Warner Bros/Joss Whedon/Ray Fisher Justice League

[SecretWarrior]

Trades? They just announced a Stargirl special that he is writing.

That does answer it.

[SecretWarrior]

they are so concerned that they have multiple projects with Johns involved, he has even a story in the upcoming Infinite Frontier.
And no Ray is not more credible, unlike Carpenter he does not provide specifics. He also changed version about Johns, first he claimed he enabled Whedon later on that he was a racist. Which is which? To be credible he must mention the specifics.

He looks like someone who thinks that he is entitled that WB must do a Cyborg movie because it's his character. When WB probably before all this, decided not to go on, because Cyborg is quite a forgettable character. When JL came out many fans complained why Green Lantern one of DC's most famous and historic characters was left out for Cyborg.
Now Fisher has ensured that whatever it costs them, WB will have no movie with him involved and nor about Cyborg.

Ever hear of an NDA?

Cyborg replaces MMH, not GL, which is a property WB has been hesitant to touch since the film and TV show failed at the box office and for failure to sell toys.

[Goldrake]

Ever hear of an NDA?

There are always other means-
He first claimed that Johns enabled Whedon later that he was a racist. What he forgot about NDA?

[SecretWarrior]

There are always other means-
He first claimed that Johns enabled Whedon later that he was a racist. What he forgot about NDA?

He can't publicly go into specifics because of his NDA, but he can speak in broad strokes about what actions he is taking.

[SecretWarrior]

Too bad officials and producers didn't leverage their power to protect the people working for them.

[Goldrake]

Cyborg replaces MMH, not GL, which is a property WB has been hesitant to touch since the film and TV show failed at the box office and for failure to sell toys.

Come on are you saying Cyborg is a better seller than GL?
GL is one of the founding members unlike Cyborg.
Besides it makes no sense not to put GL into the JL movie, whatever his first movie box office, the movie did not depend on GL, being a team movie.

[Amadeus Arkham]

[Johnny]

Ever hear of an NDA?

Cyborg replaces MMH, not GL, which is a property WB has been hesitant to touch since the film and TV show failed at the box office and for failure to sell toys.

The TV show never had it's own toyline, which is why it was canceled, it wasn't due to lack of interest or bad reception. Cartoon Network only distributed the show, it didn't fund it. Toyline for the show was never produced due to the movie toyline not selling, so it had no funding and there was no other option but to cancel it. Young Justice on the other hand did get canceled due to its toyline not selling.

[Goldrake]

He can't publicly go into specifics because of his NDA, but he can speak in broad strokes about what actions he is taking.

Easy, making accusations and changing versions and using the racist card.
Unlike Whedon nobody ever complained about about Johns.
Fisher is after revenge because the movie he believed he was ENTITLED to do, was canceled.

BTW - he also claimed that Johns threatened his career(what career? he had none) again he forgot about NDA again it seems.

[SecretWarrior]

Come on are you saying Cyborg is a better seller than GL?
GL is one of the founding members unlike Cyborg.
Besides it makes no sense not to put GL into the JL movie, whatever his first movie box office, the movie did not depend on GL, being a team movie.

From WB's perspective, how well GL sells was proven in 2011. Cyborg didn't take GL's "spot" anymore than Aquaman or Flash did. WB is just now willing to get their investors on board for GL. They couldn't do it earlier because they made promises to investors and then blew their money.

[SecretWarrior]

The TV show never had it's own toyline, which is why it was canceled, it wasn't due to lack of interest or bad reception. Cartoon Network only distributed the show, it didn't fund it. Toyline for the show was never produced due to the movie toyline not selling, so it had no funding and there was no other option but to cancel it. Young Justice on the other hand did get canceled due to its toyline not selling.

Thank you for the correction.

In their shoes, I would have cancelled it too. If the public isn't buying GL figures at the time, I'm not pumping out more GL toys just because they look cartoon-y.

[SecretWarrior]

Easy, making accusations and changing versions and using the racist card.
Unlike Whedon nobody ever complained about about Johns.
Fisher is after revenge because the movie he believed he was ENTITLED to do, was canceled.

BTW - he also claimed that Johns threatened his career(what career? he had none) again he forgot about NDA again it seems.

We didn't see people come out in this way against Whedon until now--which is to say so many people at once.

We could see this happen to Johns in time. He only really got a prominent position in 2011, and his power was limited. What Fisher is saying would indicate that he misused whatever power he did have.

Hard to believe Fisher tells the truth about one guy only to lie about the others. It's easier to believe that Johns is a dick than that Fisher is a Machiavellian mastermind who can't see there's no upside to his professional life besides on a moral level.

[Holt]

Cyborg's inclusion had nothing to do with Green Lantern. Green Lantern wasn't in the movie because the attempt to turn Hal Jordan into the next Iron Man crashed and burned the franchise badly, so they were planning that reboot (that is still in development hell). Remember, at one point Green Lantern was supposed to be the start of the DC shared movieverse, not Man of Steel. Cyborg would've likely been in it even if the Reynolds movie had been a success and led to his inclusion in the team-up because they wanted the team to be more racially diverse than it was in the Silver Age.

This and SMG speaking on this as well is big. I wonder who else will come forward.

[Ilan Preskovsky]

Ouch. This is pretty damning, ain't it? And disappointing as I am still such a huge fan of his work.

I do wonder, though, just how much worse Whedon is than your average difficult director? Sad to see that he is apparently a gigantic dick but even this sounds like child's play in comparison to the shit that certain famous directors have pulled in the past.

I'm not saying this to excuse him or other abusive directors but I do wonder, in general, what do people think about the fact that it is so often the case that great artists are often anything but great people? Does it affect how you view their work? Especially with something as beloved as Buffy?

And do you think there's coming back from this for someone like Joss Whedon? Should there be? Is just cancelling asshole artists the only way forward or do you think that a) they can repent for past behaviour and b) most importantly, do you think that such behaviour can be curbed by having producers being responsible for keeping their creators in check? Directors are, after all, employees so shouldn't producers be responsible for keeping them in line in the way a boss keeps an employee in line in a normal job?

Many gigantic asses don't act that way at work because they understand the consequences of such actions so I don't know, I think the real thing that needs to change here is not so much "cancelling" directors (unless they act genuinely illegally) but changing the system so that problematic talent can't just do whatever the hell they want on set - especially once we accept that many creative people are naturally awful human beings. This should be one of the most important jobs of executives. Obviously, this doesn't apply to self-made indies but this should be part and parcel of the studio system and the fact that it isn't is, I think, much more of a problem than the fact that many creatives are far more talented than they are decent.

It's weird, I'm glad that someone like Joss Whedon is being called out for his bad behaviour (though saddened at the same time, of course) but though there are clearly a great many creatives who are wonderful people, I do wonder if the artistic/ entertainment/ media landscape would be much poorer if only nice people are allowed to create movies, TV shows, comics, whatever. John Lennon, especially in his early years, was not by any stretch of the imagination what anyone would call a nice person, for example, but imagine popular culture if he was kept out of the studio in 1964 or whatever - especially since he became a much more decent person, apparently, later in life. And John was a saint in comparison to some other talented rock stars.

These are just some rambling thoughts that is , I guess, the result of my being conflicted between my disappointment with Whedon as a person and my continued admiration for him as an artist. And, as ever, I am incredibly suspicious of cancel culture and do worry that cancelling people like Whedon is a lest effective solution than changing a system that covers up this bad behaviour, yes, but more importantly doesn't control it in the first place.

[chamber-music]

Joss ex-wife told us years ago that Whedon isn't who he pretends to be. A lot of people just called it sour grapes and ignored her.

Hollywood protects anyone who can make them money.

The Execs on the X-Men films all but said they ignored Singer's 'issues' because of his success/'talent'.