cee
Full Member
Posts: 105
|
Post by cee on Jul 24, 2018 16:42:41 GMT -5
On the point of redemption, why is that OK for some but not others? Make child rape jokes a decade ago but say you were a yutz and that you've changed, let's forgive him, but use a racial slur years ago and it's off with their head (no specific example, just a general observation of the type of thing now considered irredeemable). Again, you're missing a huge difference : one is a joke, and one is an opinion. Having a racist employee and one who used to make bad jokes 10 years ago, that's really not a fair parallel. Do you think Gunn is a closet pedophile? Do you think that the Papa John guy is somewhat racist? |
|
cee
Full Member
Posts: 105
|
Post by cee on Jul 24, 2018 17:10:25 GMT -5
As a brilliant comedian once said, you can joke about everything, but not with everyone. By that he didn't mean that you should beware of offending others. He meant that usually, the ones who would oppose of your jokes are disingenious and not worthy of your time. Gunn's old jokes weren't funny, at least not to me. But then again, I wasn't on twitter in 2008 (still not), so I'm probably wasn't his target audience anyways. If he knew his audience and made them laugh, then he did his job. His career seems to show a pattern of constant growth and successfull challenges, doesn't it? Now just imagine a second this : if you read back soe of the jokes in Preacher or Hitman, you would put those in the same category as what Gunn is attacked for, and rightly so. Myself, I must confess that some of those Preacher jokes made me cringe and enjoy less the book. Yet, I knew the context of the jokes, and I now know which side of Ennis isnt for me (The Boys). But if those same people who dug those old Gunn tweets were focusing on Ennis, they wouldn't have to look far, and he would imediatly be fired by the same company that fired Gunn. Considering his recent and upcoming Platoon book there, I would consider it a shame, but the irony is that Ennis won the most prestigious US awards in comicdom for Preacher. He got hired by Marvel because of that. And now they'd have to fire him for the same reason? This is just stupid, and we all know that there would be close to zero if any blowback in ticket sales for GOTG III with Gunn still onboard, as most people who are going to go see this either don't care or don't know about the "scandal", or are smart enough to understand the absurdity of the situation. So you're again left with one sole reason for this firing : the boss of Marvel is a member of the Trump administration, and he was given a good enough excuse to make fire an opponent. Which shows that the reason why so many people are angry with this decision is not because they support the jokes and have a double standard, it is simply because they see through this and don't want to be taken for fools and accept a deceptive reasoning behind this firing. I'm in the same position as Slam though : I couldn't care less about this in the sense that I have no interest in those movies after seing the previous ones, and I'd rather Gunn went back to the kind of movies he did right before he was hired by Disney, but there is unfairness and disingeniousity there, and it is worthy of debate, much more than the movies  |
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Jul 24, 2018 20:10:57 GMT -5
We aren't electing James Gunn to be President. Also Gunn has said that he was a yutz and shouldn't have said any of that stuff. Trump vacillates between saying that what he said was okay and denying it in the face of overwhelming evidence. So contrition vs. non-contrition. To an extent there's a bit of caveat emptor to Disney. Gunn started out working for Troma and was a know Edgelord. They got what they got. However, Gunn appears to have tried to change. By many accounts he's not the person he was ten years ago. Trump appears to still be the same vile individual he's always been. Redemption is a thing. And we aren't electing James Gunn to be President. That's a pretty big difference. Those are fair points, although I have no idea what an "Edgelord" is, although it sounds like something Rob Liefeld would have put into one of his image books. No, Gunn isn't running for POTUS, but he made comments that made his employer uncomfortable and they didn't want to have to deal with the blowback, much like Papa John's, the University of Louisville, the NFL, and MLB didn't want to deal with John Schnatter's consequences for his use of the N-word. On the point of redemption, why is that OK for some but not others? Make child rape jokes a decade ago but say you were a yutz and that you've changed, let's forgive him, but use a racial slur years ago and it's off with their head (no specific example, just a general observation of the type of thing now considered irredeemable.)Redemption requires some form of regret, or a demonstrated modification of one’s behaviour. Trump showed no regret whatsoever. He was recorded making lewd comments many years ago, and continues to indulge in lewd behaviour. He insults women’s physique and behaves like a boor on a fairly constant basis. Gunn, on the other hand, doesn’t seem to have told that many dead baby jokes since the tweets that are now thrown back at him. If he says “I’m sorry, I was wrong and I don’t do that stuff any more” we can believe him, because he has indeed stopped. (I’m not even comparing the act of bragging about ACTUALLY grabbing women by their genitals and simply making gross jokes. There is a world of difference between the two). Regarding the Papa John thing, I admit I don’t know enough... though I did get the impression that he was being blamed, this time around, for just using the word n*** in a sentence that was not insulting itself, but illustrated how someone else had said someone insulting. That strikes me as something of an overreaction. |
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Jul 24, 2018 20:18:52 GMT -5
Those are fair points, although I have no idea what an "Edgelord" is, although it sounds like something Rob Liefeld would have put into one of his image books. No, Gunn isn't running for POTUS, but he made comments that made his employer uncomfortable and they didn't want to have to deal with the blowback, much like Papa John's, the University of Louisville, the NFL, and MLB didn't want to deal with John Schnatter's consequences for his use of the N-word. On the point of redemption, why is that OK for some but not others? Make child rape jokes a decade ago but say you were a yutz and that you've changed, let's forgive him, but use a racial slur years ago and it's off with their head (no specific example, just a general observation of the type of thing now considered irredeemable). If Disney wants to fire him it’s fine. They certainly can. I do think there’s a bit of a difference between Gunn doing something a decade ago and Schnatter’s comments which were days ago. Again it’s a question of an opportunity to change and redeem. Edgelords are people who are intentionally dark and provocative on the internet in order to provoke a response and sometimes to be darkly funny. Disney knew what they were getting with Gunn. I think some people have a problem with the disengenuousness of the individual who resurrected the tweets. It’s clearly not because he’s offended as he’s said things just as bad and apparently actually meant them, as opposed to trying to be edgy. I’m a trembling mass of indifference either way. Just trying to point out some differences. Personally, I don’t mind that a mudracker from either extreme of the political spectrum tries to dig up irrelevant old dirt on people they view as their enemies. That’s to be expected. What annoys me to no end is to see supposedly well-meaning people play the mudracker’s game and act on that dirt, draping themselves in a transparent mantle of self-serving virtue. As you said, Disney knew what kind of guy Gunn was when they hired him -the “Garth Ennis shock value“ kind of writer. They knew. For Disney’s people to act like offended vestal virgins today is hypocritical and weak. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2018 11:15:09 GMT -5
They knew. For Disney’s people to act like offended vestal virgins today is hypocritical and weak. I'd say Disney were more worried about any potential backlash from not sacking Gunn affecting their bottom line ($) than actually being offended by the tweets per se.
Being fired from a child friendly company for rape and child molestation “jokes” is the least Gunn could expect though. For me, Disney had no choice... the backlash for not firing him would’ve been worse.
|
|
cee
Full Member
Posts: 105
|
Post by cee on Jul 25, 2018 15:02:59 GMT -5
I actually doubt it. If anything, it could only help hype the movie. The audience isn't that dumb : they understand the hypocrisy behind this move. And I don't really see who would actually boycot the movie based on that, that went to see the first two. Some people ar being over cautious there, bullied by fringe trolls.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2018 13:07:16 GMT -5
The Guardians are behind James Gunn anyway...
|
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Jul 30, 2018 16:57:06 GMT -5
“Weaponizing mob mentality” is a brilliant way of describing this phenomenon.
|
|
cee
Full Member
Posts: 105
|
Post by cee on Aug 1, 2018 6:17:57 GMT -5
I really think there's no way they won't hire him back. Even when the news broke, I thought so, as it's such a dumb hypocritical move... Disney looking as cowards, nope, their PR departement can't be that dumb.
|
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Aug 1, 2018 9:02:34 GMT -5
Generally the #1 rule in the entertainment field is Don't screw with the money. If you are employed and you do something to effect the bottom line , they want you out. There seems to be an exception with the Rosanne situation. They just bagged her because she was a President Trump supporter. It kind of reminds me of when Andrew Dice Clay was the hottest thing in showbiz. I heard that the people in charge hated him and hated his popularity but knew they could make a lot of money with him. But they were secretly hoping he would fail. Which he did when the movie Ford Fairlane tanked. Disney doesn't really care about the tweets, they just care that many parents will stop taking their kids to see their movies.
|
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Aug 1, 2018 9:35:52 GMT -5
Generally the #1 rule in the entertainment field is Don't screw with the money. If you are employed and you do something to effect the bottom line , they want you out. There seems to be an exception with the Rosanne situation. They just bagged her because she was a President Trump supporter. It kind of reminds me of when Andrew Dice Clay was the hottest thing in showbiz. I heard that the people in charge hated him and hated his popularity but knew they could make a lot of money with him. But they were secretly hoping he would fail. Which he did when the movie Ford Fairlane tanked. Disney doesn't really care about the tweets, they just care that many parents will stop taking their kids to see their movies. This is demonstrably false. She was a Trump supporter when the show was green-lit. |
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Aug 1, 2018 9:38:15 GMT -5
As I pointed out, she was a President Trump supporter and they didn't like it ,but they saw that they could make money off the show. That's why I cited the Dice clay example.
|
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Aug 1, 2018 9:42:36 GMT -5
As I pointed out, she was a President Trump supporter and they didn't like it ,but they saw that they could make money off the show. That's why I cited the Dice clay example. Okay. I guess I misunderstood you. I thought you were saying she was fired for being a Trump supporter. |
|
|
|
Post by String on Aug 1, 2018 11:07:54 GMT -5
Roquefort Raider - this is so absolutely spot-on. OT to the Gunn situation, but in keeping with your post is the saga of Josh Hader, relief pitcher for the Milwaukee Brewers. Over this week's All-Star break, some offensive tweets, containing racist, homophobic, and misogynistic themes were uncovered in his Twitter feed...from seven years ago...when he was 17 and in high school. Because if this, he has to go to sensitivity training through the league and there are calls from all sorts of places for him to be suspended or even banned from the league for these tweets he made...seven years ago...when he was 17 and in high school. Look, I get it if these were from last week and people were upset, because they probably would accurately represent his feelings on the LGBTQIA, female, and minority communities today, but they aren't from last week. They're from a time before he had opportunities to interact with a larger group of people from across the spectrum (he grew up in a town of 21K in Maryland), and because of that, people need to temper their righteous indignation and anger and recognize that most 17 year-olds, particularly males from less than diverse areas, are idiots, prone to opening their mouths without thinking or considering the consequences of what they are saying. People grow and change over time, especially young people who have new experiences in their lives, and it isn't worth ruining his life over some stupid things he tweeted...seven years ago...when he was 17 and in high school. Hader's first mound appearance at home after those tweets were exposed resulted in a near standing ovation by the Brewers' home crowd. Those of a more cynical side may think that some of those in attendance may have been cheering him for what he said back then but one would hope that most were celebrating his remorse and apologies over this youth incident as well as how his diversified teammates supported him in this aftermath. Then again, in their following road trip, Hader's first mound appearance in San Fransisco against the Giants resulted in boos and outcries from that audience. Since Hader, we've now had two star players, Atlanta Braves pitcher Sean Newcomb (who came within one strike of throwing a no-hitter against the Dodgers) and Washington Nationals infielder Trea Turner both have similar racist and homophobic tweets from their youth exposed. Why baseball players are being targeted in such a fashion, I don't know. |
|
|
|
Post by aquagoat on Aug 1, 2018 15:21:36 GMT -5
I really think there's no way they won't hire him back. Even when the news broke, I thought so, as it's such a dumb hypocritical move... Disney looking as cowards, nope, their PR departement can't be that dumb. But Disney are the definition of family entertainment. That's their billion-dollar brand. That's what they are trying to protect with this. Disney don't really care what internet fanboys say, they are more concerned with what American mothers think. |
|
