Live-Action ‘Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs’

CaptinEO

Well-Known Member
I think Disney knows she has gone too far. Rather than draw attention to the comments with a public repudiation, they will quietly blacklist her and that will be the end of things. It’s not like they can reshoot the whole movie without her.
Releasing a movie with her as the star is endorsing her even if it's indirect. They should distance themselves. I'm curious if we see a full promo press tour with Rachel in March.
 

Vegas Disney Fan

Well-Known Member
Releasing a movie with her as the star is endorsing her even if it's indirect. They should distance themselves. I'm curious if we see a full promo press tour with Rachel in March.
I don’t think they have a choice, they’ve spent a couple hundred million, they need to try to recoup some of that money. I will be shocked if we see her on a publicity tour though, Disney knows she’s a PR disaster and the less she says the better off the box office will be. Her and Gadot together could make for some tense interviews after her free Pal comments also, I’d watch just to see the fireworks.
 
Last edited:

Chi84

Premium Member
I "think" Burbank DID have the right to fire her. She doesn't care about "that"

It's the job harassment and Burbank's attempt to ruin her career that will give Gina the win.

Let's say you make a political tweet. Your boss hated it and tried to force you to publicly address the company to shame you and to atone for your sins. After you did that, they fire you They then called your agent forced them to drop you as a client and threaten them to never help you get another job again. Your boss then publicly shames your name online and tries to get you blacklisted in that city you live in?

Would you not feel happy about this?

This is what the judge saw and allowed Gina to move forward against Burbank.

This is not about a simple "firing" problem.
You’re speculating way too much on what are now just allegations. For a dismissal without fact-finding, the court is required to take the allegations as true. But that doesn’t mean the court believes those allegations or that they will be proved at trial.
 

Chi84

Premium Member
I think that Burbank "likes" what she says. I think that Burbank helped to put those ideas in her head in the last three years.

Burbank just want's Zegler to keep those words PRIVATE amongst friends and coworkers "only"

Burbank is forced to distance themselves from the person THEY helped create because they know the PR looks bad. They know that most of the country does not think like "Hollywood" does and will frown on Zegler.
Most of the country does not like Hollywood? That’s a bit of a bizarre statement.
 

DKampy

Well-Known Member
YES, your boss has the right to fire you...but your boss does NOT have the right to attack and harass you in a dozen OTHER ways. This is why the judge allowed the case to move forward. The judge saw preliminary evidence to support Gina's claim.

The First Amendment does NOT protect you when you harass and slander that employee. No boss in ANY state is allowed to do THAT to you.
How did Disney harass Gina……I must have missed this
 

donaldtoo

Well-Known Member
Most of the country does not like Hollywood? That’s a bit of a bizarre statement.

What’s actually “bizarre” is you misquoting the previous poster…they clearly said “does not think like Hollywood.”
And, at this point, it should be pretty obvious most of the country doesn’t even come close to thinking like muti-million-dollar, gated community, Hollywood, or otherwise, hypocrite elites.
Unfortunately, HUBS is still rampant in this country.
 

Chi84

Premium Member
What’s actually “bizarre” is you misquoting the previous poster…they clearly said “does not think like Hollywood.”
And, at this point, it should be pretty obvious most of the country doesn’t even come close to thinking like muti-million-dollar, gated community, Hollywood, hypocrite or otherwise, elites.
Unfortunately, HUBS is still rampant in this country.
Thanks for the clarification, although I doubt people give Hollywood much thought one way or the other.
 

Chi84

Premium Member
How did Disney harass Gina……I must have missed this
I believe she alleged “online bullying” of some sort and that she had to do a Zoom call with members of the LGBTQ+ community after making some derogatory comments relating to trans people. But I haven’t read the actual pleading.
 

Chi84

Premium Member
Indeed, true.
But, the funniest part is they actually still think they’re relevant…!!!!! :hilarious:🤪:hilarious:
Hollywood is relevant to people who enjoy seeing films, and there are many who do.

The problem is that people for some reason get far too invested in the lives and opinions of the actors.

I personally loved Gina’s character and I’m disappointed that she is no longer playing that role. But I can understand Disney wanting to disassociate themselves from the particular opinions she expressed.
 

Cliff

Well-Known Member
I believe she alleged “online bullying” of some sort and that she had to do a Zoom call with members of the LGBTQ+ community after making some derogatory comments relating to trans people. But I haven’t read the actual pleading.
Gina claims that Burbank tried to force her into joining a couple of large Zoom gatherings of maybe 45 LBGTQIA++ staff and demanded that she atone for her sins, humiliate herself and admit her prejudice sin and personally apologize to that staff. Gina refused multiple coercions to that and supposedly has plenty of receipts to prove it. She says Burbank publicly harassed her in several ways to publicaly shame her.

Gina claims Burbank threatened her agent to drop her or Burbank would blacklist any and every "agency" that tried to work with Gina in the future. Gina claims to have multiple forms of evidence of harassment of not just her...but her associates too.

Burbank essentially not just simply "fired" her,...but they attacked her and went after her throat and tried to ruin her entire career in every way they could by using the FULL power and influence of the company against her.

Could you image your boss doing all that to "you"....before and after they fired you for your tweets they didn't like?

If Gina is correct and the court gets the emails and texts and witness testimony that proves it? Holy crap,...2025 is going to be ugly on a PR level. I can see the future President and the future DoJ taking that win and exploding it into the stratosphere.

If it's all proven to be a fake, lie? Then Burbank is fine.

I can tell you this...when Elon Musk's lawyers saw this case and asked to see her evidence, they IMMEDIATELY scooped it up and accepted her case...free of charge. Whatever they saw?...they are licking their chops over it.
 

Vegas Disney Fan

Well-Known Member
Hollywood is relevant to people who enjoy seeing films, and there are many who do.

The problem is that people for some reason get far too invested in the lives and opinions of the actors.

I personally loved Gina’s character and I’m disappointed that she is no longer playing that role. But I can understand Disney wanting to disassociate themselves from the particular opinions she expressed.
I preferred when celebrities were glamorous mythical figures, social media has shown they are just as biased and flawed as the rest of us, in many cases far worse.

The “Never meet your heroes” adage has been proven correct.
 

donaldtoo

Well-Known Member
Hollywood is relevant to people who enjoy seeing films, and there are many who do.

The problem is that people for some reason get far too invested in the lives and opinions of the actors.

I personally loved Gina’s character and I’m disappointed that she is no longer playing that role. But I can understand Disney wanting to disassociate themselves from the particular opinions she expressed.

OK, I’m goin’ out on a limb here, because I haven’t read even remotely close to this whole thread, but (IIRC) wasn’t there someone else involved here that strongly expressed an opposing opinion to Gina’s views that no disassociation was applied to…?!
Seems like it should have been applied equally, either way.
 

Chi84

Premium Member
OK, I’m goin’ out on a limb here, because I haven’t read even remotely close to this whole thread, but (IIRC) wasn’t there someone else involved here that strongly expressed an opposing opinion to Gina’s views that no disassociation was applied to…?!
Seems like it should have been applied equally, either way.
Why? Disney is allowed to have a particular viewpoint that agrees with some statements and abhors others.

What opposing opinion are you talking about? Her statements were dismissive of the Holocaust. If someone expressed an opposing opinion, wouldn’t that be a good thing?
 

donaldtoo

Well-Known Member
Why? Disney is allowed to have a particular viewpoint that agrees with some statements and abhors others.

What opposing opinion are you talking about? Her statements were dismissive of the Holocaust. If someone expressed an opposing opinion, wouldn’t that be a good thing?

Yes, of course, opposing opinions are beyond obviously fine, but equal application needs to be applied for all involved.
As far as the Holocaust goes, anyone that doesn’t believe that happened is brain dead.
But, hey, free speech. You know, it’s kinda’ a thing in this country, and has been for darn near 250 years.
The best part about it is anyone can put anything they want to out there, and it’s up to us to decide.
But, interference in recent years has been beyond disgustingly manipulative.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom