I also finally saw it. It was fun. Unfortunately, all the 70's love was handled a bit clumsy and would knock me out of the movie. That opening sequence with Rocket setting up a boom box and the monster fight with ELO and dancing Baby Groot was especially clumsy.
Finally got a chance to watch this. Not sure why but I just didn't have as much fun with this one as I did with the first movie. I'm not saying it was bad, it was great and I laughed my ass off, it just fell short some where and I just can't figure out why. Maybe the ending with Yondu. All of the easter eggs were great, did not expect to see Watchers, even my son got crazy stoked over that.
I don’t think this was Trump’s doing, that’s a spin to blame a hated guy. Maybe his Trumpers looked into Gunn’s tweets, but there are others more vocal (and famous) celebrities against him.
I don’t think this was Trump’s doing, that’s a spin to blame a hated guy. Maybe his Trumpers looked into Gunn’s tweets, but there are others more vocal (and famous) celebrities against him.
Alt-right white supremacist troll Mike Cernovich has claimed responsibility.
Disney for their stuff in the past. Patton because he’d be the first in the ring to jump someone on the opposite side of the aisle for the same. This Trumpkin Mike because of what he’s done.
I at least have to give props to Disney for maintaining the line in the sand they drew with Rosanne.
Disney for their stuff in the past. Patton because he’d be the first in the ring to jump someone on the opposite side of the aisle for the same. This Trumpkin Mike because of what he’s done.
I at least have to give props to Disney for maintaining the line in the sand they drew with Rosanne.
Hardly maintaining the line in the sand, or at least not the same line. If that were the case Rosanne would have been fired for the pic of her dressed as Hitler with the gingerbread men dressed as Jews.
All appearances seem to suggest that Gunn's comments were over 5 years old with nothing similar in recent history.
Disney for their stuff in the past. Patton because he’d be the first in the ring to jump someone on the opposite side of the aisle for the same. This Trumpkin Mike because of what he’s done.
I at least have to give props to Disney for maintaining the line in the sand they drew with Rosanne.
Hardly maintaining the line in the sand, or at least not the same line. If that were the case Rosanne would have been fired for the pic of her dressed as Hitler with the gingerbread men dressed as Jews.
All appearances seem to suggest that Gunn's comments were over 5 years old with nothing similar in recent history.
They were about a decade old (reported thousands of similar type tweets). I contend they maintained the line. No way Disney didn’t know about either’s social media history (hell, the company I work for does them all the time for our clients). Both were dismissed because of them, despite the revenue each produced.
It’s a tricky situation. I was listening to old Howard Stern stuff with (the now deceased) Evil Dave Letterman. There was a gay slur used by different people multiple times. Could those prevent Howard from getting a gig in something else now?
Brad Hader of the Brewers is getting shredded for tweets 7 years ago. All accounts have been those thoughts haven’t been an issue in his current life. They’re apart of his past though.
Disney for their stuff in the past. Patton because he’d be the first in the ring to jump someone on the opposite side of the aisle for the same. This Trumpkin Mike because of what he’s done.
I at least have to give props to Disney for maintaining the line in the sand they drew with Rosanne.
Hardly maintaining the line in the sand, or at least not the same line. If that were the case Rosanne would have been fired for the pic of her dressed as Hitler with the gingerbread men dressed as Jews.
All appearances seem to suggest that Gunn's comments were over 5 years old with nothing similar in recent history.
They were about a decade old (reported thousands of similar type tweets). I contend they maintained the line. No way Disney didn’t know about either’s social media history (hell, the company I work for does them all the time for our clients). Both were dismissed because of them, despite the revenue each produced.
It’s a tricky situation. I was listening to old Howard Stern stuff with (the now deceased) Evil Dave Letterman. There was a gay slur used by different people multiple times. Could those prevent Howard from getting a gig in something else now?
Brad Hader of the Brewers is getting shredded for tweets 7 years ago. All accounts have been those thoughts haven’t been an issue in his current life. They’re apart of his past though.
There’s a huge difference between tasteless comments in the past (before getting a contract with Disney) and doing it while under contract.
They pretty clearly knew what they were going into when they hired Robin Williams, Whoopi and Cheech. Had any of the three of them made inappropriate comments while under contract, that would absolutely be the same Rosanne line in the sand.
Disney for their stuff in the past. Patton because he’d be the first in the ring to jump someone on the opposite side of the aisle for the same. This Trumpkin Mike because of what he’s done.
I at least have to give props to Disney for maintaining the line in the sand they drew with Rosanne.
Hardly maintaining the line in the sand, or at least not the same line. If that were the case Rosanne would have been fired for the pic of her dressed as Hitler with the gingerbread men dressed as Jews.
All appearances seem to suggest that Gunn's comments were over 5 years old with nothing similar in recent history.
They were about a decade old (reported thousands of similar type tweets). I contend they maintained the line. No way Disney didn’t know about either’s social media history (hell, the company I work for does them all the time for our clients). Both were dismissed because of them, despite the revenue each produced.
It’s a tricky situation. I was listening to old Howard Stern stuff with (the now deceased) Evil Dave Letterman. There was a gay slur used by different people multiple times. Could those prevent Howard from getting a gig in something else now?
Brad Hader of the Brewers is getting shredded for tweets 7 years ago. All accounts have been those thoughts haven’t been an issue in his current life. They’re apart of his past though.
There’s a huge difference between tasteless comments in the past (before getting a contract with Disney) and doing it while under contract.
They pretty clearly knew what they were going into when they hired Robin Williams, Whoopi and Cheech. Had any of the three of them made inappropriate comments while under contract, that would absolutely be the same Rosanne line in the sand.
This is something different.
Disagree. Celebrities are getting slammed left & right for past transgressions that are coming to light. I wouldn’t rank which tweets are worse between Gunn & Rosanne, but with Gunn’s tweets about pedophilia & rape (especially in the MeToo era) it’s hard to spin that as nothing because they’re old.
Disney for their stuff in the past. Patton because he’d be the first in the ring to jump someone on the opposite side of the aisle for the same. This Trumpkin Mike because of what he’s done.
I at least have to give props to Disney for maintaining the line in the sand they drew with Rosanne.
Hardly maintaining the line in the sand, or at least not the same line. If that were the case Rosanne would have been fired for the pic of her dressed as Hitler with the gingerbread men dressed as Jews.
All appearances seem to suggest that Gunn's comments were over 5 years old with nothing similar in recent history.
They were about a decade old (reported thousands of similar type tweets). I contend they maintained the line. No way Disney didn’t know about either’s social media history (hell, the company I work for does them all the time for our clients). Both were dismissed because of them, despite the revenue each produced.
It’s a tricky situation. I was listening to old Howard Stern stuff with (the now deceased) Evil Dave Letterman. There was a gay slur used by different people multiple times. Could those prevent Howard from getting a gig in something else now?
Brad Hader of the Brewers is getting shredded for tweets 7 years ago. All accounts have been those thoughts haven’t been an issue in his current life. They’re apart of his past though.
There’s a huge difference between tasteless comments in the past (before getting a contract with Disney) and doing it while under contract.
They pretty clearly knew what they were going into when they hired Robin Williams, Whoopi and Cheech. Had any of the three of them made inappropriate comments while under contract, that would absolutely be the same Rosanne line in the sand.
This is something different.
Disagree. Celebrities are getting slammed left & right for past transgressions that are coming to light. I wouldn’t rank which tweets are worse between Gunn & Rosanne, but with Gunn’s tweets about pedophilia & rape (especially in the MeToo era) it’s hard to spin that as nothing because they’re old.
I’m not disagreeing that Gunn may have crossed a line - I don’t know. I haven’t read any of the questionable comments.
It’s just not the same line. Gunn is comments them. Rosanne is comments now. Given that people change, mature, evolve, they’re very clearly not the same thing.
Ultimately, it doesn’t matter. The trolls won and the Guardians franchise will likely suffer for it.
I also think for Gunn and Roseanne's behavior to be compared 1:1, Gunn would have had to not just made very problematic jokes, he would have needed to have directed that kind of behavior towards smearing and insulting an individual with racialized language. My understanding is that is not what Gunn did. He was more making very dark and tasteless jokes in general. But not targeting or attacking any individual.
Disney for their stuff in the past. Patton because he’d be the first in the ring to jump someone on the opposite side of the aisle for the same. This Trumpkin Mike because of what he’s done.
I at least have to give props to Disney for maintaining the line in the sand they drew with Rosanne.
Hardly maintaining the line in the sand, or at least not the same line. If that were the case Rosanne would have been fired for the pic of her dressed as Hitler with the gingerbread men dressed as Jews.
All appearances seem to suggest that Gunn's comments were over 5 years old with nothing similar in recent history.
They were about a decade old (reported thousands of similar type tweets). I contend they maintained the line. No way Disney didn’t know about either’s social media history (hell, the company I work for does them all the time for our clients). Both were dismissed because of them, despite the revenue each produced.
It’s a tricky situation. I was listening to old Howard Stern stuff with (the now deceased) Evil Dave Letterman. There was a gay slur used by different people multiple times. Could those prevent Howard from getting a gig in something else now?
Brad Hader of the Brewers is getting shredded for tweets 7 years ago. All accounts have been those thoughts haven’t been an issue in his current life. They’re apart of his past though.
There’s a huge difference between tasteless comments in the past (before getting a contract with Disney) and doing it while under contract.
They pretty clearly knew what they were going into when they hired Robin Williams, Whoopi and Cheech. Had any of the three of them made inappropriate comments while under contract, that would absolutely be the same Rosanne line in the sand.
This is something different.
Disagree. Celebrities are getting slammed left & right for past transgressions that are coming to light. I wouldn’t rank which tweets are worse between Gunn & Rosanne, but with Gunn’s tweets about pedophilia & rape (especially in the MeToo era) it’s hard to spin that as nothing because they’re old.
I’m not disagreeing that Gunn may have crossed a line - I don’t know. I haven’t read any of the questionable comments.
It’s just not the same line. Gunn is comments them. Rosanne is comments now. Given that people change, mature, evolve, they’re very clearly not the same thing.
Ultimately, it doesn’t matter. The trolls won and the Guardians franchise will likely suffer for it.
I agree (you’d hope) people evolve; I’m not certain about Gunn getting more mature as these were tweets from when he was an adult.
I think that if Rosanne only made that stupid comment, she might have survived. It was her tweet history with that comment that ended her.
And that Mike troll only won now (potentially short lived, as there’s a petition to get Gunn rehired). I’ve read this is his MO, but primarily targets journalists. I’m curious to see if targeting Gunn opens the flood gates of people who’ll now look to take him down.
Truthfully, I’m getting real tired of social media mobs & organized boycotts. Using old posts & tweets (often taken out of context) to take down someone. They’re all just bullying tactics. And I hate bullies.
I also think for Gunn and Roseanne's behavior to be compared 1:1, Gunn would have had to not just made very problematic jokes, he would have needed to have directed that kind of behavior towards smearing and insulting an individual with racialized language. My understanding is that is not what Gunn did. He was more making very dark and tasteless jokes in general. But not targeting or attacking any individual.
Eh, arguably. It was a targeted tweet that took down Rosanne, but during the takedown, people used her other, generalized tweets to show why she should’ve been fired. Hell, one of them mentioned was Rosanne dressed as a Nazi, something Sarah Silverman dressed as on one of her late night appearances. I’m not convinced if Rosanne had a series of general inappropriate tweets her fate wouldn’t have been the same. People wanted her to fail.
Generalized tweets, posts, & ads have drawn the ire of criticism. I have never been raped, but I don’t think Gunn had to tweet about someone specific to offend rape victims. People want Gunn to succeed which is why they are rallying behind him.
Subjectively, only one of the two has gotten money from my viewership. The other one hasn’t gotten my interest since before the initial run of the show.
Objectively, I’ll think less of Disney if they backpedal with Gunn. For one, they set a subjective line. Two, they illustrated the initial decision was ‘the swift hand of justice’ decision (I can do whole CGS episode about how I hate ‘swift hands of justice’). Three, Disney caved to the mob.
Brian K. Vaughan's The Private Eye is turning out to be more and more prophetic every day.
As someone who’s paid to look into people & their past, society is doing it to themselves. It’s why I have no legit Facebook account & was selective with what I posted on twitter before I stopped tweeting on 4/19/17.
There’s been countless times people have told me they weren’t revealing shit, but had the very information I needed on their social media accounts.
It’s why I don’t use the same handle across the board. It’s also why I code notes to myself & safeguard information. I have friends I’ve known for years that still have no idea when my birthday is.
The jokes (extreme in the vein of shock jocks across the country, Family Guy and South Park at their edgiest, and some of the jokes at celebrity roasts) were obvious attempts at deliberate shock humor made to his twitter followers at the time. Whether you find them funny or not, obviously anyone who didn't like that kind of humor at the time would've just not followed him. The tweets were purposely brought up again by a Trump supporter - Mike Cernovich - who wanted to take Gunn down for his attacks against Trump. If anyone ever doubted that this new extremist form of PC-ness has been weaponized...
I for one, plan on boycotting the film if Gunn isn't rehired, but just wanted to share that you can add your name to an online petition telling Disney you think this is unfair and you want him rehired if you're interested.
I'm not sure if this is too political for this site and if so, my apologies. It seems pretty comics related to me.
Sorry I just saw this thread now. I posted a new separate thread about it mentioning there's an online petition for those people who want to try to get Disney to change their minds. I, for one, will be boycotting the film if Gunn isn't rehired.
I don't compare any of this to what happened with Roseanne. Gunn's old tweets are very deliberate attempts at shock humor, but they are obviously jokes. I equate what he did with shock jocks across the country, the "edgiest" jokes on South Park and Family Guy, some of the material on the comedy central roasts, and the "bluest" shock humor I sometimes share with friends. When Gunn was writing this he was writing to his twitter followers. People who don't find such things funny simply needn't follow him. I remember liberals (and I'm liberal) used to say "If you don't like it, change the channel" when older or conservative people were offended by the then-increasing vulgarity/sex on tv/radio. They never say that anymore in the new form of PC-ness.
When Seth McFarlane did his Family Guy parody of one of the star wars films (I think it was Empire), he had the Peter/"Han Solo" character tell Brian/"Chewie" that they needed to find Lando. One of the characters asked who Lando was and "Han" said "He's the only black guy in the universe" and then "Chewie" says "Thank god for that, huh?"
Shouldn't Seth McFarlane be fired? And then on to the creators of South Park? And then, who's next? I'm boycotting the film if Gunn isn't rehired simply because there's no other way to battle the atmosphere created by this new rabid form of extremism, but that's just me.
Sorry I just saw this thread now. I posted a new separate thread about it mentioning there's an online petition for those people who want to try to get Disney to change their minds. I, for one, will be boycotting the film if Gunn isn't rehired.
I don't compare any of this to what happened with Roseanne. Gunn's old tweets are very deliberate attempts at shock humor, but they are obviously jokes. I equate what he did with shock jocks across the country, the "edgiest" jokes on South Park and Family Guy, some of the material on the comedy central roasts, and the "bluest" shock humor I sometimes share with friends. When Gunn was writing this he was writing to his twitter followers. People who don't find such things funny simply needn't follow him. I remember liberals (and I'm liberal) used to say "If you don't like it, change the channel" when older or conservative people were offended by the then-increasing vulgarity/sex on tv/radio. They never say that anymore in the new form of PC-ness.
When Seth McFarlane did his Family Guy parody of one of the star wars films (I think it was Empire), he had the Peter/"Han Solo" character tell Brian/"Chewie" that they needed to find Lando. One of the characters asked who Lando was and "Han" said "He's the only black guy in the universe" and then "Chewie" says "Thank god for that, huh?"
Shouldn't Seth McFarlane be fired? And then on to the creators of South Park? And then, who's next? I'm boycotting the film if Gunn isn't rehired simply because there's no other way to battle the atmosphere created by this new rabid form of extremism, but that's just me.
I think that’s debatable. Gunn’s tweets, as I’ve read them, appear to be for shock value. Aside from the tweet that blackballed her, I really only know of 2 Rosanne tweets; one is that the Boston Marathon bombing was fake & the other has her dressed as Hitler with a tray of baked gingerman cookies. I’d argue that last tweet by a Jewish person is for shock value; Sarah Silverman has done something similar.
Both sides are weaponizing whatever they can. As someone who refuses to be categorized as either party or either viewpoints, I can see the tactics being used. One of my favorite articles from last year was about Taylor Swift. She was on a social media hiatus & the article started with how another female singer could fill that void. The article then morphed into her social media hiatus was a result of her political beliefs. Since she was silent during the presidential elections, despite the vocal Hillary support of her circle of friends, she must be a Trump supporter. Here silence is either from her complete support or her embarrassment. The article then noted the area where she grew up being upper middle-class, that voted Trump in the past election (mind you, she moved at age 14 from that area).
Celtics player, Gordon Hayward recently had accusations he was a Trumper because someone looked at his twitter follows & saw he followed a couple conservative sites.
Brad Hader’s racist & homophobic (there’s no spinning those) tweets from 7 years ago were revealed last week. He got shredded for them. Then, the fans took heat for giving him a standing O when he took the mound this past weekend. Since it’s Milwaukee, there’s a distinct ethnicity in the crowd...so that’s being mentioned too.
A co-creator of Rick & Morty (I think that’s the show’s name) had his past tweets brought to light.
In the process of creating guidelines to get rid of scumbags, they’ll be casualties. I think Gunn is one of them. I think whose considered casualties vary on who you like & don’t*. That’s why I think it’s important to be objective with how policies are applied.
* funny how the people who think Rosanne got a raw deal forget her National Anthem singing/crotch grab incident...and those people are also boycotting the NFL over players kneeling!
Matt, I was unclear as to what you were referring to when you wrote "I think that's debatable". Did you mean that Seth McFarlane shouldn't be fired? He writes stuff for shock value all the time. All the people I mentioned do.
I strongly disagree with the idea that non-scumbags should be fired along with scumbags as some kind of scorched earth/zero tolerance policy against shock humor, as opposed to people simply changing the channel if you don't enjoy that kind of humor. For the record, I actually don't care for the Guardians of the Galaxy films and have no particular love for James Gunn. The only reason I am supporting him is because I don't think people should be fired for making shock humor jokes, especially retroactively, especially after an apology.
Dan Harmon, the co-creator of Rick and Morty you might be referring to just apologized for creating and posting a parody video of a time traveler who went back and time and sexually assaulted serial killers when they were children to keep them from becoming serial killers. It sounds pretty stupid to me and I don't care for Rick and Morty, but I don't think he should be fired either.
The problem with Roseanne is that her comments made some people believe she IS a racist. Whether she is or not, I don't know. I do know that nobody actually believes James Gunn or Dan Harmon are pedophiles or advocating pedophilia. Their jokes wouldn't be funny to anyone if they did.
Your indifference towards people losing their jobs for obvious jokes in the name of ridding the world of everything that might potentially offend someone is not something I share.
I think what’s “debatable” is whether Gunn’s tweets are “just jokes for shock value” and Rosanne’s aren’t; that depends on your point of view. Would victims of rape and pedophilia consider those “just jokes”, let alone just for shock value?
I recall when Affleck was getting lit up for the incident on MTV with Hilarie Burton. Fans defending him downplayed the incident as being nothing & Burton overblowing it to be relevant again. I contend we shouldn’t decide what’s offensive because we weren’t her. The threshold for what’s offensive is subjective to the individual.
Should MacFarlane be fired? Don’t know. Does his employee have a specific line in the sand? Have others been fired for it already? Will Seth be the first? That’s not my call.
I’m just arguing if there’s a line in the sand drawn for acceptable & not acceptable, then everyone needs to be held to it. I’m tired of hearing “I only got reprimanded because of X, meanwhile someone else didn’t”. That’s subjectively enforcing policies. Isnt that part of the critique on law enforcement?
I don’t think people like Gunn or MacFarlane should be casualties of zero tolerance, but its how we’ve structured ourselves. I put a lot of blame on social media, but that’s a side rant. Anything will offend at least one person. That’s part of the issue. The objective solution is to hold the same line for everyone. That doesn’t mean agree with the same repercussions for everyone, but I recognize the need for the consistency of it.
People constantly bitch about the enforcement of laws & rules...but why not focus on getting them changed instead?
Matt, IMO you are conflating two things when you write "I think what’s “debatable” is whether Gunn’s tweets are “just jokes for shock value” and Rosanne’s aren’t; that depends on your point of view. Would victims of rape and pedophilia consider those “just jokes”, let alone just for shock value?"
Victims of rape and pedophilia might not like his brand of humor, they may even be offended by it, but if they believe that he wasn't saying those things for shock value, then they are letting their level of being offended affect their good sense. It's an unreasonable response. Unless they have some kind of reason to believe that he actually is a pedophile/rapist then they are just highly offended. In which case I would advise them not to follow him since others did find him funny (I chuckled at one of the tweets when I saw them. It is it reasonable to assume I'm a pedophile?)
One of my big problems with extremists on the left (and again I say this as a liberal) is that it is - and this word is key - unreasonable to pretend that there's no such thing as shock humor all of a sudden. Is Seth McFarlane actually a racist because of the racial shock humor jokes he's done on Family Guy? If he is, I'm not aware of it. What about the "racist" shock humor jokes made at comedy roasts? They're no different.
My main point is that liberals have lost all sense of being reasonable people when they think anything anyone finds offensive is a firing-level crime, especially when it's meant as a joke.
I don't agree with the idea that as long as it offends me, as long as I feel something, no one can tell me I'm overreacting or that whatever action I take in response is justified. (This is another leftist idea.) Trump supporters felt so disenfranchised that they voted for a man who - however one may feel about him - seemed particularly unsuited for the job if only for his clear impulsiveness and thin-skinnedness. How come so many people on the left are okay with criticizing blue collar voters for making their decision based on their feelings? Shouldn't the same logic apply? Trump voters FEEL a certain way, so their reactions to these feelings are understandable and not an overreaction. I don't agree with that notion either.
If you are offended by something, I"m not saying you shouldn't be. I am saying the actions you take because you are offended may be unreasonable.
People seemed to believe Roseanne is a racist. I have no idea whether she is or not. I have never heard anyone say they think Gunn is a rapist or a pedphile, no matter how offensive they find his tweets. Firing him is going too far IMO. But corporations are now terrified b/c of the atmosphere the extremists on the left have created.
I actually agree here. I think we’ve gotten to a point where we’re making knee jerk reactions (calling back to my issue with social media) without more information or rational thought. I blame neither & I blame both. The GOP made me realize that in 2008 with the election results, the Democrats this past one.
I agree about what happened to “middle America.” Reminds me of what Alfred told Bruce in TDK about the mob & allying with the Joker. What’s irritating me is when I try to be objective about the guy (as I have with the last 2), it sounds like I’m one of those people.
I don’t think Gunn should’ve been fired. I’m starting to think Rosanne shouldn’t have been either. Both are censored, and I’m opposed to censoring people even if I disagree. I disagree with the firing, but if that’s the line, I accept that’s the outcome in these matters. I’m open to reassessing that policy to make it better.
This is definitely changing things. Apparently, Rian Johnson has deleted 20k tweets. Other celebrities are doing similar stuff. Selma Blair questioned how we can teach our kids about getting second chances. I contend we should also stress how every action has a reaction (at some point) and we should think about things before we act.
This feels like a huge step back, but it’s part of the hole we’ve dug ourselves into. I’m not sure how we rebound from here. It’s not going to happen with a changing of the guard.
Comments
Too soon?
https://deadline.com/2018/07/james-gunn-fired-guardians-of-the-galaxy-disney-offensive-tweets-1202430392/amp/
I don’t think this was Trump’s doing, that’s a spin to blame a hated guy. Maybe his Trumpers looked into Gunn’s tweets, but there are others more vocal (and famous) celebrities against him.
This stuff is happening to rookie athletes too. That’s why social media is a cesspool.
https://www.polygon.com/platform/amp/2018/7/21/17597914/james-gunn-dave-bautista-patton-oswalt-mike-cernovich-ted-cruz-michael-ian-black
Disney for their stuff in the past. Patton because he’d be the first in the ring to jump someone on the opposite side of the aisle for the same. This Trumpkin Mike because of what he’s done.
I at least have to give props to Disney for maintaining the line in the sand they drew with Rosanne.
All appearances seem to suggest that Gunn's comments were over 5 years old with nothing similar in recent history.
It’s a tricky situation. I was listening to old Howard Stern stuff with (the now deceased) Evil Dave Letterman. There was a gay slur used by different people multiple times. Could those prevent Howard from getting a gig in something else now?
Brad Hader of the Brewers is getting shredded for tweets 7 years ago. All accounts have been those thoughts haven’t been an issue in his current life. They’re apart of his past though.
They pretty clearly knew what they were going into when they hired Robin Williams, Whoopi and Cheech. Had any of the three of them made inappropriate comments while under contract, that would absolutely be the same Rosanne line in the sand.
This is something different.
It’s just not the same line. Gunn is comments them. Rosanne is comments now. Given that people change, mature, evolve, they’re very clearly not the same thing.
Ultimately, it doesn’t matter. The trolls won and the Guardians franchise will likely suffer for it.
I think that if Rosanne only made that stupid comment, she might have survived. It was her tweet history with that comment that ended her.
And that Mike troll only won now (potentially short lived, as there’s a petition to get Gunn rehired). I’ve read this is his MO, but primarily targets journalists. I’m curious to see if targeting Gunn opens the flood gates of people who’ll now look to take him down.
Truthfully, I’m getting real tired of social media mobs & organized boycotts. Using old posts & tweets (often taken out of context) to take down someone. They’re all just bullying tactics. And I hate bullies.
Generalized tweets, posts, & ads have drawn the ire of criticism. I have never been raped, but I don’t think Gunn had to tweet about someone specific to offend rape victims. People want Gunn to succeed which is why they are rallying behind him.
Subjectively, only one of the two has gotten money from my viewership. The other one hasn’t gotten my interest since before the initial run of the show.
Objectively, I’ll think less of Disney if they backpedal with Gunn. For one, they set a subjective line. Two, they illustrated the initial decision was ‘the swift hand of justice’ decision (I can do whole CGS episode about how I hate ‘swift hands of justice’). Three, Disney caved to the mob.
There’s been countless times people have told me they weren’t revealing shit, but had the very information I needed on their social media accounts.
It’s why I don’t use the same handle across the board. It’s also why I code notes to myself & safeguard information. I have friends I’ve known for years that still have no idea when my birthday is.
I for one, plan on boycotting the film if Gunn isn't rehired, but just wanted to share that you can add your name to an online petition telling Disney you think this is unfair and you want him rehired if you're interested.
I'm not sure if this is too political for this site and if so, my apologies. It seems pretty comics related to me.
I don't compare any of this to what happened with Roseanne. Gunn's old tweets are very deliberate attempts at shock humor, but they are obviously jokes. I equate what he did with shock jocks across the country, the "edgiest" jokes on South Park and Family Guy, some of the material on the comedy central roasts, and the "bluest" shock humor I sometimes share with friends. When Gunn was writing this he was writing to his twitter followers. People who don't find such things funny simply needn't follow him. I remember liberals (and I'm liberal) used to say "If you don't like it, change the channel" when older or conservative people were offended by the then-increasing vulgarity/sex on tv/radio. They never say that anymore in the new form of PC-ness.
When Seth McFarlane did his Family Guy parody of one of the star wars films (I think it was Empire), he had the Peter/"Han Solo" character tell Brian/"Chewie" that they needed to find Lando. One of the characters asked who Lando was and "Han" said "He's the only black guy in the universe" and then "Chewie" says "Thank god for that, huh?"
Shouldn't Seth McFarlane be fired? And then on to the creators of South Park? And then, who's next? I'm boycotting the film if Gunn isn't rehired simply because there's no other way to battle the atmosphere created by this new rabid form of extremism, but that's just me.
Both sides are weaponizing whatever they can. As someone who refuses to be categorized as either party or either viewpoints, I can see the tactics being used. One of my favorite articles from last year was about Taylor Swift. She was on a social media hiatus & the article started with how another female singer could fill that void. The article then morphed into her social media hiatus was a result of her political beliefs. Since she was silent during the presidential elections, despite the vocal Hillary support of her circle of friends, she must be a Trump supporter. Here silence is either from her complete support or her embarrassment. The article then noted the area where she grew up being upper middle-class, that voted Trump in the past election (mind you, she moved at age 14 from that area).
Celtics player, Gordon Hayward recently had accusations he was a Trumper because someone looked at his twitter follows & saw he followed a couple conservative sites.
Brad Hader’s racist & homophobic (there’s no spinning those) tweets from 7 years ago were revealed last week. He got shredded for them. Then, the fans took heat for giving him a standing O when he took the mound this past weekend. Since it’s Milwaukee, there’s a distinct ethnicity in the crowd...so that’s being mentioned too.
A co-creator of Rick & Morty (I think that’s the show’s name) had his past tweets brought to light.
In the process of creating guidelines to get rid of scumbags, they’ll be casualties. I think Gunn is one of them. I think whose considered casualties vary on who you like & don’t*. That’s why I think it’s important to be objective with how policies are applied.
* funny how the people who think Rosanne got a raw deal forget her National Anthem singing/crotch grab incident...and those people are also boycotting the NFL over players kneeling!
I strongly disagree with the idea that non-scumbags should be fired along with scumbags as some kind of scorched earth/zero tolerance policy against shock humor, as opposed to people simply changing the channel if you don't enjoy that kind of humor. For the record, I actually don't care for the Guardians of the Galaxy films and have no particular love for James Gunn. The only reason I am supporting him is because I don't think people should be fired for making shock humor jokes, especially retroactively, especially after an apology.
Dan Harmon, the co-creator of Rick and Morty you might be referring to just apologized for creating and posting a parody video of a time traveler who went back and time and sexually assaulted serial killers when they were children to keep them from becoming serial killers. It sounds pretty stupid to me and I don't care for Rick and Morty, but I don't think he should be fired either.
The problem with Roseanne is that her comments made some people believe she IS a racist. Whether she is or not, I don't know. I do know that nobody actually believes James Gunn or Dan Harmon are pedophiles or advocating pedophilia. Their jokes wouldn't be funny to anyone if they did.
Your indifference towards people losing their jobs for obvious jokes in the name of ridding the world of everything that might potentially offend someone is not something I share.
I recall when Affleck was getting lit up for the incident on MTV with Hilarie Burton. Fans defending him downplayed the incident as being nothing & Burton overblowing it to be relevant again. I contend we shouldn’t decide what’s offensive because we weren’t her. The threshold for what’s offensive is subjective to the individual.
Should MacFarlane be fired? Don’t know. Does his employee have a specific line in the sand? Have others been fired for it already? Will Seth be the first? That’s not my call.
I’m just arguing if there’s a line in the sand drawn for acceptable & not acceptable, then everyone needs to be held to it. I’m tired of hearing “I only got reprimanded because of X, meanwhile someone else didn’t”. That’s subjectively enforcing policies. Isnt that part of the critique on law enforcement?
I don’t think people like Gunn or MacFarlane should be casualties of zero tolerance, but its how we’ve structured ourselves. I put a lot of blame on social media, but that’s a side rant. Anything will offend at least one person. That’s part of the issue. The objective solution is to hold the same line for everyone. That doesn’t mean agree with the same repercussions for everyone, but I recognize the need for the consistency of it.
People constantly bitch about the enforcement of laws & rules...but why not focus on getting them changed instead?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2018/07/24/by-firing-james-gunn-walt-disney-has-opened-itself-up-to-unending-online-blackmail/amp/
Victims of rape and pedophilia might not like his brand of humor, they may even be offended by it, but if they believe that he wasn't saying those things for shock value, then they are letting their level of being offended affect their good sense. It's an unreasonable response. Unless they have some kind of reason to believe that he actually is a pedophile/rapist then they are just highly offended. In which case I would advise them not to follow him since others did find him funny (I chuckled at one of the tweets when I saw them. It is it reasonable to assume I'm a pedophile?)
One of my big problems with extremists on the left (and again I say this as a liberal) is that it is - and this word is key - unreasonable to pretend that there's no such thing as shock humor all of a sudden. Is Seth McFarlane actually a racist because of the racial shock humor jokes he's done on Family Guy? If he is, I'm not aware of it. What about the "racist" shock humor jokes made at comedy roasts? They're no different.
My main point is that liberals have lost all sense of being reasonable people when they think anything anyone finds offensive is a firing-level crime, especially when it's meant as a joke.
I don't agree with the idea that as long as it offends me, as long as I feel something, no one can tell me I'm overreacting or that whatever action I take in response is justified. (This is another leftist idea.) Trump supporters felt so disenfranchised that they voted for a man who - however one may feel about him - seemed particularly unsuited for the job if only for his clear impulsiveness and thin-skinnedness. How come so many people on the left are okay with criticizing blue collar voters for making their decision based on their feelings? Shouldn't the same logic apply? Trump voters FEEL a certain way, so their reactions to these feelings are understandable and not an overreaction. I don't agree with that notion either.
If you are offended by something, I"m not saying you shouldn't be. I am saying the actions you take because you are offended may be unreasonable.
People seemed to believe Roseanne is a racist. I have no idea whether she is or not. I have never heard anyone say they think Gunn is a rapist or a pedphile, no matter how offensive they find his tweets. Firing him is going too far IMO. But corporations are now terrified b/c of the atmosphere the extremists on the left have created.
I agree about what happened to “middle America.” Reminds me of what Alfred told Bruce in TDK about the mob & allying with the Joker. What’s irritating me is when I try to be objective about the guy (as I have with the last 2), it sounds like I’m one of those people.
I don’t think Gunn should’ve been fired. I’m starting to think Rosanne shouldn’t have been either. Both are censored, and I’m opposed to censoring people even if I disagree. I disagree with the firing, but if that’s the line, I accept that’s the outcome in these matters. I’m open to reassessing that policy to make it better.
This is definitely changing things. Apparently, Rian Johnson has deleted 20k tweets. Other celebrities are doing similar stuff. Selma Blair questioned how we can teach our kids about getting second chances. I contend we should also stress how every action has a reaction (at some point) and we should think about things before we act.
This feels like a huge step back, but it’s part of the hole we’ve dug ourselves into. I’m not sure how we rebound from here. It’s not going to happen with a changing of the guard.