Connect with us

Entertainment

Disney-obsessed couple loses lawsuit to get back into exclusive Club 33

Published

on

Disney-obsessed couple loses lawsuit to get back into exclusive Club 33

As members of Disney’s exclusive Club 33, Scott and Diana Anderson visited the two Anaheim theme parks 60 to 80 times a year.

The private club, with its wood-paneled trophy room and other amenities, was the center of their social life. They brought friends, acquaintances and business associates. As a couple, they went on the Haunted House ride nearly 1,000 times.

The club’s yearly dues were $31,500, and with travel and hotel expenses, the Arizona couple were spending close to $125,000 annually to get their Disney fix.

All of it came to an end in 2017, when Disney revoked their membership in the club after an allegation that Scott Anderson was drunk in public. Diana Anderson, a hardcore Disney aficionado since childhood, called it “a stab in the heart.”

The Andersons, both 60, have spent the years since then — and hundreds of thousands of dollars — trying to get back into Club 33. On Tuesday, an Orange County jury rejected their claim that Disney ousted them improperly.

Advertisement

It had taken the Andersons more than a decade to gain membership in Club 33, which includes access to exclusive lounges, dining, VIP tours and special events.

They finally made it off the waiting list in 2012.

Scott and Diana Anderson in front of Club 33 in June 2017.

(Courtesy of Anderson family)

Advertisement

“They finally became part of this special place,” their attorney, Sean Macias, told jurors in the civil trial. “That was their spot. That was their happy place, their home.”

At about 9:50 p.m. on Sept. 3, 2017, security guards found Scott Anderson near the entrance of California Adventure displaying signs of what they took to be intoxication, including slurred speech and trouble standing, according to trial testimony.

“His breath smelled of alcohol quite a lot,” one of the guards said in court.

The club swiftly ousted them.

Macias said Scott Anderson had 2½ to 3 drinks and that Disney did an incomplete and slipshod investigation, with no Breathalyzer or blood tests and no videos of Anderson’s behavior that night.

Advertisement

“They have not established that Mr. Anderson was intoxicated,” Macias said. Instead, he argued, Anderson’s symptoms were the result of a vestibular migraine, which can be triggered by red wine — among the drinks Anderson consumed that day.

In effect, Macias argued, Disney was punishing Anderson for a medical condition.

A medical expert testified for the Andersons that the symptoms of a vestibular migraine could be confused with intoxication, with a neurologist hired by Disney countering that Anderson’s behavior was more likely the consequence of drinking.

The September 2017 incident was not the first time the Andersons had run afoul of Club 33 management. The year before, Diana had been briefly suspended for “using some salty language … a couple F-words,” as Macias put it.

Macias told jurors that the Andersons filed suit against Disney to vindicate their reputation. “He doesn’t want to be known as a drunk,” Macias said. “They love that place. They took the fight to Disney because it’s his name.”

Advertisement

In their complaint, the Andersons asked to be reinstated to Club 33, with a $10,500 reimbursement for four months of unused membership in 2017. They also wanted $231,000 — the equivalent of seven years in the club.

Jonathan E. Phillips, an attorney representing Disney, said that Club 33 membership guidelines forbid public intoxication.

“They did not want to pay the consequences of failing to follow the rules,” Phillips told jurors, adding that Scott Anderson’s conduct “cost his wife of 40 years her lifetime dream of having access to Club 33.”

The security guards, who no longer work for Disney, were more credible than the Andersons, Phillips said — “What possible reason did the security guards have to lie to you?”

In their original complaint, the Andersons alleged that Club 33 targeted them for retaliation because they had complained about a club member harassing other members and staff. But Superior Court Judge Deborah Servino curtailed that line of evidence, which the Andersons saw as the death knell for their case.

Advertisement

“My wife and I are both dead set that this is an absolute wrong, and we will fight this to the death,” Scott Anderson, who owns a golf course in Gilbert, Ariz., told The Times. “There is no way we’re letting this go.”

He said the lawsuit has cost him about $400,000.

“My retirement is set back five years,” he said. “I’m paying through the nose. Every day, I’m seeing another bill, and I’m about to keel over.” He said he will appeal.

His wife said she wants to keep fighting.

“I’ll sell a kidney,” Diana said. “I don’t care.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Movie Reviews

Reagan movie review: A flawed portrayal of the 40th US President | The Express Tribune

Published

on

Reagan movie review: A flawed portrayal of the 40th US President | The Express Tribune

Sean McNamara’s “Reagan” biopic, starring Dennis Quaid, has sparked controversy with its distorted historical narrative and lackluster execution. While attempting to portray the iconic president, the film falls short in terms of accuracy and cinematic appeal.

The film’s hagiographic approach to Reagan’s life and achievements raises concerns, omitting crucial historical events and glossing over Reagan’s complex legacy. Critics argue that the movie’s depiction of Reagan as an anti-racist trailblazer is particularly problematic, given his controversial record on civil rights.

The film’s narrative also simplifies complex events such as the Cold War and Reagan’s role in it, failing to acknowledge the contributions of other factors. The insertion of a fictional KGB agent as the narrator further adds to the confusion and misrepresentation of historical events.

Beyond the historical inaccuracies, “Reagan” suffers from poor pacing, questionable artistic choices, and bizarre casting decisions, resulting in a tedious and forgettable cinematic experience.

While the film may appeal to dedicated Reagan supporters, those seeking a historically accurate and nuanced portrayal of the 40th president are likely to be disappointed. “Reagan” serves as a reminder of the delicate balance between historical storytelling and creative license, with the latter overshadowing the former in this instance.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

Queer: Daniel Craig shines in Luca Guadagnino’s steamy drama

Published

on

Queer: Daniel Craig shines in Luca Guadagnino’s steamy drama

3/5 stars

American author William Burroughs’ lurid, experimental novels are notoriously difficult to adapt and not exactly conducive to great cinema. David Cronenberg managed it with 1991’s Naked Lunch. Now, Luca Guadagnino takes on Queer, which was written in the early 1950s but was not published until 1985.

Premiering in competition at the Venice Film Festival, Queer is a faithful, authentic dive into Burroughs’ universe, albeit one that struggles to maintain interest over a protracted 135-minute runtime.

Daniel Craig successfully demolishes his James Bond image as William Lee, a middle-aged homosexual drug addict living in Mexico City, drinking himself into oblivion. That is before he starts injecting drugs and going in search of yage, the plant better known now as ayahuasca, which he believes has telepathic properties.

Advertisement

Queer new clip official – Venice Film Festival 2024

Early on, Lee has an air of bonhomie about him as he seeks out casual sex with men, but his slide towards addiction becomes Guadagnino’s focus.

The Italian director previously tackled gay love in Call Me by Your Name, but in Queer there is a sense of desperation about Lee’s same-sex encounters.
Continue Reading

Entertainment

What to know about the Disney, ESPN blackout on DirecTV

Published

on

What to know about the Disney, ESPN blackout on DirecTV

Walt Disney Co. on Sunday pulled ESPN and other channels from DirecTV minutes before the kick off of a high-profile USC football game and during the U.S. Open tennis tournament — infuriating sports fans who found themselves in the middle of a contentious contract dispute.

More than 10 million DirecTV and U-Verse video customers were swept up in the feud when DirecTV lost its rights to carry Disney programming — including Disney-owned ABC television stations.

The two companies had been negotiating at DirecTV’s El Segundo headquarters for weeks, but failed to agree on a new licensing deal by the Sept. 1 deadline.

The blackout is the latest sign of strain facing traditional television companies as customers shift to streaming.

“Consumers are going to blame somebody but, really, it took both of these companies to get into this position,” Emarketer senior analyst Ross Benes said recently.

Advertisement

Here’s what to know about the dispute:

Why is this happening?

Pay-TV providers, including DirecTV, have absorbed stiff increases in the costs of licensing programming as their customer base has eroded because of cord-cutting. TV distributors are struggling to make money on their video channel businesses and fear that big rate increases will only drive away more customers.

The cost of carrying broadcast channels (ABC, CBS, Fox and NBC) and sports channels, including ESPN, has been skyrocketing as the programmers look to pass along the increases they have agreed to pay sports leagues and conferences. Increasingly, the shrinking pool of traditional pay-TV subscribers has been asked to shoulder these increases.

DirecTV asked Disney for flexibility to offer smaller, genre-themed packages. Disney has long required pay-TV companies to carry its cable channels, including ESPN, in most of its customers’ homes. ESPN is the most expensive basic cable channel, costing distributors nearly $10 per month per subscriber home.

Advertisement

That has led to one of the thorniest issues in the current dispute: Disney’s requirements for “minimum penetration” for its channels, including ESPN. Disney requires that ESPN must be delivered to about 82% of DirecTV’s subscribers.

Over the years, the minimum penetration practice has enabled Disney to collect huge fees, including from subscribers who don’t watch much sports. Pay-TV companies must pay penalties if they don’t meet the minimum threshold.

DirecTV argues that that since fewer than 40% of its customers regularly watch Disney sports content, it is unfair to burden those subscribers with the high costs of sports programming. Disney counters that it invests heavily in high-quality programming and has offered its channels, including ESPN, to DirecTV at market rates.

DirecTV is trying to relax those penetration rates, and the fees that it must pay when it doesn’t meet the threshold.

DirecTV satellite dishes in Culver City.

Advertisement

(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

The satellite provider also notes that only 10% of its customer base regularly tunes in to kids programming — but more than 80% of its subscribers are paying for those channels.

In addition, DirecTV and other distributors also have been chafing over efforts by Disney and other entertainment giants to build their own streaming services, which compete with their longtime partners, the pay-TV companies. Disney, Warner Bros. Discovery and Fox Corp. this year teamed up to build a sports streaming service, Venu, as an alternative to companies such as DirecTV. The effort was challenged in court, and a federal judge in New York granted a preliminary injunction that temporarily blocks Venu’s launch.

How long will this dispute last?

Advertisement

That’s unclear.

A year ago, a similar dispute between Disney and Charter Communications, which operates the Spectrum service, lasted 12 days.

After that contentious struggle, Charter dropped some smaller Disney-owned channels, including Freeform, and gained the right to offer Disney streaming services, including Disney+, as part of its bundle. However, the outage proved costly to Charter, which lost more subscribers than it anticipated.

The blackout ended just as ESPN’s first “Monday Night Football” game of the season was getting underway.

Typically, a dispute ends when both sides feel the economic pain.

Advertisement

“There’s always a lot at stake,” Benes said. “But if [DirecTV doesn’t] have ESPN channels for the next three months, that will lead to even more cord-cutting. It could be another nail in the coffin.”

FILE - New York Jets quarterback Aaron Rodgers.

New York Jets quarterback Aaron Rodgers is expected to return on Sept. 9 for a “Monday Night Football” game after tearing his left Achilles tendon in last year’s New York Jets’ season opener.

(Adam Hunger / Associated Press)

What programs might be affected?

Customers who live in cities served by a Disney-owned ABC television station, including KABC-TV Channel 7 in Los Angeles, will see an interruption in some of their favorite programming, including “Good Morning America,” “Jeopardy” and local newscasts. Disney owns eight ABC stations, including in San Francisco, Fresno, New York, Chicago, Houston, Philadelphia and Raleigh-Durham.

Advertisement

For now, much of the pain is being felt by sports fans. College football fans are still miffed that they missed the USC – Louisiana State University clash on Sunday, which saw the 23rd-ranked Trojans execute a thrilling last-minute victory over the No. 13-ranked Tigers.

ESPN has rights to the U.S. Open tennis tournament, which is in the latter rounds with the men’s and women’s quarter-finals and semifinals. The championships are this weekend.

College football is also huge on ABC and ESPN.

Monday marks the kickoff of “Monday Night Football” on ESPN and ABC, with a prominent pairing of the New York Jets against the San Francisco 49ers, two markets served by ABC-owned stations. The game is slated to feature the return of Jets quarterback Aaron Rodgers, who suffered a season-ending injury in last year’s “MNF” opener.

David Muir sitting at the ABC News anchor desk.

“World News Tonight with David Muir” is among ABC’s programs.

(Heidi Gutman / ABC News)

Advertisement

ABC is also hosting the first presidential debate between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Trump on Sept. 10. However, other networks are carrying ABC’s feed for the debate.

The Disney-owned network also will broadcast the 76th Primetime Emmy Awards show Sept. 15, so millions of customers won’t be able to watch the TV fan fest — hosted by father-and-son comedy duo Eugene and Dan Levy — if the dispute drags on for two weeks.

Is there a work-around?

Viewers can access ABC signals through a digital over-the-air antenna. But that won’t help viewers of Disney’s cable channels, ESPN, ESPN2, Disney Channel, FX or National Geographic.

Advertisement

Competing services offer the Disney cable channels, including YouTube TV, Sling TV, Hulu + Live TV (owned by Disney), FuboTV and traditional cable and satellite providers, including Charter Spectrum, Cox Communications, Comcast and Dish Networks.

Can I get a refund?

Yes, sort of. DirecTV is offering customers $20 credits to compensate for the disruption. Customers must apply for the credit on an upcoming bill.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending