Sign in to follow this  
GustavoLeao

Joss Whedon Under Fire ! Fan Site Closes !

Recommended Posts

Good morning, bom dia ! Now what ???
 
Fan Site For JUSTICE LEAGUE Director Joss Whedon Shuts Down After Ex-Wife Pens Scathing Essay
 
Warner Bros. may be regretting the decision to hire Joss Whedon to helm Justice League as the filmmaker is mired in controversy due to an essay penned by his ex-wife ruining his reputations as a feminist. Oh my.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Several thoughts:

*  We’re all a tad hypocritical in our public vs. private lives to some degree.  No one is perfect.   Our public selves are who we aspire to be; our private selves are who we are.   There is some separation, and there has to be allowance for human error (and human frailty).

*   This is coming from his ex-wife.  Can’t imagine why she’d be bitter, right?  And they’re allegations, not iron-clad facts.  

*   Separate the art from the artist.  Do you like his movies and TV shows?  Fine.  Then that’s all he owes the paying public.

*   How many young women were directly inspired by “Buffy” or any of Whedon’s feminist heroes/icons?  Is all that null and void now?  Of course not.  The inspiration is the same, no matter how flawed the messenger. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really have a problem with the serial cheating. I mean, I do, but it's not all that unusual. The years of gaslighting his wife until she questions her sanity? That's psychological abuse.

And, I'm sorry, but no feminist wrote that godawful Wonder Woman screenplay. No feminist could look at that and think, "That rocks. What a hero she is."

You can divorce the artist from the art and still like the art. I do with Mel Gibson. But Gibson is still pretty trashy...and so is Whedon at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read the essay. It is not earth shattering or unusual in a divorce case to call out everything. It is mean of her though. It shows she is very angry and probably should not have written it, and posted it to that legit tabloid. Did they file based on irreconcilable differences? Seems if he was kind of a cad, she already knew on the set of Buffy. With shows life Firefly and his short films, and some of the other stories, it is suggested his male characters are ladies men. This is not a feminism issue. It is adultery, if it's proven. Hollywood is probably replete with adultery. Actors who are married sometimes don't even live together, but married only for the prestige. Sure there are some that are just fine, and married for 20 years.

The part about the psychological stuff is probably her way of making the case stick, and to that end she is ticked off about his alleged cheating and being 'secretly not a feminist crusader' whatever that is. Not enough evidence to prove it. Still, he is intense and it would not surprise me if it could be interpreted as some form of unsympathetic neglect, certainly. Still there are not enough witnesses, whereas witnesses can be unreliable, especially an ex wife, as there is just one essay and no reply from him.

So basically Joss Whedon is a guy, with possible sleazy guy issues, being a guy. It might not be right, but up until now, I have not heard him called a 'feminist crusader'. Sure he puts females in his movies, but after Age of Ultron, it is clear he doesn't understand how relationships between the super heroes work. Hulk and Black Widow? Was that fan fiction, Joss? That's physically impossible. She's not plastic woman.

So he can write feminine role models. It does not make the man a role model. Merely his characters are.

It wouldn't surprise me that there was some hanky panky on Buffy, because in Hollywood with powerful producers that is common. It is not right, as Vie said. But we don't know enough to pass any judgment. It is their word against each other.

Oh, and in case you are curious, as a single unmarried feminist liberal leaning moderate, I have not been married, so I cannot know such subtleties. I have known of bitter divorces, including family ones though.

Edited by Chimera82405

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Chimera82405 said:

It is mean of her though. It shows she is very angry and probably should not have written it,

LOL. If even fractions of what she depicts there actually occurred, she wasn't the 'mean' one by outing it. 

7 minutes ago, Chimera82405 said:

Seems if he was kind of a cad, she already knew on the set of Buffy.

And, if you had read her essay, she explains quite clearly that he gaslit her for a decade and a half. It's hard to 'know' when the other person lies and does it to you in such a way and speaks to you in such a way so as to tell you that not only are you wrong, but there's something mentally or emotionally wrong with you for even asking questions. It doesn't take much of the manipulation and condescension to basically crush you emotionally.

 

15 minutes ago, Chimera82405 said:

Still there are not enough witnesses

How do you know?

16 minutes ago, Chimera82405 said:

So basically Joss Whedon is a guy, with possible sleazy guy issues, being a guy.

All guys are sleazy cheats?

 

17 minutes ago, Chimera82405 said:

I have not heard him called a 'feminist crusader'.

He has lent his name and time to many feminist causes, so the term isn't unfounded.

 

19 minutes ago, Chimera82405 said:

but after Age of Ultron, it is clear he doesn't understand how relationships between the super heroes work. Hulk and Black Widow? Was that fan fiction, Joss? That's physically impossible. She's not plastic woman.

LOL. Okay, here you are creating unnecessary imagery and imagery that never occurred to me. Black Widow would not be having sex with the Hulk, it would be with Banner, and this much of Whedon's mindset, I understand. Banner and Romanoff are both outsiders that society will never fully accept.They fit together because they fit nowhere else.

But Whedon dumps on Romanoff, too. He has Cap coming to Banner and basically saying, 'Yeah, she flirts with everybody." And it's not particularly feminist for him to have her, after describing her forced sterilization to Banner saying, "You're not the only monster here."

Wut?

Okay, her cold history of mass assassination? Sure. But how does her inability to bear children due to, again, her forced sterilization make her a monster? She is somehow less because she can't have a child? It's not particulary nuanced for having been written by a 'feminist' Then again, the MCU, nor Disney has ever treated the character all that well.

39 minutes ago, Chimera82405 said:

So he can write feminine role models. It does not make the man a role model. Merely his characters are.

This is actually spot on.

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still taking it as allegations until proven.  

And yes, as noted above, just because the man can write great feminist role models doesn't mean he's an exemplary role model himself.   Of course, if the allegations ARE true, then yes, Whedon is pretty awful, but since he's an entertainer (and not say, a PRESIDENT), I don't really have any right to summarily judge him.  

I have a right to my opinion of his alleged actions, but that's all.   If I'm really bothered by it?  I can boycot his works, but that only harms all of the other talented artists involved in his productions and that's not fair to them.  They didn't script Whedon's marriage for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He makes good movies and writes great stories. That's all I care about. Now, if it were something illegal that would be another issue. Maybe. He could be doing coke for all I care as long as he's not endangering minors or driving around high as a kite.

He is a Hollywood person. He's not Gandhi. I don't expect any of these people to be moral crusaders. Just to make good movies. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Nombrecomun said:

He makes good movies and writes great stories. That's all I care about. Now, if it were something illegal that would be another issue. Maybe. He could be doing coke for all I care as long as he's not endangering minors or driving around high as a kite.

He is a Hollywood person. He's not Gandhi. I don't expect any of these people to be moral crusaders. Just to make good movies. 

Kind of where I'm at.   Not to mention that these ARE allegations for the moment.  If he's violated the law?  Punish him as you would anyone else.   But until anything's proven, they're still allegations. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well we all have our dark desires, and are not immune. Whedon might have some of his own. Funny because the TOS episode "The Enemy Within" comes to mind, where we see the savage Kirk driven by such (such as disturbingly harassing Yeoman Rand). We're not all perfect. Heck I know I definitely have some.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Rusty0918 said:

Well we all have our dark desires, and are not immune. Whedon might have some of his own. Funny because the TOS episode "The Enemy Within" comes to mind, where we see the savage Kirk driven by such (such as disturbingly harassing Yeoman Rand). We're not all perfect. Heck I know I definitely have some.

Desires are fine. It's acting on them that's the issue, and, it doesn't justify, if those parts of the allegations are fact, 15 years of gaslighting his wife.

As for Id-Kirk, his actions are actually completely understandable in context. Now, Spock talking to Rand about Id-Kirk's "interesting qualities" (i.e. you kinda liked it, didn't you? I bet you liked it) and the leer he gives her afterwards is sick and creepy to begin with and even creepier in that it comes from Spock.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sim   

I'd say seperate the art from the artist, too.

If the allegiations are true, it's definitely rather severe and not just common vices most of us have... but I'd agree with Rusty's sentiment insofar that I think artists are not the place to expect role models or even saints, much like many other professions don't somehow elevate people morally.

Just because you work for a good cause doesn't make you more moral than others, yet the work's value can be acknowledged -- if a surgeon saves many people's lifes, that's great work, even if he personally is a scumbag.

Whedon wrote amazing female roles (I loved Buffy, for example... and I'm even among those who like Alien Resurrection), that hopefully inspired many girls (and boys, too, in terms of how they look at girls) -- so, good job. Doesn't mean he can't be a total scumbag personally.

But then, as others said, we don't really know for sure what happened... wouldn't be the first time a hurt ex-spouse "exaggerates" the situation a little. Hard to know at this point.

Edited by Sim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shoehorning in a romance at all, much less of all people, Banner and Romanov, was silly. It is never brought up again. The extended cut might explain, but I haven't seen it. It is just weird, No, it's not because Hulk and Black Widow are outsiders. So just any two outsiders can become attached? Is it only because they are, because if that's the case, Bucky could get attached to Banner also. But its not.

Also Hulk would only transform if Banner was angry, so they would not be having sex if he was angry. Still, there are ahem, pairing shipping stories out there.

We have only the world of the ex wife on the 'gas lighting' and has there been anything more? Have others come forward?

Yes, separate the man's personal life from his works.

A lot of men are cads. Let's face it. A lot of them aren't raised right. I just saw that kind of blather in a mall today, some young male dude chatting up some worker at Bed Bath and Beyond, ignoring customers, and joking about another man they mutually knew, who did something gross involving not washing properly, to a girl he's trying to impress! I did not know the context, but this young man assumed gossip about another friend of theirs was going to get him some action, as in the same breath he was commenting on her cleavage. I bet she later wrote him off as a lech, if nothing more.

It does not excuse bad behavior. I know to respect women and would not offend. We just do not know enough.

Edited by Chimera82405

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Chimera82405 said:

Shoehorning in a romance at all, much less of all people, Banner and Romanov, was silly. It is never brought up again

Unless there's a scene somewhere I'm forgetting, there has been literally zero opportunity for Banner or Romanov to bring it up or forget about it since it happened.

 

55 minutes ago, Chimera82405 said:

So just any two outsiders can become attached? Is it only because they are, because if that's the case, Bucky could get attached to Banner also. But its not.

No. But apparently they've done so. And I would have no problem believing that Bucky and Banner might have done so to the point of attraction, if they were gay or bisexual. You seem to have some strange notions about how sexuality works for most people.

 

1 hour ago, Chimera82405 said:

Also Hulk would only transform if Banner was angry,

As we saw in The Avengers, he can basically transform at will. It's getting back to Banner that's the issue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/1/2017 at 8:24 PM, prometheus59650 said:

 You seem to have some strange notions about how sexuality works for most people.

Eh? Seems a little presumptuous of you.

Also, you think a 25 to 40 foot tall man being, ahem, intimate with a 5 foot 6 woman is normal? That would be extremely painful unless she was plastic woman, or deadly. Gosh, it was a rule 34 joke and was a meme right after the movie came out, and some sicko animated it, if you go online looking (I wouldn't recommend it, although the slightly more PG 13 one is funny and not cruel). If he can change at will, then Hulk would be full sized, and she would be well, to put it with his catch phrase, "Hulk smash!" That would be masochistic of Joss to consider, and he hadn't thought of it at the time, but in later interviews he did say something to the effect of, 'Well, the romance angle just didn't work like we wanted.' . I am not sure what he wanted.

Any who, back to the rumors, any more actual news on Joss and his ex?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Chimera82405 said:

Eh? Seems a little presumptuous of you.

Also, you think a 25 to 40 foot tall man being, ahem, intimate with a 5 foot 6 woman is normal? That would be extremely painful unless she was plastic woman, or deadly. Gosh, it was a rule 34 joke and was a meme right after the movie came out, and some sicko animated it, if you go online looking (I wouldn't recommend it, although the slightly more PG 13 one is funny and not cruel). If he can change at will, then Hulk would be full sized, and she would be well, to put it with his catch phrase, "Hulk smash!" That would be masochistic of Joss to consider, and he hadn't thought of it at the time, but in later interviews he did say something to the effect of, 'Well, the romance angle just didn't work like we wanted.' . I am not sure what he wanted.

Any who, back to the rumors, any more actual news on Joss and his ex?

It doesn't seem particularly presumptuous to me given your earlier comment.

And haven't we already accepted that it would be Banner with Roamanov and not the Hulk? 

Yes, he can change at will. That's established in film. Sometimes it is triggered but HE can trigger himself to change as well as was done in the first Avengers.

And, no I'm not going to look for that nonsense.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this