James Gunn dropped from GOTG 3

[Kevinroc]

No, it doesn't.

He took responsibility for his call about how something was timed. Which was solely his call.

Gunn's being cut loose was not solely his call. There is no even remotely logical scenario where he would take the same sort of sole responsibility for that.

Ultimately the buck stops with him. Or is supposed to stop with him. He's the chairman and CEO of the company. If you think him not taking responsibility for Gunn's firing says nothing, I don't know what to tell you at this point.

[numberthirty]

Ultimately the buck stops with him. Or is supposed to stop with him. He's the chairman and CEO of the company. If you think him not taking responsibility for Gunn's firing says nothing, I don't know what to tell you at this point.

Not taking sole responsibility for ending Roseanne's show or firing Gunn is not the same thing as "Not Taking Responsibility".

He just hasn't taken the unreasonable degree of responsibility that one person on a message board seems to want him to.

[Kevinroc]

Not taking sole responsibility for ending Roseanne's show or firing Gunn is not the same thing as "Not Taking Responsibility".

He just hasn't taken the unreasonable degree of responsibility that one person on a message board seems to want him to.

According to thirty, the buck does not stop at the desk of the Chairman and CEO.

Good to know.

[AJBopp]

In the same interview where he basically gives a wishy washy answer about Gunn, he personally takes responsibility for approving too many Star Wars projects at once.

Of course, he was not responsible for firing Gunn, but he was responsible for the Star Wars decision, so that may have something to do with it.

[Raiders]

Again, so how is this about Star Wars?

[Jokerz79]

Star Wars was their biggest franchises I think Marvel surprises it now but it was their biggest franchises of course he was hands on and took responsibility Gunn was an HR decision which he agreed with to put in perspective Kathleen Kennedy fired Lord and Miller and but the expansion of Star Wars that was Iger.

One is an HR decision involving a director one involves the expanding of a brand and of course he's involved in the expanding of a brand like Star Wars.

[Raiders]

Again, so how is this about Star Wars?

[Forseti]

Saying: "I haven't second-guessed their decision" is miles away from stating you support it. Just like saying: "I didn't dislike it" to describe something is miles away from stating you enjoyed it.

[Kevinroc]

Saying: "I haven't second-guessed their decision" is miles away from stating you support it. Just like saying: "I didn't dislike it" to describe something is miles away from stating you enjoyed it.

He said he "supported it."

How involved do you get in decisions to cancel Roseanne at ABC or fire James Gunn at Marvel?

I would say there is a blend of my helping to make the decision to my supporting the decisions that have been made. Roseanne was completely unanimous. We discussed how it would be communicated and when because there were a number of entities that had to be properly filled in, but the decision was completely unanimous. The James Gunn decision was brought to me as a unanimous decision of a variety of executives at the studio and I supported it.

There was backlash. You still support it?

I haven't second-guessed their decision.

(Of course he also makes a weird distinction between Roseanne and Gunn. He says the Roseanne decision was "completely unanimous" and the James Gunn decision was "brought" to him as a unanimous decision.)

[Carabas]

Again, so how is this about Star Wars?

It's about Bob Eiger, and about what kinds of things he does or doesn't take personal responsibility for.

[Immortal Weapon]

Why does that matter? We know it was Alan Horn that canned Gunn. Why focus on a minor detail that doesn't relate to Gunn firings? It's creating a problem that isn't there.

[Carabas]

Why does that matter? We know it was Alan Horn that canned Gunn. Why focus on a minor detail that doesn't relate to Gunn firings? It's creating a problem that isn't there.

Because Alan Horn won't be around for much longer.

[AJBopp]

Iger is responsible for company-wide decisions such as how often to invest in a costly Star Wars film, which affects multiple divisions, parks, toys, etc. Horn is responsible for decisions that affect Disney Studios, such as firing a director. At worst Iger's comment might have been "I didn't agree with the decision, but it wasn't my call to make." But unless you're going to fire Horn, you don't undercut his authority like that.

In any case, Iger did not say "I take responsibility for Gunn's firing" because in that case the buck doesn't stop with him. It stops with Horn.

[Calighoula]

I don't see Gunn's absence as a loss. Maybe in Avengers: The Party's Over, they can use the Time Stone to reboot the MCU and give us a movie that features the real Star-Lord, not the clown Gunn's written him to be.

[Raiders]

Iger is responsible for company-wide decisions such as how often to invest in a costly Star Wars film, which affects multiple divisions, parks, toys, etc. Horn is responsible for decisions that affect Disney Studios, such as firing a director. At worst Iger's comment might have been "I didn't agree with the decision, but it wasn't my call to make." But unless you're going to fire Horn, you don't undercut his authority like that.

In any case, Iger did not say "I take responsibility for Gunn's firing" because in that case the buck doesn't stop with him. It stops with Horn.

Iger has the power to veto Horn’s decision, he didn’t veto Horn because Iger agrees Horn made the right move.