Gal Gadot Out as Wonder Woman?

[brettc1]

One small difference: lynch mobs tend to kill people.

If Ratner can clear his name, then he will have other movie projects upon which to work. In the meantime? It looks pretty bad to have him in any way involved in a movie starring the greatest feminist icon in comics.

The attitude is the same.

It is not for Ratner, or for any accused person, to clear their name, but rather for those who accuse them to produce evidence of guilt. Since I don't know the full details, I must reserve judgement.

Gal is a fine actor and I appreciate her portrayal of Wonder Woman very much. She is also, by all accounts, a decent person. But unless I learn that she has direct evidence that pertains to the accusations I cannot hold her thoughts as more than pure opinion. And the opinions of the popular, like those of the powerful, should carry no more weight than that of any other individual who has no direct knowledge.

[Vanguard-01]

The attitude is the same.

It is not for Ratner, or for any accused person, to clear their name, but rather for those who accuse them to produce evidence of guilt. Since I don't know the full details, I must reserve judgement.

Gal is a fine actor and I appreciate her portrayal of Wonder Woman very much. She is also, by all accounts, a decent person. But unless I learn that she has direct evidence that pertains to the accusations I cannot hold her thoughts as more than pure opinion. And the opinions of the popular, like those of the powerful, should carry no more weight than that of any other individual who has no direct knowledge.

She's not demanding that he be placed in jail or lose his job. She's just saying she doesn't want him involved in her ONE movie because it looks bad.

It's an image thing.

[Awonder]

The attitude is the same.

It is not for Ratner, or for any accused person, to clear their name, but rather for those who accuse them to produce evidence of guilt. Since I don't know the full details, I must reserve judgement.

Gal is a fine actor and I appreciate her portrayal of Wonder Woman very much. She is also, by all accounts, a decent person. But unless I learn that she has direct evidence that pertains to the accusations I cannot hold her thoughts as more than pure opinion. And the opinions of the popular, like those of the powerful, should carry no more weight than that of any other individual who has no direct knowledge.

No, it really isn't the same. 'I don't want to spend my own time and energy working on a movie if he is involved' is a FAR cry from 'Let's kill him.'

[Gaelforce]

The attitude is the same.

It is not for Ratner, or for any accused person, to clear their name, but rather for those who accuse them to produce evidence of guilt. Since I don't know the full details, I must reserve judgement.

Gal is a fine actor and I appreciate her portrayal of Wonder Woman very much. She is also, by all accounts, a decent person. But unless I learn that she has direct evidence that pertains to the accusations I cannot hold her thoughts as more than pure opinion. And the opinions of the popular, like those of the powerful, should carry no more weight than that of any other individual who has no direct knowledge.

These are the decisions that we, as the public, and Gal, as someone involved with Ratner, are in the position to make regarding how we feel about the man.

A personal opinion is different than taking action against a person.

In Ratner's case, we have 6 women that have come forward, one of whom wrote about an incident without naming the director 7 years ago. Gal now has to decide who has more credibility - all the women and the accounts given by them and by those who worked with Ratner, or Ratner himself.

We all make decisions about people, both those we associate with in business/personal life, and those in public life.

Me? I tend to believe all of the many people who talked about Ratner. Here's an article with a lot of the details from the LA Times.

http://www.latimes.com/business/holl...htmlstory.html

So all of this comes out, and Gadot has to decide, on a personal level and on a business level, if she wants to associate with Ratner. Given this article? I'd sure want to steer clear of him.

From all accounts, Ratner, like other men in Hollywood, has been an 'open secret' that people have known about and talked about for years, but that women didn't want to risk their careers by saying anything. People in positions of power do this to people, and now they've had enough.

I don't need a court trial and a guilty verdict to decide that, from everything I've read, Harvey Weinstein is a sick pervert. I don't need women to put themselves through the hell of the court system to reach the conclusion that Ratner is in the same club as Weinstein.

[Pinsir]

That is the attitude of the lynch mob.

I understand the allegations made against Ratner are very serious, and they are also made by multiple persons. But until and unless they are proven allegations are all that they are.

Except we aren't the ones who would sentence this man to jail and if we act on our beliefs, then we just committed a crime. I trust the accounts of these women, most, if not all, came forward to a great personal risk to themselves with only a few seeking financial compensation.

[Ascended]

I don't need a court trial and a guilty verdict to decide that, from everything I've read, Harvey Weinstein is a sick pervert. I don't need women to put themselves through the hell of the court system to reach the conclusion that Ratner is in the same club as Weinstein.

Its also not our livelihoods that are in jeopardy.

I agree that from what we have seen, I am infinitely more inclined to believe the women making the accusations than I am the professed innocence of the accused. However, that doesn't really add up to much.

I believe these people (Ratner, Berganza, etc) are guilty. And it makes my blood boil. But my belief is not proof, and I'd hate to see an innocent person punished simply for a belief. Now, if their actions have been "open secrets" for years then their guilt should be easy to confirm, and when that happens they deserve to be thrown to the dogs and punished as harshly as the law and company policy allow. Until then, they're legally innocent and don't deserve a punishment more extreme than what precedent sets. Berganza has been suspended; that's a viable punishment when these sorts of allegations are in the air. What happens next should depend on verified evidence and the rule of law, not the mob rule of a fandom that's on the outside looking in.

These accusations are akin to murder; they deserve carefully considered evaluation, not gut reactions based more on emotional responses than evidence.

All that said, I am so very proud of Gadot for taking a stand like she is and flexing that new star power. She's in a great position to really force a light on this situation and demand WB take proper action instead of trying to sweep it under the rug (like they already did with Berganza). Good on you, Wonder Woman!

[WontonGirl]

What do you mean?



They've known about Berganza for years - it's long past due that they actually stop covering for him.

It was reported that Greg Rucka would NOT do Rebirth Wonder Woman if Berganza was part of the Editorial staff for Wonder Woman. He wasn't so he did it.

[Denirac]

Its also not our livelihoods that are in jeopardy.

I agree that from what we have seen, I am infinitely more inclined to believe the women making the accusations than I am the professed innocence of the accused. However, that doesn't really add up to much.

I believe these people (Ratner, Berganza, etc) are guilty. And it makes my blood boil. But my belief is not proof, and I'd hate to see an innocent person punished simply for a belief. Now, if their actions have been "open secrets" for years then their guilt should be easy to confirm, and when that happens they deserve to be thrown to the dogs and punished as harshly as the law and company policy allow. Until then, they're legally innocent and don't deserve a punishment more extreme than what precedent sets. Berganza has been suspended; that's a viable punishment when these sorts of allegations are in the air. What happens next should depend on verified evidence and the rule of law, not the mob rule of a fandom that's on the outside looking in.

These accusations are akin to murder; they deserve carefully considered evaluation, not gut reactions based more on emotional responses than evidence.

All that said, I am so very proud of Gadot for taking a stand like she is and flexing that new star power. She's in a great position to really force a light on this situation and demand WB take proper action instead of trying to sweep it under the rug (like they already did with Berganza). Good on you, Wonder Woman!

WB will make the right call. But Ratner's been fired regardless. He's had to vacate his WB office and they confirmed that the contract with Ratner's company wont be renewed after it expires in 2019. So the question is will they pay Ratner now and terminate the contract here. Or will they wait til it expires. A Solution for Wonder Woman 2 could theoretically be to wait until after the contract with Ratner ends before starting work on it. But I doubt that will happen due to the popularity of the first one... So I dont know how they'll solve it.

[WontonGirl]

I think we also have to realize that we can wait till the allegations are proven right or wrong but in the meantime, companies will remove that person from their position.

It's the same with Andrew Kreisberg and his allegations that came to light on Friday; some more drama that DC Comics is trying to nip in the bud. I mean, there are allegations stemming from 15 years back? And now people are going in on Twitter with Geoff Johns because they are like "did you know this when you guys created The Flash TV show"?

http://deadline.com/2017/11/andrew-k...ns-1202206230/

[Jim Kelly]

Other than money, I don't know what else that Ratner contributed to WONDER WOMAN or other movies. But maybe his company does other work for the movie to ensure they get a return on their investment. Or maybe Ratner and others invest money so they can be a player and hang out with Hollywood people and have free access to their trailers on set.

But the money seems to be the important thing for WB. So there's a trade off, can they get money from other investors--probably--and maybe those investors don't have baggage. Whereas, Ratner's money is no good to them, because it will taint their future movies and maybe impact the box office. So it's not actually an economic advantage to take money from this source.

However, a lot of investors are questionable when you get down to it. So if the company has no personal involvement in the movies--if there's no executive using his power to exploit people in the cast and crew--is it fair to take money from that source?

[superduperman]

I was about to post a thread on this! Glad I don't need to. Fill me in on the Rucka situation as well. I'm not familiar with that one.

[Ascended]

I think we also have to realize that we can wait till the allegations are proven right or wrong but in the meantime, companies will remove that person from their position.

Exactly.

Take George Takai for example. He's been accused of sexual assault. Word is he brought some aspiring actor half his age home, drugged him, and tried to rape him.

Ready to unfollow Takai yet? Ready to call him out as a sexual predator who should be shunned by society and thrown down a well?

You might want to wait a second, because if you do a little digging into the guy who made this accusation (like my wife did), you'll find that he's done this before, and had to come out and admit that the entire story was fabricated. He just wanted his 15 minutes of fame and was willing to ruin someone's life to get it. He told a damning lie with no basis in reality for personal gain. And he tells his Takai story just now, right when this whole thing starts heating up? Sounds suspicious as hell to me, personally.

Can we really believe him when he says these things about Takai now?

I'm not saying people like Ratner or Berganza are innocent like George Takai (probably?) is. Im saying accusations aren't evidence and these are the kinds of accusations that ruin lives, families, and careers. Not to be taken lightly.

[Denirac]

Exactly.

Take George Takai for example. He's been accused of sexual assault. Word is he brought some aspiring actor half his age home, drugged him, and tried to rape him.

Ready to unfollow Takai yet? Ready to call him out as a sexual predator who should be shunned by society and thrown down a well?

You might want to wait a second, because if you do a little digging into the guy who made this accusation (like my wife did), you'll find that he's done this before, and had to come out and admit that the entire story was fabricated. He just wanted his 15 minutes of fame and was willing to ruin someone's life to get it. He told a damning lie with no basis in reality for personal gain. And he tells his Takai story just now, right when this whole thing starts heating up? Sounds suspicious as hell to me, personally.

Can we really believe him when he says these things about Takai now?

I'm not saying people like Ratner or Berganza are innocent like George Takai (probably?) is. Im saying accusations aren't evidence and these are the kinds of accusations that ruin lives, families, and careers. Not to be taken lightly.

I'll put it like this.... Takai has less conclusive evidence to prove his guilt. The Evidence against Ratner (from several sources) is pretty damning not to mention that Ellen Page's story was backed up by Anna Paquin

[Gaelforce]

So here's the problem in court.

It's going to be 'he said/she said.' Evidence of these sorts of events is exceedingly rare - women don't stop to hit the record button or take pictures when they are being sexually assaulted, or when some creepy director has decided he wants to show her his private parts.

Also, on a lot of these things, statute of limitations has come and gone.

What it comes down to generally, provided it's within the time limit for prosecution, are three things:

1. Numbers - the more people who raise the issue, the more likely it is that there is fire behind the smoke.
2. Reputation - are the women reputable? Is the man known for lewd comments or foul behavior of some sort?
3. Corroboration - this one is usually the key. Olivia Munn, for example, told friends of the issue at the time it happened. She documented it (without naming Ratner) in writing 7 years ago. Lots of women who are assaulted won't go public or go to the police, but they'll tell their friends and family. This is the key with me for Ratner - there are secondary witnesses supporting these women, saying that they were told at the time it happened.

So, as I said, you don't need a courtroom to make a judgment, and neither does Gal.

None of us are asking to hang him, or even to lock him up. We just want to stay the hell away from guys like this.

[Gaelforce]

Exactly.

Take George Takai for example. He's been accused of sexual assault. Word is he brought some aspiring actor half his age home, drugged him, and tried to rape him.

Ready to unfollow Takai yet? Ready to call him out as a sexual predator who should be shunned by society and thrown down a well?

You might want to wait a second, because if you do a little digging into the guy who made this accusation (like my wife did), you'll find that he's done this before, and had to come out and admit that the entire story was fabricated. He just wanted his 15 minutes of fame and was willing to ruin someone's life to get it. He told a damning lie with no basis in reality for personal gain. And he tells his Takai story just now, right when this whole thing starts heating up? Sounds suspicious as hell to me, personally.

Can we really believe him when he says these things about Takai now?

I'm not saying people like Ratner or Berganza are innocent like George Takai (probably?) is. Im saying accusations aren't evidence and these are the kinds of accusations that ruin lives, families, and careers. Not to be taken lightly.

And here's the difference that illustrates my three points above.

1. One person made the claim.
2. There is zero corroboration so far.
3. Takei has a reputation that is rather sterling - he has no known history that has been brought forth regarding lewd comments or behavior, or previous matters of sexual assault. On the other hand, the victim has a negative reputation regarding this kind of accusatory behavior.

So in this case, yeah, I believe Takei and I'm not Unfollowing him, but if more people come forward, or others start speaking out against his sexual-predator like behavior or comments, or if the accuser has any corroboration? Then I'll rethink it.

But for now? No, I don't think Takei did it.