Disney Star Wars General Discussion

[SmytheKing]

You're assuming that they're willing to settle, but Musk seems to want to drag Disney through the mud and Carano wants vindication, so I'm not sure that settling will be enough for them. It won't matter how convenient it is for Disney to settle if the other side isn't willing to.

...and her lawyers will tell her to take the offer because no matter how bad Musk wants to do whatever he wants, he doesn't have a say in the matter.

Look, she has to prove (1) that she was an employee. She wasn't. She's a contractor and her contract was done. (2) that she was "fired" for something she said. She wasn't fired so that's going to be pretty hard to prove. The season was done and they chose to not bring her character back for anything else. Shows end up not happening in Hollywood all the time. They didn't recast her. She didn't have a contract to do another show.

This. Is. Nuisance. Hell, you said so yourself with the suggestion that Musk wants to hurt Disney and she wants "vindication". It's so odd to watch you play devils advocate for something like this when it's so transparently obvious what is going on. Even more so when it goes against your self-admitted beliefs.

Lastly, it's always amusing to watch the people who talk about personal responsibility and who want to get rid of government protections go running to that government to protect them from their own consequences. The fact that they never have to stand by their own principles IS infuriating however.

 

[Osprey]

...and her lawyers will tell her to take the offer because no matter how bad Musk wants to do whatever he wants, he doesn't have a say in the matter.

Look, she has to prove (1) that she was an employee. She wasn't. She's a contractor and her contract was done. (2) that she was "fired" for something she said. She wasn't fired so that's going to be pretty hard to prove. The season was done and they chose to not bring her character back for anything else. Shows end up not happening in Hollywood all the time. They didn't recast her. She didn't have a contract to do another show.

First of all, you said earlier that Disney would argue that she was let go for "insubordination." In order to be insubordinate, you have to first be subordinate, which means an employee in this context. Also, she details in her lawsuit how she was warned about her social media behavior, had to endure long phone calls with HR and was required to meet with minority representatives as part of her "re-education program." That makes it sound like she was considered an employee, whether she was working at the time or not.

Second, as I suggested before, she doesn't have to prove that she was an employee. The statutes that she's suing under also apply to hiring practices. For example, just as you can't fire someone for her political beliefs, you can't refuse to hire her for them, either. So, as long as she was a candidate for upcoming projects, it doesn't matter whether she was technically an employee or not.

This. Is. Nuisance. Hell, you said so yourself with the suggestion that Musk wants to hurt Disney and she wants "vindication". It's so odd to watch you play devils advocate for something like this when it's so transparently obvious what is going on. Even more so when it goes against your self-admitted beliefs.

Lastly, it's always amusing to watch the people who talk about personal responsibility and who want to get rid of government protections go running to that government to protect them from their own consequences. The fact that they never have to stand by their own principles IS infuriating however.

What I find odd is arguing why she has "no case" without having read the lawsuit and then getting annoyed that someone who has is correcting you.

 

[RobBrown4PM]

Makes sense that Lucas came to the support of the current board. He is both a heavy stockholder, and he hates Corporate financiers (I.e. Hedge funds and the like)

 

[johnjm22]

Disney Argues It Had a First Amendment Right to Fire Gina Carano for Offensive Posts

Disney moved to throw out Gina Carano's lawsuit on Wednesday, arguing it had a First Amendment right to fire her over her offensive posts.

variety.com

 

[PunchImlach is Alive]

Disney Argues It Had a First Amendment Right to Fire Gina Carano for Offensive Posts

Disney moved to throw out Gina Carano's lawsuit on Wednesday, arguing it had a First Amendment right to fire her over her offensive posts.

variety.com

Trivializing the Holocaust to score political talking points is just about the lowest of the low. I'm no Disney or Star Wars fan but Disney has a responsibility to their shareholders to make money. Having someone flippantly compare their privileged experience on social media to that of the Holocaust does, in fact, hurt their bottom line if their audience is just going to start avoiding anything the person saying it is in. People can say whatever dumb thing comes to their head on social media but don't come crying when people just don't want to associate with you anymore. We used to call those things "consequences" and I'm not really sure this pivot to shamelessness is working out for some of these people. Gina committed the biggest bag fumble of all time. That's on her and her alone.

 

[johnjm22]

Trivializing the Holocaust to score political talking points is just about the lowest of the low. I'm no Disney or Star Wars fan but Disney has a responsibility to their shareholders to make money. Having someone flippantly compare their privileged experience on social media to that of the Holocaust does, in fact, hurt their bottom line if their audience is just going to start avoiding anything the person saying it is in. People can say whatever dumb thing comes to their head on social media but don't come crying when people just don't want to associate with you anymore. We used to call those things "consequences" and I'm not really sure this pivot to shamelessness is working out for some of these people. Gina committed the biggest bag fumble of all time. That's on her and her alone.

I don't agree with your assessment of what she said. I thought it was pretty much nothing.

But I do agree an employer should be able to fire an employee if they say something vile enough in certain circumstances.

The irony is that it's left leaning type laws that are being used to go after Disney in this situation.

 

[johnjm22]

This is the argument I expected Disney to make.

They can simply say she was never fired at all. They can say they had no more work for her.

Even if the "Rangers of the Republic" or whatever show was planned, the fact of the matter is that plans change all the time. Tons of SW projects have been shelved. They can say her character not being in S3 of the Mandalorian was a creative decision.

 

[Osprey]

Trivializing the Holocaust to score political talking points is just about the lowest of the low. I'm no Disney or Star Wars fan but Disney has a responsibility to their shareholders to make money. Having someone flippantly compare their privileged experience on social media to that of the Holocaust does, in fact, hurt their bottom line if their audience is just going to start avoiding anything the person saying it is in. People can say whatever dumb thing comes to their head on social media but don't come crying when people just don't want to associate with you anymore. We used to call those things "consequences" and I'm not really sure this pivot to shamelessness is working out for some of these people. Gina committed the biggest bag fumble of all time. That's on her and her alone.

She didn't trivialize the Holocaust. She did the opposite by using it as an example to show how serious something current is. It's no different than what Pedro Pascal did when he compared border containment camps to Nazi concentration camps. I don't really like either of them using the Holocaust to score political points, but they didn't trivialize it. They used the severity of it to strengthen their points.

The irony is that it's left leaning type laws that are being used to go after Disney in this situation.

Also, Disney is defending itself by citing a court decision in favor of the Boy Scouts of America being allowed to discriminate against homosexuals. Everything's amusingly upside down.

This is the argument I expected Disney to make.

They can simply say she was never fired at all. They can say they had no more work for her.

Even if the "Rangers of the Republic" or whatever show was planned, the fact of the matter is that plans change all the time. Tons of SW projects have been shelved. They can say her character not being in S3 of the Mandalorian was a creative decision.

It's a good argument. The counter argument will likely be that the timing of her "firing" and reference to her tweet in it suggests that it wasn't a creative decision and the repeated attempts to reform her imply that they had plans for her in the future and constituted pressure to conform or not be hired for those future projects, which is still illegal under California law.

 

[PunchImlach is Alive]

She didn't trivialize the Holocaust. She did the opposite by using it as an example to show how serious something current is. It's no different than what Pedro Pascal did when he compared border containment camps to Nazi concentration camps. I don't really like either of them using the Holocaust to score political points, but they didn't trivialize it. They used the severity of it to strengthen their points.

You do not need to invoke the Holocaust because your perception is that you are part of a persecuted minority. That's hyperbole. I'm suspect survivors of the Holocaust are going to be very empathic to Gina's plight. They do, however, recognize exactly what that is when they see kids separated from their parents and they have spoken out about exactly what they see. It may make people uncomfortable to hear that but this isn't the first time America has had concentration camps. You can call them "border containment camps" if that helps you sleep better at night but they do meet the very definition of a concentration camp.

Comparing what Pedro said to what Gina said is apples to oranges. One is textbook and the other is not.

 

[x Tame Impala]

You do not need to invoke the Holocaust because your perception is that you are part of a persecuted minority. That's hyperbole. I'm suspect survivors of the Holocaust are going to be very empathic to Gina's plight. They do, however, recognize exactly what that is when they see kids separated from their parents and they have spoken out about exactly what they see. It may make people uncomfortable to hear that but this isn't the first time America has had concentration camps. You can call them "border containment camps" if that helps you sleep better at night but they do meet the very definition of a concentration camp.

Comparing what Pedro said to what Gina said is apples to oranges. One is textbook and the other is not.

You don’t think it’s a little disingenuous to compare Japanese internment camps and these border camps to Nazi work/concentration camps where they were starving/torturing/murdering/over-working/experimenting on people?

 

[PunchImlach is Alive]

You don’t think it’s a little disingenuous to compare Japanese internment camps and these border camps to Nazi work/concentration camps where they were starving/torturing/murdering/over-working/experimenting on people?

Those are extermination camps and it's pretty important to know the difference and that history.

 

[x Tame Impala]

Those are extermination camps and it's pretty important to know the difference and that history.

Concentration camps vs. extermination centers

70.auschwitz.org

Oh yeah all those lucky people in the concentration camps where they were worked to death and kept in physically dangerous conditions for the sole intention of eliminating them from society. What history are you speaking of? You seem to be mistaken with your claims.

I couldn’t care less about Gina Carano but anyone comparing America’s imperfect handling of illegal immigrants choosing to come here and the crisis it’s causing at and past our borders to Nazi concentration camps is a complete f***ing fool.

 

[johnjm22]

It's a good argument. The counter argument will likely be that the timing of her "firing" and reference to her tweet in it suggests that it wasn't a creative decision and the repeated attempts to reform her imply that they had plans for her in the future and constituted pressure to conform or not be hired for those future projects, which is still illegal under California law.

I mean it's pretty obvious to everyone why she was fired. I'm just not sure what the level of proof needed in a civil case is to determine that. Direct proof might be difficult.

I noticed when Lucasfilm put out their official statement, they chose their words carefully. Never saying she was fired, but rather "not currently employed".

That said, it's possible there's evidence we don't know about. Like internal company emails discussing her "firing".

In the original lawsuit filing it also says this:

34. Disney’s then-CEO Bob Chapek has been quoted as saying
Carano was fired “because she didn’t align with Company values.” In
doing so, Chapek said those company values are “values that are
universal: values of respect, values of decency, values of integrity, and
values of inclusion.”

 

[Osprey]

Comparing what Pedro said to what Gina said is apples to oranges. One is textbook and the other is not.

The point is that they both invoked the Holocaust because of how serious it was, which is the opposite of trivializing it, and if comparing things to the Holocaust that aren't as serious is trivializing it, then both are guilty.

I mean it's pretty obvious to everyone why she was fired. I'm just not sure what the level of proof needed in a civil case is to determine that. Direct proof might be difficult.

Yeah, it could be hard to prove, but I would think that her side would be given the chance to prove it, rather than the whole thing dismissed, as Disney is asking for.

That said, it's possible there's evidence we don't know about. Like internal company emails discussing her "firing".

I'm sure that she can at least provide e-mails promising her projects and pressuring her to conform, which might well not be enough, but it's possible that someone wasn't careful and outright warned her that not falling in line would jeopardize her future employment.

 

[PunchImlach is Alive]

Concentration camps vs. extermination centers

70.auschwitz.org

Oh yeah all those lucky people in the concentration camps where they were worked to death and kept in physically dangerous conditions for the sole intention of eliminating them from society. What history are you speaking of? You seem to be mistaken with your claims.

I couldn’t care less about Gina Carano but anyone comparing America’s imperfect handling of illegal immigrants choosing to come here and the crisis it’s causing at and past our borders to Nazi concentration camps is a complete f***ing fool.

Congratulations. You made it to the first page of Google. Let me know when you get into a few more chapters.

Here's one of the those "complete f***ing fools" you were referring to I guess

Holocaust Survivor: Yes, the Border Detention Centers Are Like Concentration Camps

Republicans think comparing the cramped border detention centers to concentration camps is offensive to Holocaust survivors. Ruth Bloch, 93, begs to differ.

www.thedailybeast.com

 

[x Tame Impala]

Congratulations. You made it to the first page of Google. Let me know when you get into a few more chapters.

Here's one of the those "complete f***ing fools" you were referring to I guess

Holocaust Survivor: Yes, the Border Detention Centers Are Like Concentration Camps

Republicans think comparing the cramped border detention centers to concentration camps is offensive to Holocaust survivors. Ruth Bloch, 93, begs to differ.

www.thedailybeast.com

Your article is blocked. Message me privately if you want to continue this discussion, it’s not thread-related.

 

[johnjm22]

Disney ‘Star Wars’ Box-Office Profits Fail To Cover Cost Of Buying Lucasfilm

Box office profits generated by Disney's Star Wars movies have fallen $2.8 billion short of covering the media giant's purchase of the sci-fi saga’s creator, Lucasfilm.

www.forbes.com

Interesting article. This directly contradicts the narrative Disney was pushing to investors about the financial "success" of SW.

Last month, Disney released a 67-page presentation singing the praises of its chief executive Bob Iger in a bid to convince stockholders to side with him in a battle with activist investors.

One of its key boasts was about the supposedly spellbinding return on investment generated by the franchises that Disney acquired under Iger.

The presentation gives the impression that Disney's Star Wars trilogy generated a 2.9 times return on the purchase of Lucasfilm...

However, buried in the fine print is the revelation that the purchase price of Lucasfilm isn't even included in the ROI calculation. Instead, it is purely based on the box office performance of Disney's Star Wars trilogy, its two spinoff movies, merchandise, DVD and Blu Ray sales.

Analysis of more than 800 pages of company filings has revealed that the cost of making Disney's five Star Wars movies hit a total of $2.1 billion, peaking at $567.3 million (£449.1 million) on The Force Awakens. However, that's just the start.

 

[x Tame Impala]

They spent over $560 million to sloppily remake A New Hope

 

[Osprey]

Disney ‘Star Wars’ Box-Office Profits Fail To Cover Cost Of Buying Lucasfilm

Box office profits generated by Disney's Star Wars movies have fallen $2.8 billion short of covering the media giant's purchase of the sci-fi saga’s creator, Lucasfilm.

www.forbes.com

Interesting article. This directly contradicts the narrative Disney was pushing to investors about the financial "success" of SW.

I read that article earlier today. Calculating the return on investment without including the substantial up-front investment but with including estimated profits over the next 10 years is egregious deception. It's bad enough that Disney tries to fool the public, but they apparently even try to fool their own investors and board members.

 

[Shockmaster]

I read that article earlier today. Calculating the return on investment without including the substantial up-front investment but with including estimated profits over the next 10 years is egregious deception. It's bad enough that Disney tries to fool the public, but they apparently even try to fool their own investors and board members.

I wonder why the usual bots around here who always defend Disney and Lucasfilm are so quiet?