• Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.You can use your Twitter or Facebook account to sign up, or register directly.

Ground fires for Disney's next investors call?

Mmoore29

Member
Original Poster
#1
We're not that far out from Disney's next investors/analysts call headed by Iger. At this moment, there are several elements of contention that I hope the company actually moves to get out in front of.

-What is Disney's official position regarding James Gunn? If nothing has changed, why is that? Can Disney justify cutting Gunn loose while having the likes of John C. Reilly and Sarah Silverman attached as the stars of Disney's biggest non-Marvel and non-Lucasfilm project of the year?
-If it is true that Disney was aware of these tweets and that Gunn apologized for them when hired in 2012, what was the basis of firing him? Did Gunn lie about the extent of the tweets? Was he not truly penitent? Did something untoward happen on the sets of the two films? If anything like this happened while working the films, it must be brought out to light.
-With the GOTG stars, especially Dave Bautista, saying they will do a third movie without Gunn, but basically threatening to purposefully give an inferior performance, what is the risk/reward ratio for this move compared to doing an about-face? Is it worth potential dissension in the company ranks over fears of being called hypocritical enablers by the far left and right social media world?
-What is the true status of the report in The Hollywood Reporter that called John Lasseter a petty tyrant who blocked female advancement and stole credit for other people's ideas? If this report has no merit (as stated by Chris Montan), and Lasseter's alcoholism and problems with personal space truly are the reasons, did Disney lean on Lasseter to leave, or did he make that decision of his own volition?
-Does Disney have anything definitive to say about the attacks on Star Wars, Kathleen Kennedy, Rian Johnson, et al? Even if it is a statement affirming their faith and standing by them and nothing else?
-With reports going on of "downscaling" Fox properties to "fit a family-friendly image" after the merger, what will become of each IP that isn't Avatar or X-Men? Is there a space for the likes of Alien, Predator, Kingsman and Planet of the Apes at the House of Mouse? If not, will those franchises be shelved or sold off to the likes of Universal, Paramount and Warner Bros.?

Radio silence has not worked well for Disney in 2018, and it is time to change strategy. It might be time to start a campaign of transparency to help navigated rough waters lurking ahead.
 
Last edited:

Mmoore29

Member
Original Poster
#2
Advertisement
In light of new reports saying that Gunn absolutely will not be hired back, the first question is now different:

-Alan Horn worked with Gunn before at Warners during his Troma days and was one of the people who angled for his firing? He knew Gunn the most of anyone prior to his hiring, thus he knew his humor? What can possibly have changed for Horn to take the opposite tack?

And there is now a bonus question as well:

-If Disney is afraid of being slammed as hypocritical if they hire Gunn back, they have already lost that battle as the Internet is already awash with comments calling them the same about a variety of other actors and filmmakers? Thus, given that situation, what could Disney possibly have to lose by reversing course?
 

MisterPenguin

Rumormonger
Premium Member
#4
-With reports going on of "downscaling" Fox properties to "fit a family-friendly image" after the merger, what will become of each IP that isn't Avatar or X-Men? Is there a space for the likes of Alien, Predator, Kingsman and Planet of the Apes at the House of Mouse? If not, will those franchises be shelved or sold off to the likes of Universal, Paramount and Warner Bros.?
Iger already said in the 3Q Q&A he's behind keeping Fox production companies and their present assets and adding their deep library to their streaming services (non-family friendly stuff will wind up on Hulu).

This is already pretty well known and not a contention at all.
 

Mmoore29

Member
Original Poster
#5
Of course the big question is whether new films would be made? I think, for example, that it's high time for a new Alien film, that isn't AvP or part of Ridley Scott's plan to continue the story from Alien: Covenant. For example, Disney would do well reviving Neill Blomkamp's planned film and doing right by the franchise for the first time since 1992.

Much of the reports in that thread regarding Star Wars are the usual continued clickbait and fake news with narratives to push. Like no one else in Disney has had to do director replacements or reshoots? Neither automatically makes a film bad. Not to mention, "poor performance" for The Last Jedi? Really? You call $1.33 billion in the box office, a 91 on Rotten Tomatoes, and an A+ on CinemaScore "poor reception"?

Alan Horn is a backstabbing, cowardly weasel with an inability to lead. He was the one who hired Gunn and personally accepted his 2012 apology, and for him to shiv Gunn like this is beyond the pale. The idea that he and Walt Disney Studios are superior to Walt Disney Animation, Pixar, Marvel and Lucasfilm is utterly absurd, as they should have complete autonomy and only report to Iger and the board, not someone like Horn.

Horn is also clearly responsible for the policy of radio silence, as well muddying the waters the way they have been. The fact that the talks about "scaling down projects to fit a family-friendly image" comes from him, and to basically act like Disney has never done projects like Beaches, Pretty Woman and What's Love Got to Do With It? is truly baffling and irresponsible.

Iger should step in, clarify all of this, and reverse Horn's poor decisions as much as he is able. Simple as that.
 
Top Bottom