the rights of the constitution. Someone earlier wrote that "we are all movie critics." That means you're next.

Reply

No it's not a free speech issue, no he doesn't have case. He isn't a member of the press in terms of how he gets to see movies early, he's a projectionist. He can't have his cake and eat it too and deserved to be fired.

Reply

"No it's not a free speech issue..."

Oh c'mon, the guy wrote a review of something he saw. If he signed a secrecy agreement, fine, he broke a rule. Otherwise what's to stop him?

At the end of the day, he didn't copy the film or record it for other people. All he walked out of that place with was opinions and he put THOSE online.

I honestly can't believe people are saying he deserved to be fired over such a pathetic issue. Will one unknown guys review ruin the movie before all the "professional" critics do? I doubt it.

As I said before, Fox can throw millions at a piece of shit, but this guy works in a fucking cinema to support him. Who's being more damaged by this? Yet some people STILL say he deserves to be fired for stating an opinion. Fox should know better, all this has done is draw more attention to the bad review that was given, and made people think "Wow, so not only is the film supposed to be bad, but the guys who put it out are heartless dicks, too."

Reply

The projectionists at movie theaters are performing a job - running equipment. There is an expectation that the things they see will not be shared. The expectation may not be formally written, but nonetheless it is there as this projectionist clearly knew (why else hide your name?).

There is also an expectation that they are working for the good of the theater. Putting the relationship of a theater or a whole circuit with a major studio in jeopardy is not ok.

A couple of examples:

A clerk at 7-11 tells customers who bring Coke products to the counter to purchase to only buy Pepsi because Coke products are no good.

A waiter at a local restaurant sees a local celebrity (new anchor) have one too many while dining with his friends and decides to go online to a highly visible site and post those details.

Maintaining relationships with vendors is crucial. There is a time and place for critics, but the projectionist, the 7-11 clerk, and the waiter are not the people to do it if they came accross the information in a professional capacity. It is just not good business practice or respect.

Reply

HOLY CRAP! I live in Memphis and this is the first I'm seeing this. And all I've got to say is GIVE ME A BREAK. I believe too that if Memflix wrote a glowing review Fox would have done nothing about it what-so-ever. AND you have to be one huge idiot if you think you're gonna show advance screenings of a movie and expect those folks to not "talk" about it. Especially the new FF movie and even more so in this day and age..helllooo, we call it the internet..world wide supre highway. Celebs can't even fart in public without it spreading like wild fire on the net. So Fox is stupid to think this would NEVER happen and they need to get up to speed. If it means stopping the advance screenings then do so. And, oh yeah, here's another good idea, START MAKING BETTER FLICKS. Hollywood is too full of itslef and is pumping out huge amounts of crap. The theaters are crap and the prices are crap. I see maybe 5 flicks at theaters a year and most of the time 3 of them I wish I could get my money back. At least if I rent it, I've only lost a few bucks for my family to see it, not $50.

Reply

Thank you SteveO! Finally someone got to the real issue here. Is it unfortunate that this guy got fired? Sure, I wouldn't want him to lose his job. Is it illegal? OF COURSE NOT!! People always seem to confuse an unfair or unfavorable termination with an illegal one. The company that fired him CAN fire him for ANY reason they desire, so long as it is not because he is part of a protected group. For example, they can fire him because they don't like the fact that he wore red to work today. They cannot fire him if he is black, a women, or handicapped. Other than those protected groups he can be terminated at any time for any reason whatsoever. This reason actually seems exceptionally valid, for the specific points that Steveo made. He was jeopardizing a relationship with a vendor that the the theater was dependent upon for revenue. If the Head of Fox had come to the theater and this guy had told him that he thought he was one ugly son of a bitch do you think the theater would not have fired him? And since they definitely would have, how is that firing not more valid than firing this guy because he defaced a Fox product to millions of people?

Reply

There are two issues here. Ethical & legal. The two are not always the same.

Be all end all is that ANY company can pretty much "let go" of ANY employee at any time. If I talk smack about my company in public, they can let me go. Period.

Did this guy have any legal limitations to his free speech. No. He didn't sign an NDA. As such, no charges are being pressed against him. He did not break the law or violate a contract.

Does the theater have the right to fire/let him go? Of course. Why? B/C they pay his salary and his performance was unbecoming of a member of their staff.

What this guy did wasn't the end of the world, he is not an awful person. Same goes for the theater, they are just maintaining their image and relationship with a powerful firm that provides a lot of business for them. It was a bad decision that has been blown up bigger than it should have been...

Reply

well said Wolvereen

Reply

I worked with him. He was a great guy. He doesnt deserve this. Mr. Tashie is a dick anyway, as well as all of the Malco management. Let me break down the Malco employment chain, with any signed papers and whatnot until you reach Home Office (Which I have not yet):

You get hired at one of" The fine Malco Theatres" as an entry level employee, usher or concessionist. Purple shirts they are called. After several years of working there for minimum wage (I was making min. wage for 4 years there), you get promoted to assistant manager. Green shirt. 6.50 an hr max. After even more years (about 10 at this point) you can choose to go into projection (7.00 an hr at most theatres, ridgeway.....not so much), or theatre management. You sign agreements going into theatre management saying that you acknowledge everything that goes on is under your control, inventory, the accounts, ect are your responsibility.

NOWHERE do you sign a confidentiality agreement for screenings. Tashie had no right to fire him, as im sure Mr. Lightman had more to do with it that tashie. (M.A.L.Co so you know.) after going through this whole chain, Im not suprised. "After 95 years of buisness....blah blah blah bullshit" is all it is. Tashie doesnt give a shit. Tashie wants to see all the employees cycle out every year. Thats how it is. Thats how it will be. Next time any memphians go to a Malco theatre, just remember there is a reason why it looks shitty. Minimum wage =/ maximum work, and that is what they expect.

Now screenings at the theatres, that is STRICTLY enforced as to how they are run. The managers have no say in what goes on. It is all the running of the projectionist, which is why we can smoke and do all that shit during them. We cannot do certain things though, such as pirate, because of the deadspots in the film (next movie you see, look for spots in the movie.) that ID us as the source.

Big shame. Malco loses money. They deserve it.

Reply

I'm not sure about other theaters. but i worked for showcase cinemas, and on the occasion we got to see a movie before it came out, it was agains't the rules to even discuss the movie till it came out. we were constantly reminded of this.
being a fan of movies, this was something i didn't want to lose , otherwise why would i work at a crappy job for 7$ an hour. god forbid if i would have had a kid at the time.
so pretty much , he knew what was up, and he got caught. end of game man...

Reply

Actually most theater employees (especially projectionists and managers) have to sign non-disclosure documents for exactly this reason. Also as part of a "Trade Screening" the film comes with a cease and desist press order that is displayed with the film before it is assembled (by said projectionist). In fact the film can is usually locked and the key is delivered by a guy with another NDA. So yeah, if he was a projectionist, he was well aware that he could not publicly comment on the film. The trade screen procedures are pretty standard and have been in place for the ten years that I've worked at theaters. This guys was dumb and wanted attention. He's probably a really nice guy...but dumb. As far as the bit about his kid, I have three. I would NEVER jeopardize the security of my family for some free press, especially from the guys at AICN.

Reply