(No politics!!) how impacted will Guardians in Epcot be now?

[SteveDude]

With the success of Ragnarok, and the comparable style of the films, I would not be surprised if Disney didn't at least approach Waititi. Seems like the only fit in my eyes. The Russos did a great job with the Guardians in Infinity War but Gunn was also heavily involved with their scenes, so who knows what a movie without him will be like. Regardless, we will get a solid blockbuster; Marvel has done no wrong within the past couple years.

 

[Planogirl]

If Disney can't handle anything edgy or even historically nasty then maybe they should stop buying things that are or have been that way. I've been worrying about FX for a while now and this only adds to it. Everything isn't family friendly and shouldn't have to be.

I also have huge respect for the cast coming out to support Gunn. Obviously they know him better than people on a Disney forum.

 

[HopperFan]

If Disney can't handle anything edgy or even historically nasty then maybe they should stop buying things that are or have been that way. I've been worrying about FX for a while now and this only adds to it. Everything isn't family friendly and shouldn't have to be.

I also have huge respect for the cast coming out to support Gunn. Obviously they know him better than people on a Disney forum.

YES

Disney has some non-family friendly movies in their vault, and if the upcoming goes through ........... even more.

But I'll say one word .........

DEADPOOL

 

[Brocktoon]

I've been worrying about FX for a while now and this only adds to it. Everything isn't family friendly and shouldn't have to be.

Yep, FX has taken some great risks with the content on shows like 'The Americans' (which recently had a phenomenal finale) and 'Always Sunny'. One of my favorite all-time comics, 'Y:the Last Man' is currently in casting for it's FX pilot ... which was a great home for the series given it's content. I'm starting to get worried that Disney may start meddling with the project as they haven't even filmed the pilot yet.

But I'll say one word .........

DEADPOOL

And getting back to FX, they had the guts to do evening airings of 'Deadpool', pretty much uncensored F-bombs and un-edited jokes/content. I was wondering how they heck they would air Deadpool on basic cable, but FX pulled it off. Technically I don't think the FCC could do anything against basic cable which is why Syfy, USA, FX etc are getting riskier, but I could see Disney deciding not to go that route on any of their channels.

 

[Moliphino]

Yep, FX has taken some great risks with the content on shows like 'The Americans' (which recently had a phenomenal finale) and 'Always Sunny'. One of my favorite all-time comics, 'Y:the Last Man' is currently in casting for it's FX pilot ... which was a great home for the series given it's content. I'm starting to get worried that Disney may start meddling with the project as they haven't even filmed the pilot yet.

And Legion. They better keep Legion.

 

[Truxi]

I think Disney is re-evaluating as they could easily see everything collapse when others start calling out Sarah Silverman, Patton Oswalt, Danny DeVito etc ... Based on what they booted Gunn for, Disney could easily look hypocritical for who they continue to choose to work with. I think they're going to pivot on this issue before it completely tanks them.

In my opinion Gunn was just bait for a bigger issue and Disney fell for it ... and now they're potentially stuck in a major trap. Cartoon Network/Adult Swim seems to have handled things much better when people went after Dan Harmon's (Rick & Morty / Community) past.

I think you've nailed it exactly. This was absolutely a test run, and I really hope Disney does reevaluate their actions before the inevitable domino effect goes down.

Could be! Are there really that many people in Hollywood joking about pedophilia, though?

I don't know how many times I can say that the early aughts were basically everyone trying to tell "The Aristocrats." (Actually, to really answer your first question, I guess just look up the joke and its history as 'secret handshake' for comedians for decades. The joke itself is pretty messed up.) The early aughts especially, when Family Guy and South Park were super-popular, were a time when the most common style of humor was shock "humor." I'm really glad we've grown past it, but it was a thing for a while, and if Disney wanted to cut out anyone who ever made a blue joke from their line-up...they'd run pretty dry.

Seems like a family entertainment company might reserve some extra sensitivity for that when they think about brand... but perhaps not!

As far as sensitivity goes, there's something to be said for the sensitivity that comes from growing and maturing and being willing to criticize your past self and your past callousness, which is something Gunn and Oswalt both do (probably Silvermann too, given some of her recent work, but I never really followed her).

But if you're talking about brand and family entertainment, it's worth remembering that Disney made a big deal out of having Robin Williams as the Genie, and his act was very blue, and being stream-of-conscious, often went to some dark places unexpectedly. Or shoot, remember Full House and what a big deal that was? Starring Bob Saget of all people as the milquetoast, nice-guy father?

I'm fine with that "extra sensitivity" being reserved for not hiring or keeping on people who have actively hurt or harassed others (like them replacing Jeffery Tambor on Star), rather than firing folks for public comments and jokes they made that Disney was aware of before they hired them.

 

[Truxi]

With societal pressures as they are now Disney had no choice but also societal pressures aren't always used in admirable ways.

To me, that's the real problem here. This was weaponized, and in bad faith. I find it completely unbelievable that an accused rapist who has openly called victims of date rape liars is actually bothered by Gunn's tweets.

Contrawise, most of the people I know or follow who actually do care about social justice and companies not having harassers or rapists on their staff did not jump on the "fire him" bandwagon. Because Gunn has very visibly changed and improved as a person, and because they're well aware that this is a tactic more than actual concern.

 

[rowrbazzle]

To me, that's the real problem here. This was weaponized, and in bad faith. I find it completely unbelievable that an accused rapist who has openly called victims of date rape liars is actually bothered by Gunn's tweets.

Disingenuous as it may be, Disney isn't just taking that guy's word for it or responding to his alleged outrage. Once the public takes hold of it, the manner in which it was discovered tends to be ignored or forgotten.

I generally find the trolling (prowling) for bad actions in people's past to be a troubling trend, regardless of who is doing the trolling.

 

[Jeffery berish]

I wonder how many people on here that are defending Gunn and saying Disney made a big mistake are actually parents? Pedophilia is not funny period. Disney will not reconsider this no matter how many guardians fans sign petitions and no matter what the cast might say. Actions have consequences.

 

[Smittolis]

In conversations its referred to as 'predatory listening'.... we are now seeing the same principle applied to written text. However, as some have said, there have to be consequences to actions or else anarchy reigns supreme.

Disney just have to be consistent now as they move forwards and hold everyone accountable to the same bar.

 

[Truxi]

I wonder how many people on here that are defending Gunn and saying Disney made a big mistake are actually parents? Pedophilia is not funny period. Disney will not reconsider this no matter how many guardians fans sign petitions and no matter what the cast might say. Actions have consequences.

I mean, I guess Disney should also just never hire any comedian older than 30, because if they were doing stand-up in the late 90's/early aughts, then there's a good chance they've got one joke like that somewhere in their line-up.

Nobody--repeat No. Body.--is saying that pedophilia is funny. No one is saying that. Even James Gunn said as much about his past "jokes"--BEFORE this all went down.

By this metric, it would seem like only a monster would let their kid watch Aladdin because Robin Williams' old stand-up had some pretty horrible stuff in it.

sheesh...folks will cheer for Loki's redemption arc, but heaven forbid an actual person go through one.

 

[Boski]

I wonder how many people on here that are defending Gunn and saying Disney made a big mistake are actually parents? Pedophilia is not funny period. Disney will not reconsider this no matter how many guardians fans sign petitions and no matter what the cast might say. Actions have consequences.

I found this to be interesting: Chris Pratt, Michael Rooker, Zoe Saldana, Dave Bautista, Vin Diesel, and Bradley Cooper are all parents.

 

[Jeffery berish]

I found this to be interesting: Chris Pratt, Michael Rooker, Zoe Saldana, Dave Bautista, Vin Diesel, and Bradley Cooper are all parents.

I was referring to the people replying to this post not actors that will almost always protect their own ie harvey Weinstein

 

[Boski]

I was referring to the people replying to this post not actors that will almost always protect their own ie harvey Weinstein

Thats reaching don't you think? Pretty apples to oranges when comparing the two situations.

 

[Jeffery berish]

Thats reaching don't you think? Pretty apples to oranges when comparing the two situations.

It may be at the moment but I think Disney is protecting itself in case that changes , I believe someone close to Gunn was just found to be involved in some bad stuff involving kids so you just don’t know these days

 

[Truxi]

I believe someone close to Gunn was just found to be involved in some bad stuff involving kids so you just don’t know these days

That's certainly more than I've heard. Do you have a link to that?

 

[Truxi]

Oh, I mean from a credible source.

 

[Truxi]

I was referring to the people replying to this post not actors that will almost always protect their own ie harvey Weinstein

See, the thing about this is that it goes directly against what brocktoon said upthread.

People protected Weinstein because he controlled their careers, and had the power to make sure that they never worked in Hollywood again. Once he lost that power, there weren't an awful lot of folks protecting him.

Meanwhile Disney controls the careers of the cast. And they now control the majority of the movies that will get made in this country. So speaking out against Disney's actions here isn't really something that will protect their careers. Gunn doesn't have much power, but Disney has a whole lot of power.

 

[rowrbazzle]

...sheesh...folks will cheer for Loki's redemption arc, but heaven forbid an actual person go through one.

I'm not certain the comparison is apt. One is a fictional character, the other isn't. Beyond that, what has Gunn done to be redeemed? He apologized and stopped making unsavory jokes. Is that it? If so, I'd say it's a statute of limitations thing more than redemption.

Perhaps if he'd been working with abuse victims or something people (who are actually upset) might be more receptive to redemption. I haven't heard of anything like that, though.

 

[Jeffery berish]

Oh, I mean from a credible source.

yeah I don't know how accurate it is I just knew something came up when I searched for more information on what had happened. My guess is Disney knows more than the rest of us and is trying to protect their image which is everything to them. I don't blame them for it at all, rape and pedophilia are disturbing topics.