Warner Bros/Joss Whedon/Ray Fisher Justice League

[king of hybrids]

A "dick" is weaker wording than she used. She essentially alleged that he was an abuser based on the chain she was replying to

Whether or not it’s true re the movie side, hinting at a big shot abusing writers/DC comics staff on her watch probably isn’t the smartest tactic by Nelson considering Berganza, Lobdell, Didio etc

[achilles]

So here's my problem. At the same time this Fisher thing is going on, WB actually has a lot bigger problems with Tsugihara. And that's what's got me puzzled about Fisher and Mamoa. To be sure the latter seems to be more going along with his buddy rather than having some beef he's personally passionate about. Regardless though, the Tsugihara thing has actually specific allegations. Which are terrible ones, the Weinstein package. But neither Fisher nor Aquaman have offered even a hint as to what they're even suggesting, other than they don't like the three men they've accused.

And that sort of messes with me, since I'm hardly Johns' biggest fan. As anyone who's seen a lot of my other posts will know, especially why I don't like him. Which puts me in the odd position of defending him, a position I find unpleasant. I'm also not a huge Whedon fan, going back to how he treated female characters on Buffy. However, I'm not a big fan of either anonymous accusations, or accusations which in themselves are completely unclear as to their nature. I mean how can any of these men defend themselves from an attack when they don't even know what the attack is? It seems rather unfair to me on a fundamental level.

It's Fisher's perfect right to accuse them of something, but it doesn't seem right to me that he can do it without ever specifying what he's accusing them of. At least the actress in the Tsugihara thing had the guts to actually say what she's accusing him off. And the decency.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

The only person who's been accused of being abusive is Whedon as far as I know. Johns has only been accused of enabling him and being petty. Kevin Tsujihara also hasn't been accused of abuse as far as I know. He was just cheating on his wife and promised roles to the comically untalented actress he was sleeping with.

Were these men guilty of making poor creative and managerial decisions? Certainly, but only Whedon's been called out for abuse, unless I missed something

[achilles]

The only person who's been accused of being abusive is Whedon as far as I know. Johns has only been accused of enabling him and being petty. Kevin Tsujihara also hasn't been accused of abuse as far as I know. He was just cheating on his wife and promised roles to the comically untalented actress he was sleeping with.

Were these men guilty of making poor creative and managerial decisions? Certainly, but only Whedon's been called out for abuse, unless I missed something

Again though, what is abuse in this case? Could be anything from real abuse to cutting Fisher's scenes.

[king of hybrids]

The problem, and I say this as someone who has perhaps gone over the line in their dislike of Johns before, is that A) Fisher’s claim that Johns was responsible for Whedon’s behaviour was immediately followed up by the accusation about DMing a 17 year old and B) the Snyder cut conspiracies had curdled into a white hot ball of hate years ago (eg the accusation that he leaked all of Snyder’s vision to Feige in 2013, anything to come out of Grace Randolph etc), C) contempt for Doomsday Clock and D) a belief that he poisoned DC, E) Prev. closeness to EVS, F) being originally hired by Berganza etc etc

I don’t like Johns, and if there’s a hint of B being true I’d advocate scrubbing all trace of him or his works from DC; but I can’t help but notice that Fisher seems to rely on the Snyder Cut legions to do his signal boosting. Given the circumstances I would want to believe Fisher, but there’s something off here

[achilles]

The problem, and I say this as someone who has perhaps gone over the line in their dislike of Johns before, is that A) Fisher’s claim that Johns was responsible for Whedon’s behaviour was immediately followed up by the accusation about DMing a 17 year old and B) the Snyder cut conspiracies had curdled into a white hot ball of hate years ago (eg the accusation that he leaked all of Snyder’s vision to Feige in 2013, anything to come out of Grace Randolph etc), C) contempt for Doomsday Clock and D) a belief that he poisoned DC, E) Prev. closeness to EVS, F) being originally hired by Berganza etc etc

I don’t like Johns, and if there’s a hint of B being true I’d advocate scrubbing all trace of him or his works from DC; but I can’t help but notice that Fisher seems to rely on the Snyder Cut legions to do his signal boosting. Given the circumstances I would want to believe Fisher, but there’s something off here

This is my problem too. I really don't like Johns, and under other circumstances I would believe something like that. But...what is Fisher doing? It just seems so off. And the article on the front page gives a new, interesting and believable spin to it with respect to Whedon. Fisher won't even give unbacked up examples of whatever he considers abuse. It's also weird timing.

[j9ac9k]

I certainly believe that everyone, especially Joss was under an incredible amount of pressure and that film set just became a $h!tshow where they weren't able to get together as a team. (ironic considering the theme of the movie) It's sounding like a Roshomon situation where everyone experienced something differently from their point of view because they were all so fragmented and the shoot was so chaotic.

[kjn]

No doubt that everyone was under a lot of pressure to both "fix" the movie and get it out on time.

But that still doesn't excuse acting like ****, especially for the director and the producers. Part of their job is to make the work situation safe and bearable for everyone.

[Pohzee]

The only person who's been accused of being abusive is Whedon as far as I know. Johns has only been accused of enabling him and being petty. Kevin Tsujihara also hasn't been accused of abuse as far as I know. He was just cheating on his wife and promised roles to the comically untalented actress he was sleeping with.

Were these men guilty of making poor creative and managerial decisions? Certainly, but only Whedon's been called out for abuse, unless I missed something

The language of the tweet Nelson replied to asked where the examples of Johns being and abuser were. To which she responded that there were plenty of stories. Again nothing specific, but the strong language stood out to me

[Holt]

Which is probably why it was deleted. Calling a public figure an abuser without evidence can be considered libel.

[Alan2099]

But that still doesn't excuse acting like ****, especially for the director and the producers. Part of their job is to make the work situation safe and bearable for everyone.

It wouldn't excuse the actors either. If you were on a tight deadline and one of your crew is fighting you about your decisions and what's expected of them, you don't always have time to play nice and make sure you don't hurt their feelings.

[Castling]

The problem, and I say this as someone who has perhaps gone over the line in their dislike of Johns before, is that A) Fisher’s claim that Johns was responsible for Whedon’s behaviour was immediately followed up by the accusation about DMing a 17 year old and B) the Snyder cut conspiracies had curdled into a white hot ball of hate years ago (eg the accusation that he leaked all of Snyder’s vision to Feige in 2013, anything to come out of Grace Randolph etc), C) contempt for Doomsday Clock and D) a belief that he poisoned DC, E) Prev. closeness to EVS, F) being originally hired by Berganza etc etc

I don’t like Johns, and if there’s a hint of B being true I’d advocate scrubbing all trace of him or his works from DC; but I can’t help but notice that Fisher seems to rely on the Snyder Cut legions to do his signal boosting. Given the circumstances I would want to believe Fisher, but there’s something off here

Oh look! Snyder bro conspiracy theories!I ��

[Castling]

Which is probably why it was deleted. Calling a public figure an abuser without evidence can be considered libel.

Yeah, and wasn't she in charge of DC at the time?
Why didn't she get to the bottom of these "stories"?

[Robanker]

Yeah, and wasn't she in charge of DC at the time?
Why didn't she get to the bottom of these "stories"?

I mean Berganza didn't get fired so why start with Johns, right? I don't like discrediting her statement because it may well be true, but really where was she when a serial sexual harasser held the Superman line hostage for years? Better late than never, I suppose.

[kjn]

It wouldn't excuse the actors either. If you were on a tight deadline and one of your crew is fighting you about your decisions and what's expected of them, you don't always have time to play nice and make sure you don't hurt their feelings.

That's a deflection, because it is not the job of the actors to shape and form the workplace environment. It is the job of the director and the producers. Actors play a part in that, as members of the workplace, but they are not responsible for it in the way directors and producers are.