[Alleged] Dastardly Deeds Thread

Report: Marvel Wants James Gunn Back for ‘Guardians 3′ & They’re Trying to Convince Disney
http://collider.com/james-gunn-fired-marvel-disney/#guardians-of-the-galaxy-3

Every day I ache a little bit more. I haven't wanted anything as bad as I want this in a really long time. Please Disney...not only for Guardians 3, but for Marvel going forward. Do the right thing. YOU ARE DISNEY. Do I really have to remind you of that? You own EVERYTHING. People cannot boycott you, unless they are gonna be dead or off planet. Do the right thing. He acknowledged and apologized LONG BEFORE you hired him. The trilogy HAS TO be completed by James Gunn. He IS the Guardians.
 
As I was flipping channels last night, it was really weird seeing Chris Hardwick on America's Got Talent, with his great analysis and telling the girl he golden buzzed how amazing she was and his gentle comedic timing and DAMN IT HE'S TOO DAMN LIKEABLE
 
ucsdguy1 said:
As I was flipping channels last night, it was really weird seeing Chris Hardwick on America's Got Talent, with his great analysis and telling the girl he golden buzzed how amazing she was and his gentle comedic timing and DAMN IT HE'S TOO DAMN LIKEABLE
Click to expand...


Odd, Miss Dykstra has been very active on the Twitter today. That's after she said "she wasn't looking for an eye for an eye" type justice. Ok. So she chose to NOT co-operate with any of the investigations that were initiated. Fine. Still feel like she has a point to make, then initiate charges. Anything else feels a little disingenuous. You can't keep trying him in the court of public opinion if you aren't going to prove it/substantiate your claims.
 
jerseydevil said:
Odd, Miss Dykstra has been very active on the Twitter today. That's after she said "she wasn't looking for an eye for an eye" type justice. Ok. So she chose to NOT co-operate with any of the investigations that were initiated. Fine. Still feel like she has a point to make, then initiate charges. Anything else feels a little disingenuous. You can't keep trying him in the court of public opinion if you aren't going to prove it/substantiate your claims.
Click to expand...

JD: Perhaps this is an oversimplification but it could be that she does not have the means to hire an attorney and spend eight to ten grand to prove her ex is kind of dick. Sorry, alleged dick. So the court of public opinion is her only option. Just something to consider.
 
What party? said:
JD: Perhaps this is an oversimplification but it could be that she does not have the means to hire an attorney and spend eight to ten grand to prove her ex is kind of dick. Sorry, alleged dick. So the court of public opinion is her only option. Just something to consider.
Click to expand...

Fair point, but I am pretty sure she could find an attorney, especially a Gloria Allred type, who would take the case. And, if she was lacking in funds, she has had more than ample opportunity to back up her claims. To keep saying she isn't trying to punish him, while continuing to rehash the same vague threats isn't really helping her credibility. I'm not saying she doesn't have proof, but if you aren't going to share it you can't keep holding it over his head. And I know...there is at least one person out there who considers my opinion is 'victim shaming', so I should probably quit while I am ahead.
 
jerseydevil said:
Fair point, but I am pretty sure she could find an attorney, especially a Gloria Allred type, who would take the case. And, if she was lacking in funds, she has had more than ample opportunity to back up her claims. To keep saying she isn't trying to punish him, while continuing to rehash the same vague threats isn't really helping her credibility. I'm not saying she doesn't have proof, but if you aren't going to share it you can't keep holding it over his head. And I know...there is at least one person out there who considers my opinion is 'victim shaming', so I should probably quit while I am ahead.
Click to expand...

Hmmm. Welp maybe this is a non confrontational way dealing with this situation but I am taking the broad view. We are on the cusp of social change so evidence of all indiscretions big and small are important to the cause for perspective sake. It can't all be a bad guy that raped models with the promise of jobs. There has to be the petty cases as well, my girlfriend cheated on me, boom, blackballed. Maybe you can view Chris' case like one of those criminally brilliant crime dramas from the 70's everybody's dirty, wrong and petty but there is still an injustice. Yes, yes?

As far as her motives, actors run a little shall we say thirsty so if i understand social media* that's where people get hydrated. So perhaps her re-engaging in the "debate" is being unable to turn down that social media attention. Compulsion and whatnot.

The 'victim shaming' label seems harsh but that person absolutely knows you better than I and out of context it is difficult to decipher. So if it really bothers you i guess ask them to expand on their thoughts and see how they got there.

*resident weirdo: not on social media.
 
jerseydevil said:
Chloe Dykstra Comments on Possible Litigation Regarding Chris Hardwick Allegations
http://comicbook.com/thewalkingdead/2018/08/10/chloe-dykstra-statement-chris-hardwick-litigation/


remember, she isn't an 'eye for an eye' kinda gal
Click to expand...

God forbid this was one of your family members Chris Hardwick may have crushed professionally and personally.
I don't get the feeling this is a 'sour grapes' (for lack of a better term) smear.
I get that you like Chris, but damn man. . . what if everything she has said is true?
In a world that has historically sided with the offender in cases like this, I am very willing to allow some leeway in the case of the accuser until we can bring to light what has truly happened.
(also, I listened to Hardwick's Nerdist interviews over the last few years while commuting to work in Chicago. I find his 'some day I could be a dad' reasoning to be off-putting at best and possibly damning at worst. I would like to see everyone put on the sidelines and all of this figured out)
 
jerseydevil said:
Fair point, but I am pretty sure she could find an attorney, especially a Gloria Allred type, who would take the case. And, if she was lacking in funds, she has had more than ample opportunity to back up her claims. To keep saying she isn't trying to punish him, while continuing to rehash the same vague threats isn't really helping her credibility. I'm not saying she doesn't have proof, but if you aren't going to share it you can't keep holding it over his head. And I know...there is at least one person out there who considers my opinion is 'victim shaming', so I should probably quit while I am ahead.
Click to expand...

Maybe. I would probably be shaken and maybe a bit illogical for quite a while if I were a person put in this circumstance.
We can agree that the James Gunn firing is complete bull**** though.
 
NobleSavage said:
God forbid this was one of your family members Chris Hardwick may have crushed professionally and personally.
I don't get the feeling this is a 'sour grapes' (for lack of a better term) smear.
I get that you like Chris, but damn man. . . what if everything she has said is true?
In a world that has historically sided with the offender in cases like this, I am very willing to allow some leeway in the case of the accuser until we can bring to light what has truly happened.
(also, I listened to Hardwick's Nerdist interviews over the last few years while commuting to work in Chicago. I find his 'some day I could be a dad' reasoning to be off-putting at best and possibly damning at worst. I would like to see everyone put on the sidelines and all of this figured out)
Click to expand...

And what if everything she said is a lie? What if it were a family member of yours who was falsely accused. This rush to judgement is dangerous. Yes, victims need to be protected. But not at the cost of innocent people. I could go into all my reasons for feeling she is less than truthful, but why? You have your opinion, I have mine. WITHOUT PROOF as useless as male nipples. She was asked to co-operate with multiple investigations, she refused...as she was 'not protected'. Fine. Then lawyer up and present your evidence. Otherwise, don't claim to not be trying to punish him, meanwhile you keep threatening to expose him over and over again. If she has proof, it shouldn't be that hard to back up her claims. And, if true, I will be the first to apologize. It's just time to show her hand . Look, everytime someone makes one of these claims, there should automatically be a police investigation, with consequences for the guilty. I just can't abide the international court of Twitter. It's madness.
 


The world is a sadder place today. And the joke of it...Disney is still going to use James Gunn's script. So...not only do they turn their back on a passionate team member, who, let's be honest, gave the Marvel movies the boost, and credibility they needed. He feverishly promoted...and put everything into his project. So his reward...a kick to the curb, and oh, btw...we are going to complete your vision, just without you. So, the misguided a-holes that prompted this will still be pissed. And the FANS, who spoke very clearly about what they wanted...well, **** all them. They will buy anything we sell. Feige is complicit. ****ing toady who still wants to lick bootheel despite OWNING his job. I will be honest, since Guardians and Gunn are soooooo personal to me. I may not post Marvel news for a while...if ever again. I cannot promote a company that takes the cowards way out. I will finish with A4:Infinity War 2, but...that may very well be my last Marvel movie. Shameful and tragic.
 
so after seeing the Meg last night, please lord let no one ever come out and say anything about Jason Statham. Please.
 
jerseydevil said:
Odd, Miss Dykstra has been very active on the Twitter today. That's after she said "she wasn't looking for an eye for an eye" type justice. Ok. So she chose to NOT co-operate with any of the investigations that were initiated. Fine. Still feel like she has a point to make, then initiate charges. Anything else feels a little disingenuous. You can't keep trying him in the court of public opinion if you aren't going to prove it/substantiate your claims.
Click to expand...

I'm sure she's getting a ton of people online, like you, but on her actual accounts, who are making these "Prove it! Or just shut up and leave our boy alone!" demands.

If she wanted to make a bigger deal of this whole thing, she probably could. If she has incriminating evidence on him and she wanted to, she probably could. She's not out there complaining about how he still has jobs or is back on the Nerdist masthead. She's not organizing boycotts. She seems okay with letting him come back and do his thing.

She wanted the ordeal off her chest. She felt like she needed to air it out the way she did in order to move on. She didn't feel like she needed to cooperate with any investigation to get him fired. Especially one that might compromise her legally. But when HardBoys come at her saying she should be sued or something (that lying b***), she just pipes up and says, "He's welcome to if he feels like he needs to, but I have the goods on him, so best we just go our separate ways and let this one go."

Remember, she also says he got her blackballed and cost her work once they ended. So, in her mind, he can be at least a little vindictive.


So she's not holding it over his head like a sword. She's showing that she has a shield.
 
darby said:
I'm sure she's getting a ton of people online, like you, but on her actual accounts, who are making these "Prove it! Or just shut up and leave our boy alone!" demands.

If she wanted to make a bigger deal of this whole thing, she probably could. If she has incriminating evidence on him and she wanted to, she probably could. She's not out there complaining about how he still has jobs or is back on the Nerdist masthead. She's not organizing boycotts. She seems okay with letting him come back and do his thing.

She wanted the ordeal off her chest. She felt like she needed to air it out the way she did in order to move on. She didn't feel like she needed to cooperate with any investigation to get him fired. Especially one that might compromise her legally. But when HardBoys come at her saying she should be sued or something (that lying b***), she just pipes up and says, "He's welcome to if he feels like he needs to, but I have the goods on him, so best we just go our separate ways and let this one go."

Remember, she also says he got her blackballed and cost her work once they ended. So, in her mind, he can be at least a little vindictive.


So she's not holding it over his head like a sword. She's showing that she has a shield.
Click to expand...

In your scenario, you are assuming she is at least telling a partial truth. In which case all your arguments are sound. In my scenario, where I question her 'truth'...the current state of 'if you post it, they will believe you' on Twitter allows her to constantly give people a reason to continue to assume guilt. Trial by social media is becoming an alternative to actually having to prove anything. If you have ever been falsely accused...well, it would give you a different perspective.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Now Chirping

  • No one is chatting at the moment.

Share this page

Back
Top