James Gunn dropped from GOTG 3

[Jokerz79]

I could make up a bunch of BS that makes sense as well doesnt make it right. Regardless I feel like Drax is a expendable character anyway. So having him really die in avengers 4 doesnt sound crazy. They can let Dave leave but also let Drax go out a hero. Hopefully saving groot since Gaurdians 2 was kinda how they all were surrogate parents to groot. I could see that working out well for Marvel and Dave. BTW didnt watch the video iono what was all said but most the videos like this are BS.

Drax is not replaceable there is no funny strong aliens who could replace him



Ok but's not like there are two



Well I'm leaving now

[Deathstroke]

Disney won't let him direct the movie, but they are going to use the script he wrote? Doesn't that sound a bit hypocritical of them?

To be clear, I don't think they should've fired him. I'm just curious.

[Raiders]

Disney won't let him direct the movie, but they are going to use the script he wrote? Doesn't that sound a bit hypocritical of them?

To be clear, I don't think they should've fired him. I'm just curious.

Yeah, I don’t think Disney is being truthful. I think when it’s all said and done, there not going to use Gunn’s script.

[Jabare]

Y'all realize Disney fired him for optics right and to protect the Brand.

Slightly similar (yet also very different) to when ABC cancelled Rosanne. Disney ultimately made that call and made it quickly.

I honestly don't think the stories been reported covered well. I still don't know the full context of things. And I didn't see the tweets till I entered this thread. Knowing Disney their move doesn't surprise me and I can't see them bringing him back, but its also not like he's blacklisted. He'll land other jobs I'm guessing unless there is more to this story and tweets than I realize.

[Jokerz79]

Y'all realize Disney fired him for optics right and to protect the Brand.

Slightly similar (yet also very different) to when ABC cancelled Rosanne. Disney ultimately made that call and made it quickly.

I honestly don't think the stories been reported covered well. I still don't know the full context of things. And I didn't see the tweets till I entered this thread. Knowing Disney their move doesn't surprise me and I can't see them bringing him back, but its also not like he's blacklisted. He'll land other jobs I'm guessing unless there is more to this story and tweets than I realize.

Exactly Hollywood really doesn't care what someone does they hire Spousal and Child Abusers, Misogynist, Racist, Homophobic, Pedophiles, and Rapist all the time. It's only about can you make them money or cost them money and even with all the money Gunn helped make them with the Guardians they now saw him as a liability to their brand because of public perception of him.

As for the Script vs Director most of the General Audience never look or care at who writes films unless adapted from a famous book but they know Directors because outside of actors they are the face of a project.

[Raiders]

If they use Gunn’s script, his name will still be in the credits.
If Disney care about optics they wouldn’t use his script either.
It’s hypocritical for Disney to fire Gunn as a director, but keep him as a writer.
Disney is not telling us the truth.

[Carabas]

If Disney care about optics they wouldn’t use his script either.

If Disney cared that much about optics they would have recast Captain Jack Sparrow.

[GozertheGozarian]

If Disney cared that much about optics they would have recast Captain Jack Sparrow.

If Disney cared that much about public perception, they never would have brought back Roseanne.

[Jokerz79]

There was no controversy when they brought back Rosannne even though she said awful things in the past that's my point they don't care till they see you as a liability to profit. Rosanne became a liability, Gunn was seen as one so gone, Depp isn't seen as one because they think his bad press doesn't out weigh what they'll make I don't like what happened to Gunn but I understand it because I understand how Hollywood works and always has.

[Tuck]

There is something to the whole idea of making a big show of cosmetic morals while avoiding substantive consequences of invoking them. Keeping the Gunn script and keeping The Connors on air.

People with actual moral convictions take the hit.

[Raiders]

There is something to the whole idea of making a big show of cosmetic morals while avoiding substantive consequences of invoking them. Keeping the Gunn script and keeping The Connors on air.

People with actual moral convictions take the hit.

I can understand keeping the Conners because Roseanne Barr has nothing to don’t with it.
But firing Gunn because of his tweets and still using his script doesn’t much make sense.
James Gunn name will be credited as screenwriter.
So, what was the point in firing him in the first place?

[Carabas]

So, what was the point in firing him in the first place?

There was no point. It was one guy massively overreacting. And since they're still using the script, has now calmed down considerably.

[Tuck]

I can understand keeping the Conners because Roseanne Barr has nothing to don’t with it.

If Roseanne owned the rights to the show, ABC would have found a way to keep her on the show rather than cancel it.

[GozertheGozarian]

If Roseanne owned the rights to the show, ABC would have found a way to keep her on the show rather than cancel it.

Roseanne did own the rights to the show, that's why ABC had to pay her off to get The Conners greenlit.

[Tuck]

Roseanne did own the rights to the show, that's why ABC had to pay her off to get The Conners greenlit.

Well, the point still stands.

She still made money off the situation because ABC didn't want to give up the show.