Page 65 of 104 FirstFirst ... 155561626364656667686975 ... LastLast
Results 961 to 975 of 1555
  1. #961
    Ultimate Member SiegePerilous02's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    10,848

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rev9 View Post
    It will be his word against Whedon's or Geoff's in any case ,he is speaking out because he is right to expose the truth.He has no reason to make it up
    But who says it's the truth?

    I mean it wouldn't completely surprise me if Whedon acted like a jerk, but he threw out the "abuse" thing (a loaded word) and has yet to really elaborate on it. Either shit or get off the pot.

  2. #962
    Uncanny Member XPac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    31,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rev9 View Post
    Although it's no smoking gun,when they were doing tours and panels and Ray was promoting the film,there is footage of Momoa nodding with a very weird look like "riiight we have to promote the film.smile and wave boys...'

    Though Ray is the one with little to lose , he has the one role and if he stands for what he believes is injustice he will go back to theatre.If Momoa speaks out ,it will tarnish publicity for Aquaman2 a movie WB still has on the books.I mean Momoa can come out and support him if the wrong actions were committed in front of other cast members.If it happened behind closed doors in an office to Ray only ,what can Momoa say?
    I suppose there's also the issue of whether people Whedon previously worked with will step up and cite instances of Whedons alleged abusive behavior. Whedon has worked with a lot of people in his career, and in theory a good number of them aren't in the same position that Mamoa is in where he might need to keep his mouth shut for the sake of his career.

    I think Charisma Carpenter had issues with Whedon back in the day... though from the sound of it, her accusations would fall well short of being abusive.

  3. #963
    Chad Jar Jar Pinsir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Naboo
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steel Inquisitor View Post
    I said it was perceived as a financial failure, not that it was one. A movie can be well at the box office but still be a failure with expectations being too high. At the time it was released Avengers was 4 year old, that was the high bar to clear and unlike Man of Steel it had higher expectations since it was billed as mini-Avengers. Superman and Batman fighting and teaming up with Woman Woman aren't things which have low financial expectations. Low, as in, before Avengers. The reason those films aren't scrutinised as much is that they're not as controversial as films, they exceeded expectations and they were liked by everyone. Those films weren't liked simply because they were popular and people had to like the popular thing. People who disliked Snyder's films did so for many, many reason which have nothing to do with box office. Man of Steel isn't seen as a financial bomb, it was loathed for its story. People use box office results for every movie, Snyder's Superman films aren't special.

    a) True.
    b) The article was about B vs S specifically, and "Disney sandbox" being making a billion dollars. Which it didn't do.
    c) In that case WB sent that film out to die, because they were never going to be happy with what they got after Avengers.
    This comparison between BvS and Avengers has never been warranted though, especially when we know JL exists and is unquestionably a failure. So when I see the arguments that hinge on a feeling that BvS should have been as big as Avengers, particular when the films look so different and appeal to different people, its just not convincing argument to me. Just because you feel a film should make a billion dollars, doesn't mean its a failure when it doesn't.

    For B vs S context once that was released people lost their jobs over it and WB restructured its movie division over it. Corporations don't do this unless something really bad happened.
    I agree that something bad happened; the poor reviews and more importantly public reception. Studios want franchises that can be milked for years to come, so poor reviews and public reception harm the potential for sequels (which it probably did harm JL, though that film had a lot of other issues too.) BvS was able to recover much of its public standing with the Extended Cut and now we've got the Snyder Cut coming.

    A similar thing happened for Rise of Skywalker too. The film got great box office returns, good reviews and developed a fan base, but the hardcore Star Wars audience hated it and the film bent over backwards to try and please them and that ruined the film. Film studios are extremely receptive to public criticism.
    Last edited by Pinsir; 08-15-2020 at 11:40 AM.
    Want to read Wonder Woman stories, but don't know where to start? Check out my top 10 lists for Golden Age, Silver Age, Bronze Age and Modern Age Wonder Woman tales!

    "You can't make an omelet without breaking a few necks." - Wonder Woman, probably

  4. #964
    Ultimate Member SiegePerilous02's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    10,848

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pinsir View Post
    This comparison between BvS and Avengers has never been warranted though, especially when we know JL exists and is unquestionably a failure. So when I see the arguments that hinge on a feeling that BvS should have been as big as Avengers, particular when the films look so different and appeal to different people, its just not convincing argument to me. Just because you feel a film should make a billion dollars, doesn't mean its a failure when it doesn't.
    BvS was made because WB was rushing to catch up and launch a franchise that would bring in Avengers level money. WB wanted a shared superhero universe to compete with Marvel, of course comparisons are going to come up. It may not entirely be fair, but it's going to be deemed as a bit of a failure for not being able to do it when it had the two biggest superheros ever. It also had a massive opening weekend, and it likely could have made a billion had the movie appealed to more people and the film had better legs. Like having Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman in a movie together shouldn't be a hard thing to fuck up, but they somehow managed to do it.

    It was marketed as a big blockbuster event. Not quite the same as Avengers, but comparable and meant to broadly appeal to the same audience. They had toys they were marketing towards kids. If it was always meant to be a niche take, why put so much money into it and market as the next big superhero crossover hit?


    Quote Originally Posted by Pinsir View Post
    I agree that something bad happened; the poor reviews and more importantly public reception. Studios want franchises that can be milked for years to come, so poor reviews and public reception harm the potential for sequels (which it probably did harm JL, though that film had a lot of other issues too.) BvS was able to recover much of its public standing with the Extended Cut and now we've got the Snyder Cut coming..
    I don't think this actually happened. At large, I think the general consensus is that the extended cut is a little better but the public at large has moved on from it and doesn't care about it either way. The main good thing to come out of it (Wonder Woman) they can get elsewhere.

  5. #965
    King of Wakanda Midvillian1322's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    8,834

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SiegePerilous02 View Post
    BvS was made because WB was rushing to catch up and launch a franchise that would bring in Avengers level money. WB wanted a shared superhero universe to compete with Marvel, of course comparisons are going to come up. It may not entirely be fair, but it's going to be deemed as a bit of a failure for not being able to do it when it had the two biggest superheros ever. It also had a massive opening weekend, and it likely could have made a billion had the movie appealed to more people and the film had better legs. Like having Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman in a movie together shouldn't be a hard thing to fuck up, but they somehow managed to do it.

    It was marketed as a big blockbuster event. Not quite the same as Avengers, but comparable and meant to broadly appeal to the same audience. They had toys they were marketing towards kids. If it was always meant to be a niche take, why put so much money into it and market as the next big superhero crossover hit?




    I don't think this actually happened. At large, I think the general consensus is that the extended cut is a little better but the public at large has moved on from it and doesn't care about it either way. The main good thing to come out of it (Wonder Woman) they can get elsewhere.
    I dont think the vast majority of people who went out to the theaters to see BVS the first two weekends even saw the extended cut. If they did, it was on HBO and they probaly didn't even notice. Only people talking about it were the people who already liked BvS. I only watched it cause people on here claiming it makes the movie so much better. It fixed some plot lines that made no sense but that's all it did for me. Still didn't enjoy the movie and now a very long and hard to watch film for me is even longer.

  6. #966
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    984

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SiegePerilous02 View Post
    But who says it's the truth?

    I mean it wouldn't completely surprise me if Whedon acted like a jerk, but he threw out the "abuse" thing (a loaded word) and has yet to really elaborate on it. Either shit or get off the pot.
    You have to be a pathological liar to make this up.I believe Ray because he is new in the movie buisness, someone who is new and not jaded with seeing this happen before to others is more likely to speak out.This is his first movie role what does he stand to gain from lying?

  7. #967
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    3,572

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rev9 View Post
    You have to be a pathological liar to make this up.I believe Ray because he is new in the movie buisness, someone who is new and not jaded with seeing this happen before to others is more likely to speak out.This is his first movie role what does he stand to gain from lying?
    Hard to tell, could be petty revenge for him hating Whedon for ruining Snyder's movie. People do that. The reason people are being skeptical is that Fisher's squirrelly about details, and this sort of thing is easier to digest if we have more transparency not less. If he didn't want to break a n NDA or is getting things in order to legal protect himself it's more confusing so why didn't he wait until he had all this done before saying a word?

  8. #968
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Posts
    93

    Default

    I think several people are confusing an NDA with a court's gag order. An NDA has no bearing on a criminal case and may not have a bearing on a civil case, though there are exceptions.

    A judge may order participants in a criminal or civil trial to not disclose information about an actively processed case in order to prevent the case from being prejudiced. Violating an NDA would result in a another civil trial. Violating a gag order could potentially result in the case being dismissed.

  9. #969
    Better than YOU! Alan2099's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    4,293

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rev9 View Post
    You have to be a pathological liar to make this up.I believe Ray because he is new in the movie buisness, someone who is new and not jaded with seeing this happen before to others is more likely to speak out.This is his first movie role what does he stand to gain from lying?
    Or, because he's new to the business, he's not used to working with directors that he doesn't get along with.

    This is his first movie role what does he stand to gain from lying?
    Attention.

  10. #970
    Uncanny Member XPac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    31,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rev9 View Post
    You have to be a pathological liar to make this up.I believe Ray because he is new in the movie buisness, someone who is new and not jaded with seeing this happen before to others is more likely to speak out.This is his first movie role what does he stand to gain from lying?
    It could be a simple matter of him grossly overstating the meaning of the word abusive.

    I can easily buy him or anyone else not getting along with some of the people he's working with. That can happen to anyone. But if they are flat out being abusive, that's a pretty loaded accusation.

  11. #971
    Extraordinary Member Holt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    8,008

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rev9 View Post
    This is his first movie role what does he stand to gain from lying?
    If I were a lawyer for Whedon and Johns? A misguided attempt to drum up publicity or make some cash. Look at it like this: Fisher is not a well known actor, and his career has gone nowhere since Justice League. In the three years since that film came out, the only work he's gotten was a supporting role on True Detective. No other film work, not even supporting parts. The solo Cyborg movie he was supposed to star in is dead in the water. It's safe to say the poor guy is in a rut right now.

    So if I'm an attorney, it's pretty easy to spin this one of several ways:

    A) He's hoping to revive his flagging career with a bunch of free publicity by cashing in on the current social and political climate (this is the most attention he's garnered in years).

    B) He's realized his leading man career is dead so now he's hoping to sue WB or embarrass them into paying a settlement ("Pay me and this all goes away").

    C) He's bitter about the damage Justice League did to his career, as well as WB dropping the Cyborg spin-off he was promised and disrespecting Zack Snyder's vision.


    Now, important note: I believe Ray and don't think he's lying here. But given the vague nature of his allegations and the fact that none of the other 5 JL stars have publicly backed him up, it seems like he's in for an uphill struggle.

  12. #972
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    984

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Holt View Post
    If I were a lawyer for Whedon and Johns? A misguided attempt to drum up publicity or make some cash. Look at it like this: Fisher is not a well known actor, and his career has gone nowhere since Justice League. In the three years since that film came out, the only work he's gotten was a supporting role on True Detective. No other film work, not even supporting parts. The solo Cyborg movie he was supposed to star in is dead in the water. It's safe to say the poor guy is in a rut right now.

    So if I'm an attorney, it's pretty easy to spin this one of several ways:

    A) He's hoping to revive his flagging career with a bunch of free publicity by cashing in on the current social and political climate (this is the most attention he's garnered in years).

    B) He's realized his leading man career is dead so now he's hoping to sue WB or embarrass them into paying a settlement ("Pay me and this all goes away").

    C) He's bitter about the damage Justice League did to his career, as well as WB dropping the Cyborg spin-off he was promised and disrespecting Zack Snyder's vision.


    Now, important note: I believe Ray and don't think he's lying here. But given the vague nature of his allegations and the fact that none of the other 5 JL stars have publicly backed him up, it seems like he's in for an uphill struggle.
    It's good you are putting yourself in the shoes of a lawyer but the premise is all wrong

    A) He is hopping to revive his flagging career.... REALLY? Revive? Flagging? After 1 film and one TV episode?

    B) He's realised his leading man career is dead...again Leading man? Career? I mean no lawyer would posit such hyperbole He was not a leading man, key character sure but leading man ,no way

    I get why a lawyer would spin that angle but it is just implausible .Of all the points C is the most sensible and then again we still have ZSJL so that is uncharted territory because ZSJL is the counterweight to JL damaging his career because ZSJL could boost his career

    Glad you admit you believe him though I do agree ,if most of the threats or disrespect or harassment was towards him apart from his co stars he has an uphill struggle.Though if it's true and he spoke out it doesn't matter ,he will feel he didn't sweep it under the rug coz he's a 'nobody' and they are the kingmakers.

  13. #973
    Extraordinary Member Holt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    8,008

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rev9 View Post
    It's good you are putting yourself in the shoes of a lawyer but the premise is all wrong

    A) He is hopping to revive his flagging career.... REALLY? Revive? Flagging? After 1 film and one TV episode?
    Yep.

    B) He's realised his leading man career is dead...again Leading man? Career? I mean no lawyer would posit such hyperbole He was not a leading man, key character sure but leading man ,no way
    Doesn't matter if he was or not or had a thriving career. Saying he wanted or expected such things and that Justice League likely killed them is simple enough.

    I get why a lawyer would spin that angle but it is just implausible .Of all the points C is the most sensible and then again we still have ZSJL so that is uncharted territory because ZSJL is the counterweight to JL damaging his career because ZSJL could boost his career
    That seems rather unlikely to be the case.

  14. #974
    Uncanny Member XPac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    31,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Holt View Post
    If I were a lawyer for Whedon and Johns? A misguided attempt to drum up publicity or make some cash. Look at it like this: Fisher is not a well known actor, and his career has gone nowhere since Justice League. In the three years since that film came out, the only work he's gotten was a supporting role on True Detective. No other film work, not even supporting parts. The solo Cyborg movie he was supposed to star in is dead in the water. It's safe to say the poor guy is in a rut right now.

    So if I'm an attorney, it's pretty easy to spin this one of several ways:

    A) He's hoping to revive his flagging career with a bunch of free publicity by cashing in on the current social and political climate (this is the most attention he's garnered in years).

    B) He's realized his leading man career is dead so now he's hoping to sue WB or embarrass them into paying a settlement ("Pay me and this all goes away").

    C) He's bitter about the damage Justice League did to his career, as well as WB dropping the Cyborg spin-off he was promised and disrespecting Zack Snyder's vision.


    Now, important note: I believe Ray and don't think he's lying here. But given the vague nature of his allegations and the fact that none of the other 5 JL stars have publicly backed him up, it seems like he's in for an uphill struggle.
    If Whedon is indeed abusive, then odds are he's done this sort of thing before. Which means in theory the other 5 JL stars don't necessarily need to publically back him up to at least win over the court of public opinion. The guy has worked on dozens of projects, and it's probably not likely Ray is literally the only person who would be on the receiving end if indeed Whedon does act that way. Which isn't to say people from previous projects is necessarily proof that it happened to Ray... but if even 3-4 people come foreward, then it would seriously hurt Whedons career regardless of how talented he is. We'll see.

  15. #975
    Extraordinary Member Holt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    8,008

    Default

    I'm speaking more of Johns than Whedon, which is why I don't like Ray's chances here. Hell, Jason Momoa is making a new movie with Geoff Johns and Jon Berg, two of the men Ray accused.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •