|
sponges posted:He might be able to do small budget stuff like Much Ado about Nothing None of his old regulars will ever work with him again. He isn't Woody Allen, he's about to become radioactive.
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 01:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 19:07 |
|
|
Whedon's reputation never relied on being edgy or provocative, he never played in the "art above all" crowd, and of the three superhero movies he directed only the first one was well-received, and that was almost a decade ago, with plenty of other directors stepping up since then doing the same thing better than he did. Nobody has any reason to take a risk on tying their financing to his brand at this point. He's probably got a future ahead of him as a highly-sought-after script doctor, but the days of him putting his name on big projects are over.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 02:07
|
|
|
Before I had my doubts but after the things Trachtenberg said I feel very confident that Whedon is in the upper echelon of cancelled celebrities alongside Landis and Spacey. They will probably be in at least one more movie before they die, but it’s not going to be anything coming to your local AMC. Much Ado About Nothing-tier projects are the best Whedon can hope for from here on out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 09:14
|
|
|
he can always do the Polanski J'accuse thing and make a movie about how he, is in fact, the most oppressed victim of the world of all time
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 09:55
|
|
|
Sodomy Hussein posted:He was hired to salvage Justice League under unusual circumstances and turned in a disaster, and frankly if his career were going well he wouldn't be doing TV. My hottest take is that had cavill shaved his moustache most if not all the problems with justice league and whedon's behaviour on set would have been swept under the rug. Affleck looking like a bloated corpse, the cgi, the coloring,the ost, how uninspired it looks. everything but that hidous cgi face would have been forgiven. They would have considered the film a bomb, but WB would have been sold to ATT and Kevin Tsujihara's sex scandal would have buried anything else. hump day bitches! fucked around with this message at 11:32 on Feb 19, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 11:26
|
|
|
hump day bitches! posted:My hottest take is that had cavill shaved his moustache most if not all the problems with justice league and whedon's behaviour on set would have been swept under the rug.They would have considered the film a bomb, but WB would have been sold to ATT and Kevin Tsujihara's sex scandal would have buried anything else. Cavill was the hero we needed all along.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 11:31
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:Cavill was the hero we needed all along. He was contractually obligated to keep it for MI6.Funnily enough Cruise broke his ankle delaying the movie an entire year. So they only needed to wait a little bit longer to get him in his full capacity.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 11:34
|
|
|
Pirate Jet posted:Before I had my doubts but after the things Trachtenberg said I feel very confident that Whedon is in the upper echelon of cancelled celebrities alongside Landis and Spacey. They will probably be in at least one more movie before they die, but it’s not going to be anything coming to your local AMC. Much Ado About Nothing-tier projects are the best Whedon can hope for from here on out. Indulging my cynicism for an ugly moment, I wouldn't be surprised if the BBC were to hire Whedon as a Dr Who writer.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 11:36
|
|
|
ynohtna posted:Indulging my cynicism for an ugly moment, I wouldn't be surprised if the BBC were to hire Whedon as a Dr Who writer. Is he TERFy enough ?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 11:42
|
|
|
Whedon will be back. So long as his 'bad behaviour' isn't sexual in nature, and no one has implied that it is yet, it'll be easy for him to do the whole I'm a different person and I've learned my lesson thing. David O'Russell still works and his lovely behaviour is on film. The only positive is that his audience are the exact people who are going to reject someone like him.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 12:27
|
|
|
Whedon has a HBO sci fi show premiering in April this year. So it's not that he will come back, but that he never left.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 12:33
|
|
|
He got fired from that show. But he directed 2 episodes and wrote the whole thing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 12:35
|
|
|
Seems like he departed of his own accord, due to the exhausting nature of the production because of covid. lol The new showrunner for the possible second season is already covering Whedon's rear end though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 12:42
|
|
|
He def got fired or at least pressured to leave. And it most likely came from the WB investigation
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 12:58
|
|
|
DrVenkman posted:The only positive is that his audience are the exact people who are going to reject someone like him. And this is why he's done. Disney replaced him, WB has essentially disowned him, HBO fired him, and his fanbase cares very much about what kind of person he is, which isn't the case with people like David O Russell or Bryan Singer. For better or worse, his personality has always been as much a part of his brand as his actual resume. If he were a bit more anonymous or if Avengers 2 and Justice League had been better received he'd likely be able to weather this, but as it is he's never going to be able to get the Buffy crowd back and he's not dependable enough to be worth keeping on for bigger-budget stuff. His biggest, most reliable skill is writing quips, and he can be called on to do that quietly. Electronico6 posted:Seems like he departed of his own accord, due to the exhausting nature of the production because of covid. He was right in the middle of a very public investigation by WB at the time. He didn't give up his shiny new HBO show over covid any more than disgraced politicians retire to spend more time with their families.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 13:03
|
|
|
hump day bitches! posted:My hottest take is that had cavill shaved his moustache most if not all the problems with justice league and whedon's behaviour on set would have been swept under the rug. You know, reading about the Tsujihara scandal https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.la...ml%3f_amp=true, it strikes me how his fall was engineereed by the talent agencies like CAA instead of being shamed into doing it like the sexual assault cases like Weinstein, that took multiple women coming forward and alot of press. Tsujihara hooked up with a young actress and tried to get her roles in the movies he oversaw. The relationship was consensual. But I think that paradigm threatened agencies much more than the horrors usually visited on actresses we've heard about, and thats why they were so on the ball to call it out
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 13:22
|
|
|
DrVenkman posted:Whedon will be back. So long as his 'bad behaviour' isn't sexual in nature, and no one has implied that it is yet I'm pretty sure Trachtenberg's instagram post heavily implied that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 13:38
|
|
|
Carthag Tuek posted:for some people, its only rape when its physically violent Here's a hosed up little factoid: That is literally how it is in Norway. According to the law there has to be physical violence for something to be rape. There has been cases where everyone has agreed that the victim clearly said no but because there was no physical violence involved the accused couldn't be convicted for rape.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 13:44
|
|
|
Didn't the first instance of this stuff coming out, a few years back when his wife came out and made a low key statement, heavily imply if it didn't outright state he'd been acting similarly to Weinstein in his capacity as a showrunner for years? Like hanging women's future careers over their heads to get what he wanted, using his status to use and discard them, etc? I'd mentally put him in the same space as Spacey and such ages ago.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 13:54
|
|
|
His fanatical base did come to his defense when his ex wife made that statement. They're mostly quiet now though I have seen one or two people say he's being unfairly treated and how there's no proof. But gently caress those people.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 13:57
|
|
|
His wife was like “he cheated on me all the time with all the hot young actresses in the show” and Whedon is paraphrased as basically saying “well what was I supposed to do, not hook up with all these powerful young women?” or close enough. I remember because it was the sort of thing where I was like “wow that’s all I need to here” before just immediately filing him in the dumpster.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 13:59
|
|
|
Give the last 5-6 years' track record of movies it's become pretty uncool to be a Whedon stan, and that is doing a lot more work than the actual accusations, because the world is a gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 14:00
|
|
|
Alhazred posted:I'm pretty sure Trachtenberg's instagram post heavily implied that. I mean it's just as likely that people knew he was a bully and decided to shield the youngest member of the cast from that. The only source for him sleeping around is his wife right? Not asking to dismiss her because I don't think she's lying, just that while we knew already that Whedon iced out Carpenter and that he had been lovely to James Marsters because Spike was popular, no one involved in the show has implied there was anything sexually untoward happening on his shows. Though it's entirely possible I've missed it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 14:38
|
|
|
DrVenkman posted:The only source for him sleeping around is his wife right? It was a letter that Whedon wrote to his wife, so the source is Whedon himself.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 14:41
|
|
|
It sounds less like Whedon was sleeping with the actresses on the show (Charisma, Allison, SMG) and more like he was having a free-for-all with the High School and college age extras/vampires floating around 24/7. The main cast of women all had pretty serious careers with movies and I believe SMG was married for part/most of Buffy? So it makes sense to me that instead of leering and creeping on the high profile talent, you could probably casting couch your way through dozens of young women over a 7 year TV production with the promise of repeat castings or maybe a line during a cafeteria scene
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 14:43
|
|
|
Felicia Day is rumored to be one of those young women but she's not said a word about it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 15:02
|
|
|
That's probably a rumour from people who don't like Felicia day for being a girl who plays videogames. Edit addition: ugh I've started to see ads for the Allen/Farrow documentary and the replies are absolutely disgusting and almost unanimously defending Allen. I checked these fuckers profiles and they're real people, not some defense botnet. John Wick of Dogs fucked around with this message at 02:01 on Feb 20, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 15:23
|
|
|
Not that I want to focus on the gross details, but with the Dylan Farrow sexual assault allegation against Woody Allen: is she saying he outright raped her, or did other things to her that in the eyes of the law would be less of a crime? Cause I haven't fully wrapped my head around the whole investigation that came from it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 02:26
|
|
|
Anonymous John posted:Not that I want to focus on the gross details, but with the Dylan Farrow sexual assault allegation against Woody Allen: is she saying he outright raped her, or did other things to her that in the eyes of the law would be less of a crime? Cause I haven't fully wrapped my head around the whole investigation that came from it. He performed oral sex on her so yeah rape.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 02:40
|
|
|
I would add that "outright raped" is an extremely loaded phrase. Not accusing you of anything, but different states have all kinds of different legal definitions of rape, and sometimes someone will be convicted of something not called "rape" even though most people would think of their act that way. And sometimes that kind of qualifying language is used to downplay the realities of all kinds of situations that do not fit someone's imagined version of rape as some precise "violent crime in a dark alley" kind of thing. So it's good to be clear about what you're asking. I get you're speaking to legal definitions, I just wanted to be clear that sometimes the badness or magnitude of the act is not always the defining line between "rape" and something else in the eyes of the law, and many legal systems just have actively stupid and harmful definitions of sexual crimes. Martman fucked around with this message at 02:48 on Feb 20, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 02:45
|
|
|
Martman posted:I would add that "outright raped" is an extremely loaded phrase. Not accusing you of anything, but different states have all kinds of different legal definitions of rape, and sometimes someone will be convicted of something not called "rape" even though most people would think of their act that way. And sometimes that kind of qualifying language is used to downplay the realities of all kinds of situations that do not fit someone's imagined version of rape as some precise "violent crime in a dark alley" kind of thing. So it's good to be clear about what you're asking. It's going to be a pretty obvious sign they are not arguing in good faith if they really, really want to insist on the correct technical definition of what "raped" is when discussing allegations like that. It's like the people who get super offended when they get called racist for say something islamophobic and push back asking if islam is a "race" and then calling you a racist for saying that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 02:57
|
|
|
Martman posted:I would add that "outright raped" is an extremely loaded phrase. Not accusing you of anything, but different states have all kinds of different legal definitions of rape, and sometimes someone will be convicted of something not called "rape" even though most people would think of their act that way. And sometimes that kind of qualifying language is used to downplay the realities of all kinds of situations that do not fit someone's imagined version of rape as some precise "violent crime in a dark alley" kind of thing. So it's good to be clear about what you're asking. Apologies for coming across the wrong way; I guess a phrase such as "penetrative sex" may have been a better way of putting it. I could certainly see the 90's having even more actively stupid definitions in the laws than what we have now. FWIW, I also consider performing oral sex on a child to fall under rape. Anonymous John fucked around with this message at 03:03 on Feb 20, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 02:57
|
|
|
Yeah no worries, I really didn't mean that you were using it that way! Just kind of a heads up because I've seen that kind of language abused so much. Kinda harkens to that classic awful "legitimate rape" Todd Akin moment.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 03:01
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:His fanatical base did come to his defense when his ex wife made that statement. They're mostly quiet now though I have seen one or two people say he's being unfairly treated and how there's no proof.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 05:11
|
|
|
DrVenkman posted:Whedon will be back. So long as his 'bad behaviour' isn't sexual in nature, and no one has implied that it is yet, it'll be easy for him to do the whole I'm a different person and I've learned my lesson thing. There was an on set rule about him not being allowed to be alone with a teenage Trachtenberg and he had multiple affairs, I think it's safe to say his bad behavior was more than just screaming at a pregnant Charisma Carpenter.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 05:33
|
|
|
If you don't think that the Trachtenberg rule should be setting off alarm bells, then I don't know what to say to you.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 05:38
|
|
|
Don't get me wrong, emotional abuse of anyone on set is bad, pregnant or not, but it indicates a pattern of behavior that would make someone believe other norms of society don't apply to you.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 05:45
|
|
|
DC Murderverse posted:I can’t wait for the usual suspects to come out with “look, the Sun-Yi stuff is a little odd but he was never a father figure and nothing happened until she was 18”, which has always struck me as the most backhanded defense. Those are likely the people who will continue down the “Mia implanted this in their heads” path Has anyone here actually read Moses' blog post? Because the reason he's stuck by Woody is because, according to him, Mia was a horribly abusive mother who treated her children like objects, physically abused them, and constantly gaslit and pressured them into believing false narratives she had constructed, harshly punishing any child who dared contradict those narratives. For example: quote:For all of us, life under my mother’s roof was impossible if you didn’t do exactly what you were told, no matter how questionable the demand. He was also fourteen years old at the time, and witnessed everything that happened surrounding and during the period at the house when the alleged molestation took place, and he says that it definitively couldn't have happened as described. For instance, someone mentioned Dylan's recollection of the scene in the attic being particularly gut-wrenching (which I agree with). Well, here's what Moses has to say about that: quote:In her widely-circulated 2014 open letter in The New York Times, the adult Dylan suddenly seemed to remember every moment of the alleged assault, writing, “He told me to lay on my stomach and play with my brother’s electric train set. Then he sexually assaulted me. He talked to me while he did it, whispering that I was a good girl, that this was our secret, promising that we’d go to Paris and I’d be a star in his movies. I remember staring at that toy train, focusing on it as it traveled in its circle around the attic. To this day, I find it difficult to look at toy trains.” Here's how Moses describes being pressured and emotionally manipulated into saying things he knew weren't true, for fear of being punished or ostracized from the family (which he ultimately was): quote:It was Monica who later testified that she saw Mia taping Dylan describe how Woody had supposedly touched her in the attic, saying it took Mia two or three days to make the recording. In her testimony she said, “I recall Ms. Farrow saying to Dylan at that time, ‘Dylan, what did daddy do... and what did he do next?’ Dylan appeared not to be interested, and Ms. Farrow would stop taping for a while and then continue.” I can vouch for this, having witnessed some of this process myself. When another one of Dylan’s therapists, Dr. Nancy Schultz, criticized the making of the video, and questioned the legitimacy of the content, she too, was fired immediately by Mia. (My mother, for whom “loyalty” was hugely important, would also fire another long-term caretaker, Mavis, claiming that she was making statements against her.) But really, you should read the whole thing, if you're actually serious about believing victims and taking their claims seriously. I am. I think Moses is a victim, and I think Dylan is a victim--of Mia Farrow. I believe Moses. I also believe Dylan--I believe she believes what she's saying. She was only seven years old. Her mother convinced her that something terrible had happened to her, and unspeakably traumatized her for life, all to get back at her ex-partner. Because Mia Farrow is not well. And Moses' account isn't nearly the end of it. There are many very good reasons to believe that Woody Allen is innocent of this specific charge, reasons which people in this thread should probably avail themselves of before so confidently proclaiming that a man molested his own daughter, and that's that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muyaCg2dGAk I mean, really? Someone half-remembers Woody putting sunscreen on Dylan's back in a way they now claim must have probably definitely been pervy? That's where we're at now? This is transparently ridiculous. This isn't how child molesters operate. They don't do it exactly once, in middle-age, in a brief twenty-minute window in a cramped crawlspace in the crowded house of a mentally ill ex who they're in the middle of acrimonious custody proceedings with, but never before and never again--except maybe one time they allegedly put sunscreen on a back in a weird way. None of it holds up, none of it makes any sense, none of it fits. Moses' and Woody's story makes far more sense on the face of it, and accords with the evidence. There's a reason he was exonerated, twice, when the claims were investigated by actual, qualified professionals. Cnut the Great fucked around with this message at 06:54 on Feb 20, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 06:51
|
|
|
I read Moses's piece when it was released, and at this point I think if you want to publically come out calling your sibling a liar in their accusation as he has, you can't then hide behind the "I want to remain private" excuse as he had for giving basically no further statements or appearances after that blog post. It's one thing for him to have his point of view, but in fact it is odd to claim to remember details of an alleged event from 25 years ago, when you were 14 years old, so strongly when you were not involved and would not have been involved. I would really like for him to be more open about this, but as it is I have come to strongly suspect the possibility that his (solely textual) voice is being used purely as a shield, basically directly by Allen. And hey, he may honestly believe he remembers the events perfectly too. But he himself is claiming to have been an abused child, and even without the abuse it is genuinely insane to think his memory of events should be considered so much more reliable than Dylan's that you could close the book on that issue. Martman fucked around with this message at 07:46 on Feb 20, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 07:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 19:07 |
|
|
I get big 'I want to stay in the will' vibes from that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 07:51
|
|