Disney fires James Gunn from "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3"

[Gavin70]

What I am wondering is where this is all heading. Usually language changes over time and things that used to be acceptable become seen as racist or sexist. I've always wondering though if their is a breaking point where people simply feel like they can't say anything because at times it really does feel like anything you say will offend. I'm not sure you can maintain that kind of feeling before people just want to revolt. I've wondered if this has been a big influence on the rise of the Alt-Right. In the past I think people had a better grasp on what words were wrong but as the list grows so does the feeling of censorship and a loss of freedom. I've also wondered if it has been to fast in a shorter period of time. How long did it take for the N word and C word fore example to really sink into culture were it was seen by most as bad words? Is it possible for change to happen to fast especially when it seems like everything is changing at once. Plus how does the number of mix signals impact society. On one hand things feel super PC I guess is the best word to use yet at the same time you got Trump in office and Nazi's becoming part of the culture. It's like the country has somehow become more liberal and more right-wing at the same time. How in the world does that happen? Do moderates even exist anymore or have any influence on anything?

Jason

It's certainly a challenging time. I think this current case is a simple case of revenge - right wingers saying "you got some of our side fired for what they said on Twitter so now we're going after yours". Only difference is that people like Rosanne got in trouble for things they were saying now whereas James Gunn is in trouble for stuff he said years ago and there's nothing current to indicate he still supports those comments.

But there's also the challenge of people being condemned for historical attitudes that were acceptable at the time. Laura Ingles Wilder is a recent example. Racist language in her books, sure - but nothing out of the ordinary for that era. It's important to acknowledge that people in the past don't conform to today's standards and often said things that are clearly wrong, but its also important to read things in the context of their time and understand that whether or not you agree with them, they weren't any worse than other people of those times.

 

[Jayson1]

It's certainly a challenging time. I think this current case is a simple case of revenge - right wingers saying "you got some of our side fired for what they said on Twitter so now we're going after yours". Only difference is that people like Rosanne got in trouble for things they were saying now whereas James Gunn is in trouble for stuff he said years ago and there's nothing current to indicate he still supports those comments.

But there's also the challenge of people being condemned for historical attitudes that were acceptable at the time. Laura Ingles Wilder is a recent example. Racist language in her books, sure - but nothing out of the ordinary for that era. It's important to acknowledge that people in the past don't conform to today's standards and often said things that are clearly wrong, but its also important to read things in the context of their time and understand that whether or not you agree with them, they weren't any worse than other people of those times.

I agree. When people say it was a different time that means everyone was different. Even the liberals weren't very liberal by modern standards. People like to say Lincoln who was a Republican wouldn't be one today which I think is true but i'm not sure he would be welcomed as Democrat. I can only imagine what people would think once you ask him things like whether or not Southern Leaders should face war crimes or you ask him what he thinks about gay marriage. The guy would be run out of the party.
Even when you look at Gunn just look at all the change that has happened since then. Trump is president,#METOO,Black Lives Matter,Russia hacked the election. I know things were more progressive but we seem to be living in the second 60's right now and it sure didn't feel like that to me. Granted I wasn't on the internet at the time which might be knock on the internet. If people were going crazy online and people offline is unaware of what is going on then we might be living in 4 countries right now. Liberal,Conservative,Online and Offline. Does the world feel as crazy offline to people as it does online in everyone's lives or is it the normal crazy that has always been their. We still go to work or go to the movies and get fast food and all that regular stuff. Most important I don't think most of us have the same amount of conflict ofline as we do online. Do people spend hours fighting about everything from Star Wars to politics with people in the real world? Do people just insult people to their face as if they aren't a human being and then have others rally around and egg it on.
I forget who it was who was on Bill Maher but he was someone who I guess studied the internet and I remember him saying that people going on the internet wasn't so much a problem. It's when you stay their to long that it becomes a issue. It makes you feel depressed and the way people are constantly checking their phones is almost like being a drug addict. If people are already depressed and then you deal with insults or racism or whatever it is soon as you log on yet you still feel the urge when you leave to hurray back then is it any wonder things can get so hostile. At some point you got to consider it isn't just the issues that are causing the problems but the enviroment. I know that is why I will always avoid Twitter and Facebook. I would love to do the same for Youtube because I know I have been pulled into some negative videos because of clickbait or I'm in a bad mood and then regret it as soon as the guy starts yaping. Still I do like some of the stuff their and it's where I watch lots of old sports games,Music Videos,New Sports and a few places like Collider and ScreenJunkies. Actually their is lots of good stuff their but wherever you go their is one outraged person who knows how to appeal to your cynical side with the clickbait and you fall for just enough to just get weary of the entire place.

Jason

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Nobody 'manipulated' Disney. The smart person would take care as to what they post PUBLICLY to any social media; or public info source that can be archived. Personal activity on Social Media isn't required for any critical function in your life. A good rule of thumb for ANYONE: "Think before you hit <Post>"

Exactly. Disney--in this case--is not responsible for Gunn's reprehensible history of rape and pedophilia posts. He obviously felt his interest was of such a strong level that he had to take that to social media, not giving a damn about how morally bankrupt his posts were.

What if it was a left-wing person who found them and brought them to light? Why would that make a difference? It isn't like the right-wingers created the tweets and tried to attribute them to Gunn. Gunn made them.

True--some are attacking a right winger for Gunn's own sick interests reads like they believe Gunn was unfairly exposed, and should have been left alone. He pretty much begged for this outcome, with his being a relentless critic of Trump inspiring others to uncover his true character & history.

 

[Jayson1]

Exactly. Disney--in this case--is not responsible for Gunn's reprehensible history of rape and pedophilia posts. He obviously felt his interest was of such a strong level that he had to take that to social media, not giving a damn about how morally bankrupt his posts were.



True--some are attacking a right winger for Gunn's own sick interests reads like they believe Gunn was unfairly exposed, and should have been left alone. He pretty much begged for this outcome, with his being a relentless critic of Trump inspiring others to uncover his true character & history.

He asked for it just because he criticised Trump? Wouldn't Trump be asking for the same people calling him out with his behavior? Also a apology is hardly the same as asking to be fired. Also if were going after him just the post then that means ever tv show, movie,comedy show,book and song that depicted a illegal act also needs to be treated the same? Should ever pieces of art ever be erased and anyone responsible be fired who had anything to do with it. If art is just going to be about showing people doing nice legal things I think everyone is going to be getting really bored soon. I feel like I am living in Bizaro world were real crime gets to happen but fiction crime is the sin of all sin. Actually sounds like a solid police state as well if we want that.

Jason

 

[BillJ]

He pretty much begged for this outcome, with his being a relentless critic of Trump inspiring others to uncover his true character & history.

You know this is a pretty poor excuse for trying to undo someone's career? Gunn made the posts, Disney had the right to fire him. But how fragile is Trump that he (or his surrogates) has to go after people that disapprove of the job he does and are openly critical of him?

Is Trump the POTUS, or is he a snowflake?

 

[Mudd]

Yeah, it's not funny that Gunn's dismissal was engineered and is being celebrated by people who are just fine with Donald Trump wandering around the Miss Teen USA dressing rooms to cop a look at naked girls.

 

[BillJ]

Yeah, it's not funny that Gunn's dismissal was engineered and is being celebrated by people who are just fine with Donald Trump wandering around the Miss Teen USA dressing rooms to cop a look at naked girls.

Many on the Right definitely sold their souls for the White House.

 

[Jayson1]

What's just as bad is it seems Patton Oswalt and Sarah Silverman seems to be next on the hit list. Has a modern version of the Joseph McCarthy era started now? I actually think Stormy Daniels was first but she is a porn star so nobody cared. Either way I hope nobody has done anything to be labeled Un-American in the last 20 plus years the internet has been around. If you got any old risque fan fiction on your computer it's proably a good time to dump it.

Jason

 

[mos6507]

...going after him

A showbiz figure needs to rely on its social reputation. Regardless of how that reputation gets dragged into the dirt, once it does, the damage is done and a business needs to deal with it.

For instance, how employable is Lindsay Lohan these days? Even celebrities who mostly self-destruct rather than harm others wind up having a difficult time getting work, because they're simply...unlikeable. If all you can think about when they're on screen is how much of a mess they are in real life then you can't sustain disbelief anymore. This is the current problem with Johnny Depp who can't shield how much of a trainwreck he is anymore which is why some people don't like his participation in a Harry Potter movie.

Tom Cruise after the Oprah incident also lost a lot of his bankability. He had to sort of double-down on being a no-nonsense action star from that point onward but even though people are now calling the newest MI one of the best action movies of all time, his rep as a leading man will always be sullied because people think he's a scientology weirdo.

This is just how it works. It doesn't have to elevate itself to mug shots and prison time. It's simple popularity in the eyes of the public. If the public thinks you're a creep, some of them will vote with their wallets and stay home. It's just as simple as that.

It's...just...business.

 

[Jayson1]

Many on the Right definitely sold their souls for the White House.

The issue isn't just with the right. Liberals are split on the issue of whether he should be fired. Just like Bernie vs Clinton and look at how that turned out for us.

Jason

 

[Mudd]

The issue isn't just with the right. Liberals are split on the issue of whether he should be fired.

Yes, and what's happening here is that right wing trolls are using values that mean nothing at all to them to entangle decent people who do feel responsible to behave well and hold others to such standards.

 

[BillJ]

Liberals are split on the issue of whether he should be fired.

I really don't understand what this has to do with anything? People disagree all the time, on a multitude of issues. When I start worrying is when we start doing things in lockstep with no dissent.

 

[Jayson1]

A showbiz figure needs to rely on its social reputation. Regardless of how that reputation gets dragged into the dirt, once it does, the damage is done and a business needs to deal with it.

For instance, how employable is Lindsay Lohan these days? Even celebrities who mostly self-destruct rather than harm others wind up having a difficult time getting work, because they're simply...unlikeable. If all you can think about when they're on screen is how much of a mess they are in real life then you can't sustain disbelief anymore. This is the current problem with Johnny Depp who can't shield how much of a trainwreck he is anymore which is why some people don't like his participation in a Harry Potter movie.

Tom Cruise after the Oprah incident also lost a lot of his bankability. He had to sort of double-down on being a no-nonsense action star from that point onward but even though people are now calling the newest MI one of the best action movies of all time, his rep as a leading man will always be sullied because people think he's a scientology weirdo.

This is just how it works. It doesn't have to elevate itself to mug shots and prison time. It's simple popularity in the eyes of the public. If the public thinks you're a creep, some of them will vote with their wallets and stay home. It's just as simple as that.

It's...just...business.

We don't know though just how much this story would damage his image or the movie. This seems like something he could have survived because of the circumstances are different than they are with Depp. Nobody has ever taken time to really gage the pulse of the fans and most of the initial outrage was just flat out lies they used to manipulate fear in Disney.

Jason

 

[BillJ]

We don't know though just how much this story would damage his image or the movie.

Would you spend $250+ million dollars to find out?

 

[Jayson1]

I really don't understand what this has to do with anything? People disagree all the time, on a multitude of issues. When I start worrying is when we start doing things in lockstep with no dissent.

It's the ole Divide and Conquer game. Are division sends mixed messages and keeps everyone off balance as to what the best thing to do because nobody can agree what the best thing is. Republicans love that stuff. They know how to exploit it and they also know Gunn isn't going to be the last. It will eventually make it down to politicans. You can't keep sacrificing your own unless they really,really cross a line you can't cross. It sends a message that you will fall for any trick and it sends a message that forgiveness and tolerance aren't things we really believe in. We only believe it if we feel someone deserves it to standards so strict that it's almost impossible for any flawed human to live up to. If it isn't risque jokes it will always be something with everyone.In fact we are suppose to defend people even when they have crossed a line. That's why we don't believe in the death penalty and you feel like people after they do their time in prision should get a second chance. At least that was what I thought we were suppose to be for.

Jason

 

[BillJ]

You can't keep sacrificing your own unless they really,really cross a line you can't cross.

James Gunn and Disney sacrificed James Gunn.

 

[Jayson1]

Would you spend $250+ million dollars to find out?

Seeing as how much money the others made and how Gunn was suppose to run the Cosmic Universe part of the franchise then yes I would spend that money. Especially if I was Disney. I bet they have $250 in their couch cushions. That isn't much money I expect to them and it also beats the possibility of no movie at all if the stars walk away or people don't rally around a new director. Also why would any director come and work for you in the future if you don't have their back and your willing to fire them at the first speed bump.

Jason

 

[Jayson1]

James Gunn and Disney sacrificed James Gunn.

Maybe Disney did but Gunn didn't quit and he even made amends with a apology.

Jason

 

[BillJ]

Also why would any director come and work for you in the future if you don't have their back and your willing to fire them at the first speed bump.

This isn't a speed bump. It is a black eye for Disney and Gunn.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

You can't keep sacrificing your own unless they really,really cross a line you can't cross.

If you're stopping to ask if they're 'your own' before deciding whether what they did is bad enough to warrant consequences, you're part of the reason why discourse in the modern world is so f#cked. They either crossed a line or they didn't. You can disagree about where the line is, you don't get to say 'well, we can let this one slide because he's one of OURS'.