These weren't even popular tweets. Dude fucked himself out of work with some old ass tweets no one gave a fuck about, until they gave a fuck about his actual work. Ironic!his old tweets ( just click image to make larger)
James Gunn Fired From ‘Guardians Of The Galaxy’ Franchise Over Offensive Tweets
- Thread starter fonzerrillii
- Start date
Lesson: If you know you're about to blow up, delete all your old social media pages and start from scratch with a pro page.
nigga idgaf...some of y’all are really on one in here just bcuz the nigga directed a couple marvel flicks smh
Should have got fired based on that trash GoG 2.
Twitter is literally ruining everything I enjoy. At this stage of its lifecycle it does way more harm than good. Just get rid of it. Individuals are fairly(relatively) intelligent creatures. Twitter is an ignorant juggernaut that eats its own young and attackes its own reflection. I'll go as far as to say, I can tell who on BGOL is heavy into twitter just by how they reply in certain threads. Even though this board is male dominated, the views of Shay butter/(blk)feminist twitter gets parroted on here all the time.
lesson: don't embrace pedophilia to begin with...
Unless you're "grandfathered in" ... based on what I've "learned" here
I'm afraid even to ask....
Disney Should Know the Difference Between James Gunn and Roseanne
Last Friday, the Walt Disney Company abruptly severed its professional relationship with writer-director James Gunn. Gunn’s third movie for the company, Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3, was to start production this fall; his first two Guardians films (sorry, “volumes”) grossed a combined $1.6 billion for Disney. So this was no small thing — the termination, for cause, of a central asset of the most successful movie franchise in the world. What ended Gunn’s gig was not his job performance, but his pre–Marvel Universe status as a fringe director, internet asshole, and provocateur. His time at Disney expired due to bad tweets, now the second leading cause of Hollywood career death, behind only sexual misconduct. The tweets — an endless, gross, “indefensible,” in the company’s words, litany of sick jokes about pedophilia — were not entirely fresh news. They, along with entries on a blog Gunn eventually took down, had been the subject of online discussion for quite some time. If the studio didn’t know about them already, the reason can only be that it simply wasn’t paying attention. (The studio’s statement dismissing Gunn did not address the question of how long those in charge have known about his tweets.)
What apparently caused Disney to pull the trigger was the tweeting of Mike Cernovich, alt-right self-styled scourge and a central figure in the Pizzagate/Infowars Universe, who re-unearthed Gunn’s jokes and went into strategically righteous “how can Disney let this man work around children” mode. (The Guardians movies are cast with adults, but never mind.) Practically bleeding concern from every pore, Cernovich later wrote of Gunn’s tweets, “How do you know they are jokes?” Cernovich then got to his real point, which is that he claims to have examples of “100” more Hollywood people making pedophilia jokes on Twitter. Oh, good. Yay. This should be another awesome couple of weeks in the land of Everything Is Garbage Now.
There are many boxes to unpack here, and the smallest, least interesting one is labeled “Find a better use for your time and creative energy than making jokes about sex with children.” That doesn’t need to be discussed because, one’s absolute right to make those jokes aside, pretty much everyone agrees that it’s bad, including Gunn, who tweeted his regrets about them, and after being fired, issued a statement about his “wildly insensitive” tweets, the sum of which was that although “they don’t reflect the person I am today … I take full responsibility,” and as a “business decision,” I get it.
As mea culpas go, fine: It’s a teachable moment. Henceforth, everyone should sing like no one can hear you, dance like nobody’s watching, and tweet like several years from now you’ll be employed by a corporation trying not to run afoul of government regulatory agencies mid-merger. Let your work be your “brand,” not your needy impulse to shock the room. But it’s too easy to say that Gunn brought this on himself. He didn’t. Assuming there is no more to the story than we are being told, from all appearances Disney capitulated, without more than a half-day’s thought, to a manifestly disingenuous pressure campaign from a movement seeking to recast an ongoing debate about offensive speech to suit its own purposes — a redefinition that does not stand up to a minute’s scrutiny. And in doing so, Disney endorsed something far more offensive and dangerous than Gunn’s joke that in the sequel to The Giving Tree, the tree gives the kid a blow job.
The road to the takedown of Gunn probably began two months ago, with Disney’s (via its network ABC) abrupt cancellation of Roseanneafter its star compared former Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett to an ape, while attacking Muslims and George Soros for good measure. Like Gunn, Barr had a long history of appalling statements on social media, one that was well-known to ABC before Roseanne was revived. Unlike Gunn, the tweet that resulted in her dismissal was brand-new, which suggested that Disney was willing to draw a line, in effect granting its top-level talent amnesty for any preemployment offensiveness as long as, going forward, their records stayed clean.
Barr’s support for Trump made her a hero of the right (and of Trump himself, who called her to offer congratulations on her first episode’s ratings). When she shot herself in the foot, as anyone who has followed her social-media career knew she would, her firing was quickly reframed by alt-righters as the end point of a liberal-media smear campaign. And here’s where the problem starts. The Breitbart/Trump/Cernovich portion of the right has always tried to minimize blatant racism, homophobia, xenophobia, sexism, and anti-Jewish or anti-Muslim rhetoric by placing it all under one heading: “not politically correct.” In their world, only “snowflakes” take umbrage at people who dare to “tell it like it is”; they view everything from the #MeToo movement to attacks on racism as penalties that liberals administer to those who violate perceived political orthodoxy. The outrage with which Cernovich went after Gunn is a calculated posture, a way of saying, “If you can get someone fired by saying their words are offensive, we can too.”
That approach depends, for its effectiveness, on a deliberate refusal to draw any categorical distinctions. It insists on a world in which punishment should be weighed not by the intensity of the offense but by the noise level of those who are (or act) offended. Thus, Gunn’s comment that a hotel shower was so weak that it felt like a 3-year-old peeing on his head (yes, that is literally one of the “pedophilia” jokes that was quoted in support of his firing) is given the same weight as a blunt-force attack on African-Americans, the LGBTQ community, or women. If you can’t see a difference between a lame Gunn tweet from 2012 like “Three Men and a Baby They Had Sex With #unromanticmovies” and “When is the last time women organized to support a men’s rights issue? Stop being fags. Who cares about breast cancer and rape? Not me” (a Cernovich tweet from 2012 — he’s super-interested in not being interested in rape), then you’re either not trying, or you’re invested in insisting there’s no difference. As is, for example, Ted Cruz, who swiftly attached his suction cups to the underside of this news cycle and sweatily tweeted about Gunn that “if these tweets are true, he needs to be prosecuted.” By Saturday, Gunn’s Wikipedia page had a subheading labeled “Pedophilia accusations”; it has since been changed, but the reputational damage is done.
Disney has always fluffed its feathers about how, because of its worldwide brand, anyone associated with its name must be above reproach, but in the wake of its merger with 21st Century Fox, it’s going to be responsible for more of what we watch than any other company in America. How the company decides what to punish and what to defend is a question its employees and its customers have a right to ask, and the answer had better be something other than “We’ll do it quickly and in a state of panic.”
The website Deadline Hollywood fretted over the weekend that Gunn’s firing was going to cause a “free speech chill” in Hollywood, but free speech has never meant the right to make public remarks with a guarantee of no consequences from one’s employer — it didn’t for Barr and it doesn’t for Gunn. This will not be solved by the application of a single, uniform principle, whether it is “Free speech is absolute” or “Anything that offends someone is by definition offensive.” It can be handled only by examining nuance, intention, and meaning, an approach in which corporations rarely specialize or excel.
We live in an era in which any insistence that two things with surface similarities are in fact different is met with instant, ill-informed charges of hypocrisy. But a joke — even a thousand creepy jokes that you wouldn’t tell at a dinner table, in a locker room, or anywhere else — is not the same thing as the public stereotyping or vilification of groups that are already widely targeted with discrimination and hatred. Sarah Silverman’s “I want to get an abortion but my boyfriend and I are having difficulty conceiving,” is not an attack on babies, as much as Ted Cruz would probably want to prosecute her for conspiracy to commit murder. Nor does it equal Roseanne Barr calling George Soros a Nazi “who turned his fellow Jews in 2 be murdered … and stole their wealth.” One is a jab; one is a libel (one for which Barr later apologized). What the alt-right wants is to gerrymander the racist, the hateful, the defamatory, and the outright menacing into the same district as the merely tasteless, in the hope that the left will shrug in resignation and sigh, “Okay, we give, maybe it’s all merely tasteless.” But it’s not. And if a company that’s all about expression can’t draw those distinctions — and worse, if it outsources its judgment about offensiveness to professional internet trolls — how can any creative artist believe that Disney has their back?
http://www.vulture.com/2018/07/james-gunn-is-not-roseanne-and-disney-should-know-it.html
Last Friday, the Walt Disney Company abruptly severed its professional relationship with writer-director James Gunn. Gunn’s third movie for the company, Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3, was to start production this fall; his first two Guardians films (sorry, “volumes”) grossed a combined $1.6 billion for Disney. So this was no small thing — the termination, for cause, of a central asset of the most successful movie franchise in the world. What ended Gunn’s gig was not his job performance, but his pre–Marvel Universe status as a fringe director, internet asshole, and provocateur. His time at Disney expired due to bad tweets, now the second leading cause of Hollywood career death, behind only sexual misconduct. The tweets — an endless, gross, “indefensible,” in the company’s words, litany of sick jokes about pedophilia — were not entirely fresh news. They, along with entries on a blog Gunn eventually took down, had been the subject of online discussion for quite some time. If the studio didn’t know about them already, the reason can only be that it simply wasn’t paying attention. (The studio’s statement dismissing Gunn did not address the question of how long those in charge have known about his tweets.)
What apparently caused Disney to pull the trigger was the tweeting of Mike Cernovich, alt-right self-styled scourge and a central figure in the Pizzagate/Infowars Universe, who re-unearthed Gunn’s jokes and went into strategically righteous “how can Disney let this man work around children” mode. (The Guardians movies are cast with adults, but never mind.) Practically bleeding concern from every pore, Cernovich later wrote of Gunn’s tweets, “How do you know they are jokes?” Cernovich then got to his real point, which is that he claims to have examples of “100” more Hollywood people making pedophilia jokes on Twitter. Oh, good. Yay. This should be another awesome couple of weeks in the land of Everything Is Garbage Now.
There are many boxes to unpack here, and the smallest, least interesting one is labeled “Find a better use for your time and creative energy than making jokes about sex with children.” That doesn’t need to be discussed because, one’s absolute right to make those jokes aside, pretty much everyone agrees that it’s bad, including Gunn, who tweeted his regrets about them, and after being fired, issued a statement about his “wildly insensitive” tweets, the sum of which was that although “they don’t reflect the person I am today … I take full responsibility,” and as a “business decision,” I get it.
As mea culpas go, fine: It’s a teachable moment. Henceforth, everyone should sing like no one can hear you, dance like nobody’s watching, and tweet like several years from now you’ll be employed by a corporation trying not to run afoul of government regulatory agencies mid-merger. Let your work be your “brand,” not your needy impulse to shock the room. But it’s too easy to say that Gunn brought this on himself. He didn’t. Assuming there is no more to the story than we are being told, from all appearances Disney capitulated, without more than a half-day’s thought, to a manifestly disingenuous pressure campaign from a movement seeking to recast an ongoing debate about offensive speech to suit its own purposes — a redefinition that does not stand up to a minute’s scrutiny. And in doing so, Disney endorsed something far more offensive and dangerous than Gunn’s joke that in the sequel to The Giving Tree, the tree gives the kid a blow job.
The road to the takedown of Gunn probably began two months ago, with Disney’s (via its network ABC) abrupt cancellation of Roseanneafter its star compared former Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett to an ape, while attacking Muslims and George Soros for good measure. Like Gunn, Barr had a long history of appalling statements on social media, one that was well-known to ABC before Roseanne was revived. Unlike Gunn, the tweet that resulted in her dismissal was brand-new, which suggested that Disney was willing to draw a line, in effect granting its top-level talent amnesty for any preemployment offensiveness as long as, going forward, their records stayed clean.
Barr’s support for Trump made her a hero of the right (and of Trump himself, who called her to offer congratulations on her first episode’s ratings). When she shot herself in the foot, as anyone who has followed her social-media career knew she would, her firing was quickly reframed by alt-righters as the end point of a liberal-media smear campaign. And here’s where the problem starts. The Breitbart/Trump/Cernovich portion of the right has always tried to minimize blatant racism, homophobia, xenophobia, sexism, and anti-Jewish or anti-Muslim rhetoric by placing it all under one heading: “not politically correct.” In their world, only “snowflakes” take umbrage at people who dare to “tell it like it is”; they view everything from the #MeToo movement to attacks on racism as penalties that liberals administer to those who violate perceived political orthodoxy. The outrage with which Cernovich went after Gunn is a calculated posture, a way of saying, “If you can get someone fired by saying their words are offensive, we can too.”
That approach depends, for its effectiveness, on a deliberate refusal to draw any categorical distinctions. It insists on a world in which punishment should be weighed not by the intensity of the offense but by the noise level of those who are (or act) offended. Thus, Gunn’s comment that a hotel shower was so weak that it felt like a 3-year-old peeing on his head (yes, that is literally one of the “pedophilia” jokes that was quoted in support of his firing) is given the same weight as a blunt-force attack on African-Americans, the LGBTQ community, or women. If you can’t see a difference between a lame Gunn tweet from 2012 like “Three Men and a Baby They Had Sex With #unromanticmovies” and “When is the last time women organized to support a men’s rights issue? Stop being fags. Who cares about breast cancer and rape? Not me” (a Cernovich tweet from 2012 — he’s super-interested in not being interested in rape), then you’re either not trying, or you’re invested in insisting there’s no difference. As is, for example, Ted Cruz, who swiftly attached his suction cups to the underside of this news cycle and sweatily tweeted about Gunn that “if these tweets are true, he needs to be prosecuted.” By Saturday, Gunn’s Wikipedia page had a subheading labeled “Pedophilia accusations”; it has since been changed, but the reputational damage is done.
Disney has always fluffed its feathers about how, because of its worldwide brand, anyone associated with its name must be above reproach, but in the wake of its merger with 21st Century Fox, it’s going to be responsible for more of what we watch than any other company in America. How the company decides what to punish and what to defend is a question its employees and its customers have a right to ask, and the answer had better be something other than “We’ll do it quickly and in a state of panic.”
The website Deadline Hollywood fretted over the weekend that Gunn’s firing was going to cause a “free speech chill” in Hollywood, but free speech has never meant the right to make public remarks with a guarantee of no consequences from one’s employer — it didn’t for Barr and it doesn’t for Gunn. This will not be solved by the application of a single, uniform principle, whether it is “Free speech is absolute” or “Anything that offends someone is by definition offensive.” It can be handled only by examining nuance, intention, and meaning, an approach in which corporations rarely specialize or excel.
We live in an era in which any insistence that two things with surface similarities are in fact different is met with instant, ill-informed charges of hypocrisy. But a joke — even a thousand creepy jokes that you wouldn’t tell at a dinner table, in a locker room, or anywhere else — is not the same thing as the public stereotyping or vilification of groups that are already widely targeted with discrimination and hatred. Sarah Silverman’s “I want to get an abortion but my boyfriend and I are having difficulty conceiving,” is not an attack on babies, as much as Ted Cruz would probably want to prosecute her for conspiracy to commit murder. Nor does it equal Roseanne Barr calling George Soros a Nazi “who turned his fellow Jews in 2 be murdered … and stole their wealth.” One is a jab; one is a libel (one for which Barr later apologized). What the alt-right wants is to gerrymander the racist, the hateful, the defamatory, and the outright menacing into the same district as the merely tasteless, in the hope that the left will shrug in resignation and sigh, “Okay, we give, maybe it’s all merely tasteless.” But it’s not. And if a company that’s all about expression can’t draw those distinctions — and worse, if it outsources its judgment about offensiveness to professional internet trolls — how can any creative artist believe that Disney has their back?
http://www.vulture.com/2018/07/james-gunn-is-not-roseanne-and-disney-should-know-it.html
The worst part is the "oh it was ten years ago and he was younger and did something stupid" excuse. He was fuckin 40. I'm not even 40 yet and I wouldn't say some of that shit. Nor would I say it in my 20s. He works for Disney, not Adult Swim, who isn't firing the creator of Rick and Morty for his baby rape skit.
65,000 MCU Fans Sign Petition for Disney to Rehire James Gunn on Guardians 3
- BY DAN ZINSKI
- – ON JUL 22, 2018
- IN MOVIE NEWS
An online petition calling on Disney to re-hire ousted Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3director James Gunn has received over 65,000 signatures. Gunn was dropped by Disneyon Friday, after years-old offensive tweets by the writer-director resurfaced online amid his feud with conservative social media personality Mike Cernovich. Gunn quickly released his own statement apologizing for the tweets and taking responsibility for his words, which he insisted were meant to be humorous and provocative.
In the wake of Disney's swift move to fire Gunn, many of the director's colleagues have come to his defense. Guardians of the Galaxy star Dave Bautista was one of the earliest and most vocal defenders of Gunn, saying he is "not OK" with the action taken by Disney. Gunn's brother Sean Gunn, who appears in the Guardians movies as the on-set stand-in for Rocket Raccoon, also came out in vehement defense of the ousted director.
Related: Why James Gunn Was Fired From Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3
Guardians of the Galaxy fans, and MCU fans in general, are now having their say on Disney's firing of James Gunn, and a lot of them aren't happy. A Change.org petition calling on Disney to reverse course and re-hire Gunn went up two days ago, and by Sunday afternoon had already received over 65,000 signatures on the way to a goal of 75,000 total. The petition statement reads in part:
I agree on the point that if people say a bunch of stupid s--t while working for a studio, the studio has full right to fire him over the possible controversy. This situation is very different though as he made these jokes years before he was working for Disney and also the fact that they were jokes. I agree with most, including Gunn himself that the jokes were s---ty and un-funny but they were still jokes, it wasn't an opinion or a statement, it was just a bad attempt at being funny.
The other thing is if you do this to Gunn you have to do it for all the other directors who have said some crappy joke sometime in their life, which is all of them, cause I doubt there's one human on this planet who hasn't made a s---ty joke once or twice in there [sic] life.
While calling on Disney to go back on their decision and re-hire gun, the petition originator Chandler Edwards freely admits it's highly unlikely the studio will comply, no matter how many signatures they get. Edwards says he hopes the petition will at least send a signal to Disney that their fans believe they made a mistake in firing Gunn over his old tweets. Before his days directing Guardians of the Galaxy movies for Marvel Studios and Disney, James Gunn made his name working on quirky and some might argue tasteless films like Tromeo and Juliet, Slither and Super. Many saluted Disney for hiring Gunn to handle the big-budget Guardians films, praising the generally conservative studio for their willingness to take a risk on a quirky filmmaker with a very particular sense of humor. Indeed, Gunn's unusual sensibilities are generally listed as assets anytime critics discuss the two Guardians films, which have collectively grossed $1.6 billion worldwide.
However, Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 will have to go on without James Gunn, after the very same sense of humor that helped the director make millions for Disney manifested itself in a much less acceptable way. Of course, many would argue there's nothing humorous about Gunn's tweets at all, with their references to pedophilia, rape and other extreme subject matter. On the other hand though, the 65,000 people mentioned above clearly don't see those dated tweets as an offense worthy of firing the creative mastermind behind the hit Guardians franchise.
Sean Gunn Addresses James Gunn's Guardians Of The Galaxy 3 Firing
Guardians of the Galaxy cast member Sean Gunn has voiced his opinion on Disney firing his brother and director James Gunn from the third film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe series. He's the goofy Ravager, Kraglin, and serves as the on-set analog for digital character Rocket.
The ousted director came under attack earlier this week after conservative website The Daily Caller dredged up some years-old, deleted comments from Gunn's Twitter account. The tweets included jokes about rape, child abuse, and AIDS, among other controversial topics. Disney declared that the statements were "indefensible and inconsistent with [its] values" and severed ties with the director. Gunn responded with his own statement, in which he took full responsibility for his bad jokes and said that he respected Disney's decision.
Related: What Happens to Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 Without James Gunn?
Sean Gunn took to Twitter himself to offer his own thoughts on the situation. He provides insight from growing up with his brother and watching him develop as an artist. He does not try to excuse the controversial statements, but rather uses them as evidence to how much the writer/director has grown and how the first two Guardians films reflect that.
Marvel is not attending Comic-Con in San Diego this weekend, but Gunn's firing has kept the studio and its parent company in the news, anyway. Gunn was supposed to make an announcement about a new project Friday, but Sony pulled the announcement from their panel in light of the controversy. Along with directing the first two films, Gunn shared writing credits on the original with Nicole Perlman and wrote the sequel solo. He had already turned in a draft of the third film, which is due out in 2020. But it's not clear yet if Marvel will use his ideas or also replace him as writer.
- BY EVAN KILLHAM
- – ON JUL 21, 2018
- IN MOVIE NEWS
Guardians of the Galaxy cast member Sean Gunn has voiced his opinion on Disney firing his brother and director James Gunn from the third film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe series. He's the goofy Ravager, Kraglin, and serves as the on-set analog for digital character Rocket.
The ousted director came under attack earlier this week after conservative website The Daily Caller dredged up some years-old, deleted comments from Gunn's Twitter account. The tweets included jokes about rape, child abuse, and AIDS, among other controversial topics. Disney declared that the statements were "indefensible and inconsistent with [its] values" and severed ties with the director. Gunn responded with his own statement, in which he took full responsibility for his bad jokes and said that he respected Disney's decision.
Related: What Happens to Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 Without James Gunn?
Sean Gunn took to Twitter himself to offer his own thoughts on the situation. He provides insight from growing up with his brother and watching him develop as an artist. He does not try to excuse the controversial statements, but rather uses them as evidence to how much the writer/director has grown and how the first two Guardians films reflect that.
I hope it goes without saying that I love and support my brother James. And I'm quite proud of how kind, generous, and compassionate he is with the people in his life, whether they are friends, family, colleagues, fans, or strangers.
Since he was a kid, it was clear he had a desire (maybe destiny) to be an artist, tell stories, find his voice through comics, films, his band. The struggle to find that voice was sometimes clunky, misguided, or downright stupid, and sometimes wonderful, moving, and hilarious.
Since devoting his entire life to the Guardians movies and MCU six years ago, I've seen him channel that voice into his work on those movies and seen him transform from the guy who made up things to shock people.
I saw firsthand as he went from worrying about "softening his edge" for a larger audience to realizing that his "edge" wasn't as useful of a tool as he thought it was. That his gift for storytelling was something better.
I saw that he was more open-hearted than the guy who needed to get a rise out of people by making nasty or offensive jokes (or whatever you choose to call them--I don't think his bluer material was ever his funniest and neither does Mom).
In many respects this change in my brother was reflected in the change that the Guardians go through. I've heard my brother say many times that when Quill rallies the team with "this is our chance to give a shit"--to care--that it's the pep talk he himself needed to hear.
It's part of what made working on the Guardians movies such a rewarding experience for the cast, myself included. We managed to find ourselves involved in a big-budget superhero movie that was, at its core, deeply personal. That's a gift. And that's why it's good.
This isn't new information, by the way. It's all stuff that James has explained many times in interviews, in more detail and more eloquently. It's not some new spin. It's always been part of the story.
So I guess my hope is that fans continue to watch and appreciate the Guardians movies, not despite the fact that the filmmaker used to be kind of a jackass, but because of it. They are, after all, movies about discovering your best self.
Working on those movies made my brother a better person, and they made me one too. I'm proud of that. Peace.
Since he was a kid, it was clear he had a desire (maybe destiny) to be an artist, tell stories, find his voice through comics, films, his band. The struggle to find that voice was sometimes clunky, misguided, or downright stupid, and sometimes wonderful, moving, and hilarious.
Since devoting his entire life to the Guardians movies and MCU six years ago, I've seen him channel that voice into his work on those movies and seen him transform from the guy who made up things to shock people.
I saw firsthand as he went from worrying about "softening his edge" for a larger audience to realizing that his "edge" wasn't as useful of a tool as he thought it was. That his gift for storytelling was something better.
I saw that he was more open-hearted than the guy who needed to get a rise out of people by making nasty or offensive jokes (or whatever you choose to call them--I don't think his bluer material was ever his funniest and neither does Mom).
In many respects this change in my brother was reflected in the change that the Guardians go through. I've heard my brother say many times that when Quill rallies the team with "this is our chance to give a shit"--to care--that it's the pep talk he himself needed to hear.
It's part of what made working on the Guardians movies such a rewarding experience for the cast, myself included. We managed to find ourselves involved in a big-budget superhero movie that was, at its core, deeply personal. That's a gift. And that's why it's good.
This isn't new information, by the way. It's all stuff that James has explained many times in interviews, in more detail and more eloquently. It's not some new spin. It's always been part of the story.
So I guess my hope is that fans continue to watch and appreciate the Guardians movies, not despite the fact that the filmmaker used to be kind of a jackass, but because of it. They are, after all, movies about discovering your best self.
Working on those movies made my brother a better person, and they made me one too. I'm proud of that. Peace.
Marvel is not attending Comic-Con in San Diego this weekend, but Gunn's firing has kept the studio and its parent company in the news, anyway. Gunn was supposed to make an announcement about a new project Friday, but Sony pulled the announcement from their panel in light of the controversy. Along with directing the first two films, Gunn shared writing credits on the original with Nicole Perlman and wrote the sequel solo. He had already turned in a draft of the third film, which is due out in 2020. But it's not clear yet if Marvel will use his ideas or also replace him as writer.
Sean Gunn Addresses James Gunn's Guardians Of The Galaxy 3 Firing
- BY EVAN KILLHAM
- – ON JUL 21, 2018
- IN MOVIE NEWS
Guardians of the Galaxy cast member Sean Gunn has voiced his opinion on Disney firing his brother and director James Gunn from the third film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe series. He's the goofy Ravager, Kraglin, and serves as the on-set analog for digital character Rocket.
The ousted director came under attack earlier this week after conservative website The Daily Caller dredged up some years-old, deleted comments from Gunn's Twitter account. The tweets included jokes about rape, child abuse, and AIDS, among other controversial topics. Disney declared that the statements were "indefensible and inconsistent with [its] values" and severed ties with the director. Gunn responded with his own statement, in which he took full responsibility for his bad jokes and said that he respected Disney's decision.
Related: What Happens to Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 Without James Gunn?
Sean Gunn took to Twitter himself to offer his own thoughts on the situation. He provides insight from growing up with his brother and watching him develop as an artist. He does not try to excuse the controversial statements, but rather uses them as evidence to how much the writer/director has grown and how the first two Guardians films reflect that.
I hope it goes without saying that I love and support my brother James. And I'm quite proud of how kind, generous, and compassionate he is with the people in his life, whether they are friends, family, colleagues, fans, or strangers.
Since he was a kid, it was clear he had a desire (maybe destiny) to be an artist, tell stories, find his voice through comics, films, his band. The struggle to find that voice was sometimes clunky, misguided, or downright stupid, and sometimes wonderful, moving, and hilarious.
Since devoting his entire life to the Guardians movies and MCU six years ago, I've seen him channel that voice into his work on those movies and seen him transform from the guy who made up things to shock people.
I saw firsthand as he went from worrying about "softening his edge" for a larger audience to realizing that his "edge" wasn't as useful of a tool as he thought it was. That his gift for storytelling was something better.
I saw that he was more open-hearted than the guy who needed to get a rise out of people by making nasty or offensive jokes (or whatever you choose to call them--I don't think his bluer material was ever his funniest and neither does Mom).
In many respects this change in my brother was reflected in the change that the Guardians go through. I've heard my brother say many times that when Quill rallies the team with "this is our chance to give a shit"--to care--that it's the pep talk he himself needed to hear.
It's part of what made working on the Guardians movies such a rewarding experience for the cast, myself included. We managed to find ourselves involved in a big-budget superhero movie that was, at its core, deeply personal. That's a gift. And that's why it's good.
This isn't new information, by the way. It's all stuff that James has explained many times in interviews, in more detail and more eloquently. It's not some new spin. It's always been part of the story.
So I guess my hope is that fans continue to watch and appreciate the Guardians movies, not despite the fact that the filmmaker used to be kind of a jackass, but because of it. They are, after all, movies about discovering your best self.
Working on those movies made my brother a better person, and they made me one too. I'm proud of that. Peace.
Marvel is not attending Comic-Con in San Diego this weekend, but Gunn's firing has kept the studio and its parent company in the news, anyway. Gunn was supposed to make an announcement about a new project Friday, but Sony pulled the announcement from their panel in light of the controversy. Along with directing the first two films, Gunn shared writing credits on the original with Nicole Perlman and wrote the sequel solo. He had already turned in a draft of the third film, which is due out in 2020. But it's not clear yet if Marvel will use his ideas or also replace him as writer.
@fonzerrillii
@ViCiouS
thoughts?
I have no opinion on this
The reason I asked is now that Chris Hardwick and Lenard got "exonerated" I wonder if Disney will let Gunn back in?
CTG wasn't exonerated - it never should have been a thing in the first place - the whole thing was a hit job, it takes coordination to quickly spread the story into the culture and more coordination to maintain that kind of heat
I don't know Hardwick's story...
As for Gunn - I'm waiting to see if this really really really is only about offensive tweets
the CTG thing to me...I can't call it.
I feel like he caused some of it by talking reckless and disparaging of the victim on all those mediums
but the attack WAS coordinated
from Star to the blogs to social media...it was BOOM BOOM BOOM
Hardwick is the host of Talking Dead on AMC and was accused by an ex and a few months later got his shows back and then the "victim" suddenly said just forget everything
https://www.bgol.us/forum/threads/chris-hardwick-has-a-new-show-coming-up-talking-metoo.1005833/
Gunn thing to me is VERY complicated
Cause they KNEW he was doing this stuff a while back and let him stay.
and he was always "out there"
but those tweets...
I really think anyone DEFENDING them?
Is just making sure to protect THEMSELVES and THEIR friends...
just in case.
and I was SHOCKED someone I REALLY respect is trying to DEFEND him
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/firing-james-gunn-disney-hurts-all-hollywood-1129691
In Firing James Gunn, Disney Hurts All of Hollywood
Jeff Spicer/Getty
James Gunn
fired by Disney, “Many people who have followed my career know, when I started, I viewed myself as a provocateur, making movies and telling jokes that were outrageous and taboo. As I have discussed publicly many times, as I've developed as a person, so has my work and my humor.”
The very things that make Gunn so interesting as a filmmaker came from that place. The reason why you rope him in to write the reboot of Dawn of the Dead is because he’ll write in a zombie infant. The reason why you let him draft your live-action Scooby-Doo flick is because he’ll make it a horror picture. The reason why you hire him to write and direct your giant superhero movie is because he’ll infect it with an irreverence of tone that’ll make it stand out among a crowded field of giant superhero movies.
Is the content of those past tweets revolting? Absolutely. Undeniably. And Gunn, now 51, was in his 40s when he sent them, hardly a kid. But so long as there has been no actual criminal activity, there has to be a difference between who a person was and who a person is. And we have to allow for the fact that people can change.
Roseanne Barr is the kind of person who dresses up in a Hitler costume and threatens to bake Jews in an oven. She is the kind of person who fires off racist tweets and conspiracy theories. Jeffrey Tambor is someone who creates a hostile work environment on the sets of his television shows. You fire that person today for something she or he did yesterday.
By most accounts, from his collaborators and peers, Gunn is the kind of person who is committed to equality and representation, who conducts himself on his sets in a fair and respectful manner, and who speaks out against injustice when he sees it in the world. He was, it seems, an asshole. Do I want assholes? No. But I’ll take assholes who realized they were assholes and changed for the better all by themselves — before we noticed they were assholes.
Sometimes, artists’ lives are messy. They are people full of contradictions. They are compelled to push boundaries, to make noise, to get noticed. Sometimes the urge to do that is driven by some deep-seated mania. Other times because they are processing past traumas, both physical and psychological. But none of them is a static being … they are always evolving, trying to find the version of themselves that makes creation possible.
To demand that every artist who works for you to have never had a past, to have never had jagged edges that have been sanded down over time, is asking for people who will make boring art. I want people who challenged the world around them. I want people who were misfits and outcasts. I want people who raised hell. I want David Bowie and Tim Burton and John Waters and Sarah Silverman and Mel Brooks and Patton Oswalt and Eddie Murphy.
I want the voices that carry — and many of those voices didn’t always say things we want to hear.
Marc Bernardin is a former Hollywood Reporter editor and a comic book and television writer whose credits include Hulu's Castle Rock. He also co-hosts the Fatman on Batman podcast with Kevin Smith.
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/firing-james-gunn-disney-hurts-all-hollywood-1129691
Jeff Spicer/Getty
James Gunn
fired by Disney, “Many people who have followed my career know, when I started, I viewed myself as a provocateur, making movies and telling jokes that were outrageous and taboo. As I have discussed publicly many times, as I've developed as a person, so has my work and my humor.”
The very things that make Gunn so interesting as a filmmaker came from that place. The reason why you rope him in to write the reboot of Dawn of the Dead is because he’ll write in a zombie infant. The reason why you let him draft your live-action Scooby-Doo flick is because he’ll make it a horror picture. The reason why you hire him to write and direct your giant superhero movie is because he’ll infect it with an irreverence of tone that’ll make it stand out among a crowded field of giant superhero movies.
Is the content of those past tweets revolting? Absolutely. Undeniably. And Gunn, now 51, was in his 40s when he sent them, hardly a kid. But so long as there has been no actual criminal activity, there has to be a difference between who a person was and who a person is. And we have to allow for the fact that people can change.
Roseanne Barr is the kind of person who dresses up in a Hitler costume and threatens to bake Jews in an oven. She is the kind of person who fires off racist tweets and conspiracy theories. Jeffrey Tambor is someone who creates a hostile work environment on the sets of his television shows. You fire that person today for something she or he did yesterday.
By most accounts, from his collaborators and peers, Gunn is the kind of person who is committed to equality and representation, who conducts himself on his sets in a fair and respectful manner, and who speaks out against injustice when he sees it in the world. He was, it seems, an asshole. Do I want assholes? No. But I’ll take assholes who realized they were assholes and changed for the better all by themselves — before we noticed they were assholes.
Sometimes, artists’ lives are messy. They are people full of contradictions. They are compelled to push boundaries, to make noise, to get noticed. Sometimes the urge to do that is driven by some deep-seated mania. Other times because they are processing past traumas, both physical and psychological. But none of them is a static being … they are always evolving, trying to find the version of themselves that makes creation possible.
To demand that every artist who works for you to have never had a past, to have never had jagged edges that have been sanded down over time, is asking for people who will make boring art. I want people who challenged the world around them. I want people who were misfits and outcasts. I want people who raised hell. I want David Bowie and Tim Burton and John Waters and Sarah Silverman and Mel Brooks and Patton Oswalt and Eddie Murphy.
I want the voices that carry — and many of those voices didn’t always say things we want to hear.
Marc Bernardin is a former Hollywood Reporter editor and a comic book and television writer whose credits include Hulu's Castle Rock. He also co-hosts the Fatman on Batman podcast with Kevin Smith.
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/firing-james-gunn-disney-hurts-all-hollywood-1129691
You know...
I think its a little more complicated.
Cause his wife is a f*cking HEARST.
But then ALL their friends came out and DEFENDED him
he had tweets he saved, she had a BIG mental health issue more than ONCE
and she CHEATED ON HIM and he dumped her
he got married
less than a year later?
She wrote that essay basically accusing him or sexual abuse.
and IMMEDIATELY Hardwick wife said this would ALL get resolved.
and it WAS.
and the investigative agency AMC use?
their biggest client is ummm...
HEARST Inc.
I KNOW money was used...a LOT of it
but I got a feeling none of it ended up in her pocket.
But instead it was used to make her see things CLEARLY.
And to be honest like I said
her story was basura from jump.
Amazon Passes On James Gunn's Starsky & Hutch Reboot
A new report says James Gunn's Starsky & Hutch reboot is off the table at Amazon Studios, but it's unclear whether the move has anything to do with the former Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 writer-director's controversial tweets. It's been a rough few days for Gunn, who was fired by Disney on Friday, following the revelation of years-old tweets where the filmmaker made jokes about rape and pedophilia. The architect of Marvel Studios' highly lucrative Guardians of the Galaxy franchise, Gunn immediately apologized for the now-deleted posts, which were spread around by conservative commentators Jack Posobiec and Mike Cernovich in an apparent retaliation to Gunn's online criticism of President Donald Trump.
Despite the shocking nature of his tweets, celebrities have come out in support of Gunn,defending his character and noting the filmmaker's dark sense of humor. Also, fans have started a petition demanding Disney reinstate Gunn at the helm of Guardians 3. Apart from those efforts, other Gunn projects have already started to erode, beginning with Sony Pictures canning Gunn's planned movie announcement at the studio's Hall H panel at San Diego Comic-Con. And now, another project from the filmmaker has been declared dead.
RELATED: THANOS CO-CREATOR SAYS DISNEY MADE A BAD CALL BY FIRING JAMES GUNN
According to Yahoo!, Gunn's planned reboot of the 70s TV series Starsky and Hutch is no longer in development at Amazon Studios. Amazon had purchased the rights to the Sony TV series with a straight-to-series commitment last August, but when Yahoo! recently followed up with the company about if Gunn was still going to direct the project, a spokesperson said, “We passed on the project completely months ago. There was no statement. This is the same for any other project we do not move forward with.”
Don't be surprised if fans and celebrities supporting Gunn question why Amazon didn't announce the move earlier, especially since months ago Gunn was still in the good graces of Hollywood following the blockbuster success of Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2, and very much a high-profile director. At the same time, the online giant does appear to have a solid explanation in place, citing a company policy that they don't release statements on projects they pass up.
Whether Gunn's latest scandal killed Starsky & Hutch or not, it'll be interesting to see how Gunn's firing from Disney will continue to affect his career going forward, as well as what happens to other filmmakers and celebrities who've posted jokes or statements in the past that others might find offensive. Social media scandal already looks to have killed Roseanne Barr's career - at least for now - and in Gunn's case, it appears that no matter how long ago one might have transgressed, one's public misdeeds can still come back to haunt them.
- BY TIMOTHY LAMMERS
- – ON JUL 24, 2018
- IN TV NEWS
A new report says James Gunn's Starsky & Hutch reboot is off the table at Amazon Studios, but it's unclear whether the move has anything to do with the former Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 writer-director's controversial tweets. It's been a rough few days for Gunn, who was fired by Disney on Friday, following the revelation of years-old tweets where the filmmaker made jokes about rape and pedophilia. The architect of Marvel Studios' highly lucrative Guardians of the Galaxy franchise, Gunn immediately apologized for the now-deleted posts, which were spread around by conservative commentators Jack Posobiec and Mike Cernovich in an apparent retaliation to Gunn's online criticism of President Donald Trump.
Despite the shocking nature of his tweets, celebrities have come out in support of Gunn,defending his character and noting the filmmaker's dark sense of humor. Also, fans have started a petition demanding Disney reinstate Gunn at the helm of Guardians 3. Apart from those efforts, other Gunn projects have already started to erode, beginning with Sony Pictures canning Gunn's planned movie announcement at the studio's Hall H panel at San Diego Comic-Con. And now, another project from the filmmaker has been declared dead.
RELATED: THANOS CO-CREATOR SAYS DISNEY MADE A BAD CALL BY FIRING JAMES GUNN
According to Yahoo!, Gunn's planned reboot of the 70s TV series Starsky and Hutch is no longer in development at Amazon Studios. Amazon had purchased the rights to the Sony TV series with a straight-to-series commitment last August, but when Yahoo! recently followed up with the company about if Gunn was still going to direct the project, a spokesperson said, “We passed on the project completely months ago. There was no statement. This is the same for any other project we do not move forward with.”
Don't be surprised if fans and celebrities supporting Gunn question why Amazon didn't announce the move earlier, especially since months ago Gunn was still in the good graces of Hollywood following the blockbuster success of Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2, and very much a high-profile director. At the same time, the online giant does appear to have a solid explanation in place, citing a company policy that they don't release statements on projects they pass up.
Whether Gunn's latest scandal killed Starsky & Hutch or not, it'll be interesting to see how Gunn's firing from Disney will continue to affect his career going forward, as well as what happens to other filmmakers and celebrities who've posted jokes or statements in the past that others might find offensive. Social media scandal already looks to have killed Roseanne Barr's career - at least for now - and in Gunn's case, it appears that no matter how long ago one might have transgressed, one's public misdeeds can still come back to haunt them.
In an early morning tweet, Roseanne Barr expressed disgust at the level of support being shown for fired Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 director James Gunn. Disney dismissed Gunn after years-old tweets of his resurfaced, in which he made offensive jokes about rape and pedophilia. Since the firing, Gunn has received an outpouring of support both from his Guardians colleagues and Hollywood at large.
In May, Barr herself came under fire for a racist tweet aimed at former Obama advisor Valerie Jarrett. Barr's sitcom Roseanne was swiftly canceled by Disney-owned ABC after a successful revival season leading to a second season order. Later, ABC resurrected Roseanne as the spinoff show The Conners, after reaching an agreement with Barr which will see her reaping no financial rewards from the new show. Barr has become increasingly combative in the weeks since, continuing to make public statements that express defiance rather than remorse.
Related: Thanos Co-Creator Says Disney Made A Bad Call By Firing James Gunn
Far from dialing back her campaign against Hollywood, Barr has instead upped the ante yet again, using Twitter to vent her frustration over the level of support being shown to Gunn after his firing. Clearly believing there is a double-standard in play, Barr tweeted:
Barr has vehemently insisted that her tweet about Valerie Jarrett was an innocent mistake as she didn't realize Jarrett was black. The voices of condemnation raised against Barr in the immediate wake of that tweet included those of her Roseanne cast mates, particularly Sara Gilbert and Michael Fishman, both of whom were ripped by Barr for "throwing her under the bus." It's been a very different story for Gunn, who has received almost universal support from his Guardians of the Galaxy colleagues. Drax actor Dave Bautistacame out swinging right after the firing, and has since been joined by Zoe Saldana and Chris Pratt. Gunn's long-time collaborator Michael Rooker, who played Yondu in both Guardians films, quit Twitter in protest over Disney's decision to fire Gunn.
After Disney made the decision to let him go, an apologetic Gunn released a statement taking responsibility for his tasteless tweets, posted nearly 10 years ago.Barr released her own initial statement apologizing for her racist tweet, but has since reversed course and gone on the defensive, characterizing her firing as a politically motivated blacklisting. Gunn's fans have made their feelings known to Disney by circulating a petition calling for him to be re-hired, but it seems unlikely the company will comply.
Kurt Russell Thinks It’s ‘Sad’ James Gunn Was Fired by Disney
Ego has spoken. Expressing similar sentiments to those shared by his fellow Guardians of the Galaxy castmates, Kurt Russell is defending James Gunn after the director was fired by Disney for a resurfaced history of offensive tweets. “It’s sad. But it’s a part of our fabric now, and I get it,” Russell explained to Varietywhen asked about Gunn this weekend. “But I do think we’re getting a little too sensitive on maybe some of the wrong people.” Unlike his castmates, however, Russell stopped short of stating Gunn should be reinstated as Vol. 3’s director. “You have to realize that when you are in that world as a comedian, a writer, whatever, you’re always stretching the boundaries and trying to find something which lead him to something that the world loves, which is Guardians of the Galaxy,” he continued. “He has a wonderful heart and a wonderful mind. I hope he is forgiven.”
Following Gunn’s firing last month — owing to tweets that joked about rape and pedophilia, which Gunn took “full responsibility” for — Galaxy’s leading cast published an open letter in support of him. Chris Pratt, Bradley Cooper, Zoe Saldana, Karen Gillan, Vin Diesel, Michael Rooker, Dave Bautista, and Sean Gunn all believe Gunn shouldn’t have been fired, although agree his tweets were inexcusable. “There is little due process in the court of public opinion. James is likely not the last good person to be put on trial,” they wrote, in part. “Given the growing political divide in this country, it’s safe to say instances like this will continue, although we hope Americans from across the political spectrum can ease up on the character assassinations and stop weaponizing mob mentality.”
Ego has spoken. Expressing similar sentiments to those shared by his fellow Guardians of the Galaxy castmates, Kurt Russell is defending James Gunn after the director was fired by Disney for a resurfaced history of offensive tweets. “It’s sad. But it’s a part of our fabric now, and I get it,” Russell explained to Varietywhen asked about Gunn this weekend. “But I do think we’re getting a little too sensitive on maybe some of the wrong people.” Unlike his castmates, however, Russell stopped short of stating Gunn should be reinstated as Vol. 3’s director. “You have to realize that when you are in that world as a comedian, a writer, whatever, you’re always stretching the boundaries and trying to find something which lead him to something that the world loves, which is Guardians of the Galaxy,” he continued. “He has a wonderful heart and a wonderful mind. I hope he is forgiven.”
Following Gunn’s firing last month — owing to tweets that joked about rape and pedophilia, which Gunn took “full responsibility” for — Galaxy’s leading cast published an open letter in support of him. Chris Pratt, Bradley Cooper, Zoe Saldana, Karen Gillan, Vin Diesel, Michael Rooker, Dave Bautista, and Sean Gunn all believe Gunn shouldn’t have been fired, although agree his tweets were inexcusable. “There is little due process in the court of public opinion. James is likely not the last good person to be put on trial,” they wrote, in part. “Given the growing political divide in this country, it’s safe to say instances like this will continue, although we hope Americans from across the political spectrum can ease up on the character assassinations and stop weaponizing mob mentality.”
Why Rehiring James Gunn Is Harder For Disney Than Fans Realize
After James Gunn's sudden and shocking firing from Guardians of the Galaxy 3, fans and celebrities have been showing support, begging Disney to rehire the director, but the House of Mouse doesn't seem likely to budge on its decision, and it shouldn't be much of a surprise.
Years before Gunn was brought into the Marvel Cinematic Universe as the director of Guardians of the Galaxy, he saw himself as an edgy comedian and provocateur - traits that he not only expressed in his movies, but also in his Twitter feed. Little was off topic for Gunn as he made light of rape, pedophilia, 9/11, the Holocaust, and everything in between.
Related: Why James Gunn Was Fired From Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3
Gunn has veered away from such controversial content since joining Disney, but after a recent political Twitter spat led to the Tweets being brought to light, Gunn quickly deleted thousands of old posts, but it was too late and screenshots were already wildly circulating. In a quick and decisive action, Disney fired the director. Gunn took full responsibility in a sincere apology. In the fallout, many have been quick to explain the context and how the tweets aren't reflective of his character today, fans started a petition, which currently has over 365,000 signatures, and the Guardians of the Galaxy cast released an open letter urging Disney to rehire Gunn. The support is impressive, and they may be right, but it's a much more complicated situation than that, and it's doubtful Disney will bring Gunn back. If they do, it won't be a quick or easy decision.
The fact that Gun had offensive tweets in his history is no surprise to anyone that has followed his career. Gunn got his start with Lloyd Kaufman and Troma Entertainment, where edgy, shocking, boundary-pushing subject matter was the objective. The tweets that got him fired were intended to be offensive at the time, although that kind of inappropriate humor, while intended to be politically incorrect, would have received more of an eye roll than outrage by many at the time when they were first posted.
That doesn't make them funny. Gunn has sincerely apologized for them, as he should, but any attempt to treat them as more than bad jokes is ill-founded. There have been no claims of any actual wrongdoing against Gunn, and it's important to draw a line between ill-conceived jokes in poor taste and actual acts of pedophilia.
By all accounts, Gunn has actually grown and changed significantly since he originally made the jokes, embracing the more family-friendly nature of his work with Marvel, and the entire cast of his Guardians movies has gone to bat for him.
Related: Is Rocket James Gunn's Secret Guardians of the Galaxy Easter Egg?
To condemn Gunn today for the offensive tweets he made years ago totally ignores all this context, and, while the jokes he made are just as bad today as they were when he made them, he shouldn't still be associated with them today. It was short-sighted of him to not delete them years ago when he moved on from that style of humor, but the fact that the worst things being attributed to him happened a decade ago actually says a lot about how much he's changed in that time.
Unfortunately, this more nuanced understanding of the context is not something Disney can expect from general audiences.
THE GENERAL AUDIENCE DOESN'T CARE ABOUT CONTEXT
One of the biggest points made by Gunn's defenders is that the tweets surfaced because of a bad faith act by a provocateur with political motivations. Gunn was an active political voice on Twitter and has been particularly critical of President Trump, and, as tends to happen, some people took issue with this. Digging into Gunn's Twitter history, the tweets were dug up and broadcast across the internet, quickly gaining traction on social media at a pace far too fast for many to absorb the context for what was happening.
The thing is, the fact that the act was a politically motivated takedown doesn't matter to most of the general audience who don't follow movie news and social media drama to the extent that many fans and other members of the media do. The Tweets weren't fabricated, so the motivations don't matter to them. In fact, a sizeable portion of audiences may even agree with the political motivations.
Related: Guardians of the Galaxy 3 Trailer, Cast, Every Update You Need To Know
When it comes to average parents and casual moviegoers who digest this kind of news for the first time days after it happens, the only words that matter are "pedophile tweets." Even when provided with a detailed explanation of the original context of the tweets, Gunn's changed character, the political motivations, and etc., the fact that Gunn - at any point in time, for any reason - made light of child rape is too much for many people to swallow, and no amount of excuses will make them brush it aside.
It's certainly not fair, but it's an unfortunate reality. Even if a sizeable chunk is able to get over the offensive tweets, Disney is still looking at potentially millions in lost revenue, not only for Guardians 3, but any other Disney movie. In the age of Harvey Weinstein, Kevin Spacey and other problematic Hollywood figures, Disney needs to be seen as taking a strong stance on the issue, and, unfortunately, that might include innocent casualties like Gunn.
DISNEY FIRED GUNN TOO QUICKLY
Things might be different if Disney hadn't acted so quickly to fire Gunn after the tweets resurfaced. Gunn isn't the only high profile creative to come under similar scrutiny for past behavior recently, but his situation is certainly more famous. His connection to Marvel and Guardians of the Galaxy certainly give him a higher profile than Chris Hardwick or Dan Harmon, but it was really Disney's quick firing that made the situation blow up and receive the amount of attention it has.
Related: Disney Should Rehire James Gunn For Guardians of the Galaxy 3
If Disney had simply stated it was investigating the tweets and looking into Gunn's more recent character and behavior, then let things die down and later released a statement later condemning the tweets, but saying Gunn has clearly changed and hasn't made such offensive comments in recent years, and certainly not while under their employ, things may have blown over.
Instead, Disney effectively threw gasoline on a fire with the shock of his firing, drawing more widespread (and less nuanced) mainstream attention to the issue in a way that is far harder to reverse. Sure, Gunn has plenty of defenders and a hefty petition with his name on it, but there's no escaping the story of the "pedophile tweets" now.
THIS CAN'T BE SWEPT UNDER THE RUG
Thanks to Disney's hasty reaction, Gunn's tweets have become the biggest story surrounding Guardians of the Galaxy 3. Even if Disney were to renounce its decision and bring him back, the story of the pedophile tweets would follow production and be a major talking point during interviews and the general discussion leading up to release.
Related: What Happens To Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 Without James Gunn?
Nevermind the likely boycotts. The same provocateurs who initially spread the tweets around are likely to raise attention to them again before release, likely resulting in Disney boycotts in some circles, where some families are on the constant verge of boycotting Disney already anyway. And this isn't a fan boycott, which rarely has the same box office impact. General audiences, not hardcore fans, drive box office, and that's the demographic that will be most influenced by the news about Gunn's Tweets. It's a significant enough issue to give Disney serious concerns over the movie's box office impact and the franchise's long-term brand image.
Gunn has already written the first draft for Guardians of the Galaxy 3, so there could still be a small role for him in the franchise's future. He's unlikely to be brought back as the movie's director, but unless his story is thrown out entirely, and the new story doesn't even bear a faint resemblance, he'll still receive a story (and possibly writer) credit when the movie hits theaters. And who knows, after a few years, Disney might even be able to bring him back for another - non-Guardians of the Galaxy 3 - project down the road.
In the wake of Gunn's firing, other celebrities have also begun deleting past tweets to ensure any of their own minor infractions from years ago won't be brought against them in a similar way. Disney was apparently unaware of Gunn's own Twitter history when they first signed him, but they're likely to be more careful in that regard in the future. While this situation is certainly sad for Gunn and fans of the Guardians of the Galaxy franchise, it's also a cautionary tale for anyone else who gains Gunn's prominence. Creatives have typically been held to less strict standards than the average person when it comes to keeping a clean social media presence due to potential employer scrutiny. Tweets like the ones from Gunn would have gotten many people fired from non-show-business work, and similar (although likely still less stringent) standards may be applied to creatives more in the future.
- BY STEPHEN M. COLBERT
- – ON AUG 04, 2018
- IN SR ORIGINALS
After James Gunn's sudden and shocking firing from Guardians of the Galaxy 3, fans and celebrities have been showing support, begging Disney to rehire the director, but the House of Mouse doesn't seem likely to budge on its decision, and it shouldn't be much of a surprise.
Years before Gunn was brought into the Marvel Cinematic Universe as the director of Guardians of the Galaxy, he saw himself as an edgy comedian and provocateur - traits that he not only expressed in his movies, but also in his Twitter feed. Little was off topic for Gunn as he made light of rape, pedophilia, 9/11, the Holocaust, and everything in between.
Related: Why James Gunn Was Fired From Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3
Gunn has veered away from such controversial content since joining Disney, but after a recent political Twitter spat led to the Tweets being brought to light, Gunn quickly deleted thousands of old posts, but it was too late and screenshots were already wildly circulating. In a quick and decisive action, Disney fired the director. Gunn took full responsibility in a sincere apology. In the fallout, many have been quick to explain the context and how the tweets aren't reflective of his character today, fans started a petition, which currently has over 365,000 signatures, and the Guardians of the Galaxy cast released an open letter urging Disney to rehire Gunn. The support is impressive, and they may be right, but it's a much more complicated situation than that, and it's doubtful Disney will bring Gunn back. If they do, it won't be a quick or easy decision.
The fact that Gun had offensive tweets in his history is no surprise to anyone that has followed his career. Gunn got his start with Lloyd Kaufman and Troma Entertainment, where edgy, shocking, boundary-pushing subject matter was the objective. The tweets that got him fired were intended to be offensive at the time, although that kind of inappropriate humor, while intended to be politically incorrect, would have received more of an eye roll than outrage by many at the time when they were first posted.
That doesn't make them funny. Gunn has sincerely apologized for them, as he should, but any attempt to treat them as more than bad jokes is ill-founded. There have been no claims of any actual wrongdoing against Gunn, and it's important to draw a line between ill-conceived jokes in poor taste and actual acts of pedophilia.
By all accounts, Gunn has actually grown and changed significantly since he originally made the jokes, embracing the more family-friendly nature of his work with Marvel, and the entire cast of his Guardians movies has gone to bat for him.
Related: Is Rocket James Gunn's Secret Guardians of the Galaxy Easter Egg?
To condemn Gunn today for the offensive tweets he made years ago totally ignores all this context, and, while the jokes he made are just as bad today as they were when he made them, he shouldn't still be associated with them today. It was short-sighted of him to not delete them years ago when he moved on from that style of humor, but the fact that the worst things being attributed to him happened a decade ago actually says a lot about how much he's changed in that time.
Unfortunately, this more nuanced understanding of the context is not something Disney can expect from general audiences.
THE GENERAL AUDIENCE DOESN'T CARE ABOUT CONTEXT
One of the biggest points made by Gunn's defenders is that the tweets surfaced because of a bad faith act by a provocateur with political motivations. Gunn was an active political voice on Twitter and has been particularly critical of President Trump, and, as tends to happen, some people took issue with this. Digging into Gunn's Twitter history, the tweets were dug up and broadcast across the internet, quickly gaining traction on social media at a pace far too fast for many to absorb the context for what was happening.
The thing is, the fact that the act was a politically motivated takedown doesn't matter to most of the general audience who don't follow movie news and social media drama to the extent that many fans and other members of the media do. The Tweets weren't fabricated, so the motivations don't matter to them. In fact, a sizeable portion of audiences may even agree with the political motivations.
Related: Guardians of the Galaxy 3 Trailer, Cast, Every Update You Need To Know
When it comes to average parents and casual moviegoers who digest this kind of news for the first time days after it happens, the only words that matter are "pedophile tweets." Even when provided with a detailed explanation of the original context of the tweets, Gunn's changed character, the political motivations, and etc., the fact that Gunn - at any point in time, for any reason - made light of child rape is too much for many people to swallow, and no amount of excuses will make them brush it aside.
It's certainly not fair, but it's an unfortunate reality. Even if a sizeable chunk is able to get over the offensive tweets, Disney is still looking at potentially millions in lost revenue, not only for Guardians 3, but any other Disney movie. In the age of Harvey Weinstein, Kevin Spacey and other problematic Hollywood figures, Disney needs to be seen as taking a strong stance on the issue, and, unfortunately, that might include innocent casualties like Gunn.
DISNEY FIRED GUNN TOO QUICKLY
Things might be different if Disney hadn't acted so quickly to fire Gunn after the tweets resurfaced. Gunn isn't the only high profile creative to come under similar scrutiny for past behavior recently, but his situation is certainly more famous. His connection to Marvel and Guardians of the Galaxy certainly give him a higher profile than Chris Hardwick or Dan Harmon, but it was really Disney's quick firing that made the situation blow up and receive the amount of attention it has.
Related: Disney Should Rehire James Gunn For Guardians of the Galaxy 3
If Disney had simply stated it was investigating the tweets and looking into Gunn's more recent character and behavior, then let things die down and later released a statement later condemning the tweets, but saying Gunn has clearly changed and hasn't made such offensive comments in recent years, and certainly not while under their employ, things may have blown over.
Instead, Disney effectively threw gasoline on a fire with the shock of his firing, drawing more widespread (and less nuanced) mainstream attention to the issue in a way that is far harder to reverse. Sure, Gunn has plenty of defenders and a hefty petition with his name on it, but there's no escaping the story of the "pedophile tweets" now.
THIS CAN'T BE SWEPT UNDER THE RUG
Thanks to Disney's hasty reaction, Gunn's tweets have become the biggest story surrounding Guardians of the Galaxy 3. Even if Disney were to renounce its decision and bring him back, the story of the pedophile tweets would follow production and be a major talking point during interviews and the general discussion leading up to release.
Related: What Happens To Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 Without James Gunn?
Nevermind the likely boycotts. The same provocateurs who initially spread the tweets around are likely to raise attention to them again before release, likely resulting in Disney boycotts in some circles, where some families are on the constant verge of boycotting Disney already anyway. And this isn't a fan boycott, which rarely has the same box office impact. General audiences, not hardcore fans, drive box office, and that's the demographic that will be most influenced by the news about Gunn's Tweets. It's a significant enough issue to give Disney serious concerns over the movie's box office impact and the franchise's long-term brand image.
Gunn has already written the first draft for Guardians of the Galaxy 3, so there could still be a small role for him in the franchise's future. He's unlikely to be brought back as the movie's director, but unless his story is thrown out entirely, and the new story doesn't even bear a faint resemblance, he'll still receive a story (and possibly writer) credit when the movie hits theaters. And who knows, after a few years, Disney might even be able to bring him back for another - non-Guardians of the Galaxy 3 - project down the road.
In the wake of Gunn's firing, other celebrities have also begun deleting past tweets to ensure any of their own minor infractions from years ago won't be brought against them in a similar way. Disney was apparently unaware of Gunn's own Twitter history when they first signed him, but they're likely to be more careful in that regard in the future. While this situation is certainly sad for Gunn and fans of the Guardians of the Galaxy franchise, it's also a cautionary tale for anyone else who gains Gunn's prominence. Creatives have typically been held to less strict standards than the average person when it comes to keeping a clean social media presence due to potential employer scrutiny. Tweets like the ones from Gunn would have gotten many people fired from non-show-business work, and similar (although likely still less stringent) standards may be applied to creatives more in the future.
Similar threads
