hdnmickey

Exactly. Like so many others complaining about the posts at this site, he loves to play the "do as I say, not as I do" game.

As for there being an issue of politics at this site, when a topic that has no basis in politics is turned into one for absolutely no reason, then I think we all should look into why. But this is clearly not that topic given the obvious political angle that was there right from the start.

As a admitted huge fan of Disney, I have see that they are one of the worst when it comes to either looking to squash all concern over their practices, or overreact like they did in this Gun case in order to supposedly save face. They rarely seem to do the right thing. One extreme or the other.

Groucho

Again, please stop discussing posters, and take the political discussion to the other thread.

hdnmickey

Was in the process of writing that post as you posted yours. Timing worked against me.

This recent turn seems like a perfect time for a one of the many thread splits I've seen done so many times before. The original intent of the thread can resume once Disney has figured out what they will do withe the movie long term.

fumanstan

Didn't you move to the States? Drop that Canadian accent already!

hdnmickey

And seriously, I'll a political side track over the MRA bullshit any day.

fumanstan

Huh? What does this have to do with my joke to Dan?

Dan

Once a Canuck, always a Canuck, ya hoser!

hdnmickey

From what I saw, that came from this comment. A comment that I see as part of the MRA folks going on about movies like Ghostbusters.

That stuff makes many of the Movie forum topics, and many in the TV forum as well, something I just avoid. As I agreed, politics can sometimes go too far, but I find the MRA stuff far worse and just avoid the discussion and MRA lunatics themselves.

fumanstan

Weird choice to quote a post joking about Canada then. And no, it's not a reference to anything MRA related, but a reference to another B5Erik rant.

B5Erik

I have no problem with one of the subjects of the story being labeled as such, but I do believe that making similar comments about other board members is generally out of bounds.


This topic is not black and white, and my feelings about it are not rigid and inflexible. I think Disney overreacted and acted in haste, but I think what Gunn posted was stupid, offensive, and disturbing. Furthering the situation is the fact that the person who brought those posts to light is a less than reputable person.


Now, when you look at that taking one side over the other is difficult unless you've got a particular political or social bias that guides your opinion in this matter.

It's easy to see how each party is guilty of handling at least part of this badly.

So I understand Disney's point of view. And I agree with it - to a point. Just like I can understand Gunn's point of view and agree with that to a point.

Where I fall on that scale might change slightly, but I'm in the middle on this one, and it's a big gray area. This situation isn't black and white. It's just not.

Jay G.

Good thing that didn't happen in this thread.

The problem is that your views sometimes seem to change within the same post. You haven't really given a consistent argument. You sometimes seem to concede certain points, only to argue them again later. You argue one thing, and then switch to a contradictory argument later. The only consistent thing is that you're constantly arguing against Gunn, in one way or the other.

I didn't know making tasteless jokes was now a political matter. I personally think I've been arguing without bringing politics into it, except to point out that the hoopla over his posts was specifically a politically motivated hit piece, to help show that any "social" concerns about his posts have really been overblown.

What specifically do you agree with about Gunn's point of view?

Dan

So how about that Groot? Such a silly character, that is. Yep.

Decker

I really feel this is just a case where the bad guys just played the game better and won. I like Gunn and think he did a great job on 1 and decent on 2 (can't help but feel that there was a better movie to be made with Kurt Russell on board).
Digging up ancient Tweets is a stupid reason to get someone fired, but Disney isn't just a publicly held super-corporation, it's a publicly held super-corporation that is synonymous with Family Entertainment. If any company should be controversy-averse, it's Disney. I get that and I have to respect that. It's their property and it's exceptionally valuable IP now. I don't think they feel good about it either.
The bad guys won. Sometimes that happens.

slop101

And how about the fact that it's gotta be the easiest paycheck any actor's ever gotten? Vin just has to say one line over and over, doesn't even have to do the mo-cap work for it, and cha-CHING!

Groucho

Ironically, it's Vin Diesel's least wooden performance.

Decker

Dan

Why is that ironic?

B5Erik

I don't think the impact of his posts has been overblown. The stuff he posted is completely repugnant and offensive in the worst way to a lot of people. Parents. Disney's biggest group of concern. They couldn't ignore it or soft sell it. They had to do something definitive.

That getting fired when he did and how Disney did it wasn't right. Maybe they come to the same decision, but spending more time going over other possible options was called for.

Jay G.

Why do you feel you have to speak for "a lot of people"? Do you actually know how anyone besides yourself feels about it?

I was talking about "impact" in more of terms of buzz and media attention. It got a bit right away, he got fired, the firing got attention, and then since then the attention died fast, with any followup articles being about the cast, fan, and celebrity support of Gunn. The additional "reveals" have gotten zero traction.

I think the early buzz was just Cernovich and his allies astroturfing it. Disney fired Gunn before they could get an idea of the actual general public interest/outrage, which was minimal.

How do you know that's Gunn's point of view? That's more of a fan argument. Gunn hasn't really said anything about it.

How about Gunn's point that these were a long time ago, and he's a changed person, and hasn't done anything like that in years? Isn't the fact that the posts were from so long ago, and don't reflect his current behavior, more important? Are we never to forgive people for their past mistakes?

B5Erik

Fuck. I give up. You don't want to find common ground. You want to attack and argue and belittle.

Whatever. I don't care. You win. Congrats!

RoboDad

Clearly, you don't speak Groot. Perhaps it is time to go back to school and take that elective course you overlooked before.

Jay G.

Where did I attack or belittle in that post?

I'm fine with your assertion the Disney should've waited. But based on your previous statements, based on the photos of the themed party, you don't think he should get his job back.

Personally, I don't think the photos or tweets are that bad, and I also factor in how long ago there were. I don't think there's a definitive answer for what the "right" move from Disney's perspective would've been; there's a lot of factors, and saying that they "had no choice" but to fire him doesn't make it true. All we can really say for sure is what we'd personally prefer to have happened, and what we'd like to still happen.

The Cow

Can the James Gunn talk move here?

James Gunn Fired by Disney: The Political Thread

B5Erik

Ok, argue, parse, lecture, condescend, etc.

You are clearly from a different generation. In my day ( ) we'd beat the crap out of the kind of person who thought rape and pedophilia were funny. I still find those comments to be repugnant, and I'm damned sure you'd find that most people my age or older feel the same way.

B5Erik

Is there really anything else to talk about with this movie right now?

Maybe when they hire a new director we can discuss that. Then we can discuss how he's not James Gunn so the movie will now suck. (Kind of like the Edgar Wright Ant-Man discussion.)