James Gunn skirts faux controversy as 'Guardians Of The Galaxy' closes in on cast
Comments from two years ago suddenly ignite some online indignation
I can see why you'd want someone very serious to handle this film.
Are you a fan of Motion Captured?
Sign up to get the latest updates instantly.
Hey, guys, I don't want to speak out of turn, but I have a sneaking suspicion that James Gunn, who is writing and directing "Guardians Of The Galaxy" for Marvel, likes really, really dirty jokes.
I can't prove it, but it's just one of those feelings I get. Maybe it's because I've seen his Troma movies. Or because I've watched his "PG Porn" shorts or because I saw "Super," his deranged little riff on the superhero film, or because he is pretty much a non-stop blast of filthy and funny on Twitter. If you've seen "Slither," then I think you've got the basic idea, which is that there is no line James Gunn is unafraid to cross for no other reason that It amuses him.
The first thing I heard today about "Guardians" was that they're about to start screen-testing guys for the lead, and it's a cool short list of guys who could all bring something different to the part. I like Joel Edgerton a lot, but don't know Jack Huston at all. I haven't watched "Boardwalk Empire" yet, and if he's in something else I've seen, I don't recognize the name. Jim Sturgess was really good in "Cloud Atlas," and I'll have my full review of Eddie Redmayne in "Les Miserables" soon. The name that mosts interests me on this list is Lee Pace, who was really good in "Twilght: Breaking Dawn, Part 2." Yes, I know I just put the phrase "really good" in the same sentence as the title of that film, but Pace shows up and it's like he's just stepped in from another much more fun version of the franchise. He could be a great unexpected choice for Peter Quill, who is half-human, half-alien, and the leader of the Guardians.
And that's enough attention for one day for a film that's not coming out until 2015, but then for some reason, a piece that ran on Gunn's personal blog back on February 17, 2011 just turned into a "thing." I put that in quotes because I have trouble taking the controversy very seriously. Gunn ran a list called "The 50 Superheroes You Most Want To Have Sex With: 2nd Annual Poll Results!" and it's a long article full of photos and dirty jokes. The one that made me laugh was number 21, Nightwing, but honestly, it's the sort of thing that has been fodder for gratuitously dirty jokes since people have been reading superhero comics. Par for the course. Nothing particularly new or breathtakingly shocking. I've read the think-pieces about how he's responsible for "slut-shaming" these fictional characters and I've seen people who think the language of the piece is truly homophobic, and you ultimately have to decide if he crossed a line you're not comfortable with... or maybe you don't, since it's not like you're being forced to read it.
Is it just because he's directing a big-budget superhero film that people are suddenly upset? When something old like this goes viral, I always wonder about the motivation and the timing. Someone had to make the conscious decision that this thing was going to be brought back from the dead right now. I mean, it's not even on his actual site anymore. You can see it thanks to Google cache, but Gunn took it down. Not that I think he particularly should have taken it down. If you're offended by it, I would never tell you not to be. I would just tell you not to read his website, and that in general, that's his voice. That's the sort of thing he finds funny. And I don't understand when we suddenly turned this corner in pop culture where we want everyone to round off their personal quirks and voices. I would think the reason Marvel hired Gunn was precisely because he doesn't have the same sensibility as everyone else making mainstream movies. When they hired Shane Black for "Iron Man 3," that was not the most immediate logical decision, but it fits in a way that makes it exciting. I think Gunn being the guy at the helm of a movie about a bunch of aliens that include one dude who is made of plant matter and another dude who is a three-foot-tall laser-gun wielding raccoon with a bad attitude is fiendishly clever on Marvel's part. It's a weird property, so why not steer the boat into the weird? Why not embrace it without reservation? Why not go big with it?
I am sure the list Gunn published doesn't sit well with every comic fan, male or female, but I'm equally sure that there are many people who will never spare it another thought, and who will see "Guardians" (or not) regardless of what they think of something he published on his blog.
I just want to see who they hire as the lead. It seems like one of the first times in a while where there's almost no preconception of who a character like this is, making it easy to do almost anything they want with it.
"Guardians Of The Galaxy" arrives in theaters August 1, 2014.
News From Our Partners
-
'The Voice' Recap: Top 8 Revealed, Blake Shelton + Miranda Lambert Perform 'Over You'
T-ara Member Hyomin Shows Off Her Sexy Side in Korean InStyle [Pics]
Listen to David Guetta's Remix of Empire of the Sun's 'Alive
-
The Telefile - TV on DVD: Tuesday, May 21, 2013
The Telefile - Veep: The Episode's Best Insults
The Telefile - Saturday Night Live: Straight Outta 8H
-
Is 'Jurassic Park 4' a Reboot? Yes, According to Sam Neill
'Return of the Jedi': 25 Things You Didn't Know About the Original 'Star Wars' Trilogy Finale
Melissa McCarthy Fires a 'Tammy' Extra for Mistreating Her Child
-
Who Won 'DWTS'?
Backstage Drama Leads To 'Nashville' Changes
Who Went Home On 'The Voice'?
-
In Pictures: The Cars of Fast & Furious
Digital Multiplex: Warm Bodies and Aftershock
Discover the Best-Reviewed Films in Summer Movie Scorecard 2013
-
What to Watch Tonight: The Season Finales of SVU, The Middle, Modern Family, Chicago Fire, Nashville, and Criminal Minds
What to Watch Tonight: SYTYCD, Awkward., and the Finales of Grimm, The Game, and DWTS
7 Lessons We Learned from the 2012-2013 TV Season
-
Seth MacFarlane's Next Film: 'Every Line Is Hilarious,' Amanda Seyfried Swears
'The Wolverine' Trailer: Five Questions It Answered
'Star Trek Into Darkness' Takes Box-Office Crown With $84 Million
-
'Grimm' Season Finale Review: "Goodnight, Sweet Grimm"
'The Killing' Season 3′s Latest Trailer: The Beginning of a New Spree!
'Man of Steel' Trailer: Zod Will Make Us Suffer
Get Instant Alerts on Motion/Captured
Latest Posts
-
As the series shifts focus and winds down, we talk to the main trio about returning one last timeWednesday, May 22, 2013
-
One of the film's biggest ideas is explained more clearlyTuesday, May 21, 2013
-
Let's see what sort of boners fall out of Tobias's mouth this timeTuesday, May 21, 2013
-
The final film in the trilogy changes the way we look at the seriesTuesday, May 21, 2013
Comments
Option 1
Comment instantly as a guest GuestOption 2
Option 3
Login or create a HitFix account Login Signup- 1
- 2
Next 70 CommentsCody
November 28, 2012 at 10:31PM EST Reply to CommentUgh, seeing this become a story has been so irritating. Maybe it's just because I'm familiar with Gunn's sense of humor, but I thought the list was clearly satirical. Just the intro alone seemed to be mocking the countless Maxim-like lists that are out there. Seeing The Mary Sue make such big accusations when they clearly don't have any knowledge of Gunn's background, then seeing people pile on in the comments, going so far as to try and get a petition started to get Gunn fired, is just sad.
It must have slipped under their radar that Shane Black uses the phrase "faggot gun" in "Kiss Kiss Bang Bang".
Eyes Gunn has to put out a statement, pronto. His piece is so obviously light-hearted, but when people who grind axes find an excuse to cause damage, that's what they will do.
November 29, 2012 at 12:45AM ESTJeff Mclachlan If he says anything about this other than to make fun of it, I will be very disappointed. And it'll only fan the flames. What makes me laugh is the thought of all the sensitive Whedonites trying to reconcile how their saintly idol could be friends with such a monster.
November 29, 2012 at 2:39PM ESTjells The Mary Sue is complete joke of a site. Its the same as those "DC Women Kissing Ass" blog. Feminism and femmes in comics! Lilith Fair! RAINN and Tori Amos. Go Gloria Steinem! Pro Choice! I think..
November 29, 2012 at 7:29PM ESTEyes If there's a serious misunderstanding then there's a reason for clarification, especially if your job is on the line. It's encouraging that Mr. Gunn has been sharp enough to see this. These things are about business, not principle (and like he said, there wasn't really anything in that post worth defending, was there?).
November 30, 2012 at 8:27AM ESTToday any grievance group can harass whoever they like online with few, if any, consequences to themselves. Although Steven Moffat said sorry countless times for some ill-considered remarks about women in an ancient interview, it wasn't enough to stop him being hounded off Twitter. I think the lesson is not to try to shrug off dumb comments, but to deal with them as honestly as possible, which takes that ammunition away from people who want to use it.
FistOSalmon
November 28, 2012 at 10:51PM EST Reply to CommentJack Huston played the Viking that challenged John Caviesel's character to run the shields in Outlander. He didn't make much of an impression but it might have just been miscasting and a pretty dull movie. He's very good on Boardwalk but he's always wearing prosthetics so again, hard to tell.
Stephen P.
November 28, 2012 at 11:07PM EST Reply to CommentI'm not sure this should just be dismissed as "Gunn being Gunn. The article was filled with slut-shaming, misogynistic and homophobic comments, and that matters. I think it was intended as satirical but I still find it a little disturbing. I don't personally know James Gunn so I don't know what his feelings toward women are but there are a few comments he made that, to me, indicate a lack of respect for feminine sexuality.
I don't think he should be pulled from the movie, especially considering that he isn't the writer, and will have Joss Whedon looking over his shoulder, but I think that a lot of people grow up learning certain thoughts and behaviours that can be dangerous and damaging to all of us, and if that's ever going to change we can't just sweep things like this under the rug.
AzureDragoon He's progressive, don't worry. He's good friends with the beloved Joss Whedon.
November 29, 2012 at 12:04AM ESTChris Yeah, every joke someone makes that offends another person should be held against them forever because it could be "dangerous and damaging to all of us".
November 29, 2012 at 12:26AM ESTThe idea that Gunn could be removed from the film or penalized for something as dumb as this is disgusting.
MarkP Oh, thank GOD "Saint Joss" is looking over his shoulder. I am a BIG Whedon fan, but this deification of the man is RIDICULOUS. Just wait, in 5-10 years, he'll put out something sub-par (it is inevitable - it happens to everyone), and the backlash will be Lucas-scale.
November 29, 2012 at 1:07PM ESTJeff Mclachlan Men shouldn't use the phrase "slut-shaming". It just sounds weird.
November 29, 2012 at 2:35PM ESTI think the majority of the offense to the post comes from people with specific attachments to some of the characters mentioned who don't like to see their deities brought down to earth. Which is the whole point of the thing, by the way.
Stephen P.
November 28, 2012 at 11:10PM EST Reply to CommentAs for casting I would love to see Lee Pace in this. He's a fantastic actor and I think he really deserves it.
Cody B
November 28, 2012 at 11:36PM EST Reply to CommentHaving Jack Huston in talks makes me SOOOO excited. He is PHENOMENAL on Bakrdwalk Empire and is one of my favorite characters. But I never knew how much of a brilliant actor he was until recently. Me and my dad where watching TV when this Guinness commercial comes on starrig an extremely familiar face. It drove me and my dad crazy trying to figure it out who it was. I looked it up and found out it was Richard from Boardwalk Empire. To say we where blown away would be an understatement. The guy COMPLETELY trnasforms himself for the role of Richard. Marvel has a phenomenal list of actors, but my vote is firmly for Jack Huston.
mridge1
November 28, 2012 at 11:59PM EST Reply to CommentLet's just forget the silly protest and move onto the casting. I quite like Lee Pace for the role but Jack Huston is a fantastic actor that deserves whatever work he gets.
KlarkKent
November 29, 2012 at 12:39AM EST Reply to CommentLee Pace was in Twilight? Huh. I missed that. I'll choose to remember him from Wonderfalls instead. The real question is who should voice Rocket Racoon.
DKT Pushing Daisies FTW!
November 29, 2012 at 3:49AM ESTvelocityknown
November 29, 2012 at 1:07AM EST Reply to CommentHah, gotta love the hypocrisy of some people. Get up in arms over what may or may not be a joke, but Roman Polanski still directs films and no one complains. This isn't meant to be an attack on Polanski, I'm just pointing out that people need to learn to separate the art from the artist especially when it's this mild.
On the casting side of things, I would love to see pretty much every one of those actors your mentioned in this movie. Lee Pace was wonderful in Pushing Daisies, Jack Huston is phenomenal on Boardwalk Empire, Jim Sturgess is always reliable, but I have to say that of all of those, I'd really like for the world to become more acquainted with Jack Huston. That man is a true talent and it'd be a shame if he keeps going unrecognized outside of the BE fanbase.
Vern Reply to comment...
November 29, 2012 at 4:15AM ESTVern Well, I agree with you that this is a dumb controversy, but actually TONS of people complain every time Polanski makes a movie, and also when he's not making a movie. I'd say it ranks pretty high on the 'Most Tiresome Things That Come Up All The Damn Time In Online Movie Discussions' list, although well below 'George Lucas blah blah blah Prequels Childhood etc.'
November 29, 2012 at 4:21AM ESTAnyway I agree with you, Gunn isn't a Supreme Court justice nominee, and he's not asking to marry our daughter. He's just a guy directing a movie about a talking racoon and a tree man shooting lasers. I'm not sure why we're supposed to give a shit if he wrote some stupid shit about dicks on a blog.
dyikini
November 29, 2012 at 1:10AM EST Reply to CommentHeh, this has just obtained it's headline on a main Australian news web-site as well now.
The headline "Superfail: Marvel Director' homophobic yadda yadda yadda".
Beyond a shadow of a doubt it's a story spreading because it's getting clicks and nothing more. There are a handful of offended people signing the 'destined to fail' petition while 99.9% of the rest of the world reads the article laughing their tits off.
Silly bunch of a fun-sponges.
tromeo
November 29, 2012 at 2:34AM EST Reply to Commentthe problem was that it was immediately deleted. if this was something that was clearly meant as satire and wouldn't be mistaken for anything as such it would have stayed there. but removing the piece acknowledges that it was a bad idea to publish it. not all jokes are good jokes. some fall flat. context is everything, and i don't think he should be removed or is a misogynist... but it was poorly thought out piece.
amy You're leaving out the possibility that it was meant as satire but could conceivably be mistaken for something else.
November 29, 2012 at 1:25PM ESTJeff Mclachlan Satire is ALWAYS mistaken as something else by somebody. That's never a reason not to do it.
November 29, 2012 at 2:49PM ESTAnd it should be noted that the dirty superhero piece was put out to promote Gunn's dirty superhero movie. Which actually contained much more offensive material than anything on that list, but I guess it didn't cast aspersions on Nightwing's manhood or make fun of Stephanie Brown, so it was okay.
CinemaPsycho
November 29, 2012 at 3:15AM EST Reply to CommentTwo questions:
1) Does anyone think that Gunn is being serious when he talks about wanting to have sex with comic book characters who DON'T EXIST?
2) Does anyone think that Guardians of the Galaxy will be full of homophobic, misogynistic and "slut-shaming" (where did THAT phrase come from anyway) material because of this? Really?
Brett Ratner is still working in Hollywood. People say politically incorrect things from time to time. Let's not have a damn witch hunt over it, all right?
And I for one have nothing but respect for female sexuality. That's why I watch porn... (ducks)
That Werewolf Guy I don't mind you watching porn, but porn that involves ducks is just sick and wrong.
November 29, 2012 at 3:36AM ESTDryden 01. No. I can still think it's stupid, unfunny, and not worth defending (and apparently, so did James Gunn). I also think James Gunn is still a good choice for director.
November 29, 2012 at 12:21PM EST02. I get the sense you're not genuinely interested, but slut-shaming broadly refers to comments that imply any type of sexual agency, past experiences, or sometimes even people's reactions are somehow a failure of a woman's character. And no, GotG won't be like the article, but you can still point out the article was a poor choice.
Jeffmc2000 Nowhere in that article does Gunn refer to any character's sexual history in a negative way. More the opposite. Although he does occasionally question their taste in men (Black Canary).
November 29, 2012 at 2:54PM ESTJeffmc2000 Nowhere in that article does Gunn refer to any character's sexual history in a negative way. More the opposite. Although he does occasionally question their taste in men (Black Canary).
November 29, 2012 at 2:54PM ESTr1pvanw1nkl3 @JEFFMC2000: That's actually incorrect.
November 29, 2012 at 6:03PM EST"Batgirl – Stephanie Brown: Being a teen mom and all, you know she’s easy. Go for it."
Jeffmc2000 In that context, he definitely did not mean "being easy" as a negative.
November 29, 2012 at 6:13PM ESTAnd that's the type of joke that's only funny when it's really, really wrong, and not the sort of thing you're supposed to say. It's shock humor, which isn't everyone's thing, obviously, but it hasn't hurt Howard Stern or Sarah Silverman or Russel Brand.
Well, it may have hurt Russel Brand (the Andrew Sachs thing)but he's still around and he's still rich.
r1pvanw1nkl3 I honestly don't know how to reply to this.
November 29, 2012 at 6:25PM ESTJeffmc2000 I don't know why this is such a thing. Is it because it's comic book characters? It's alternative comedy---it's a bit meta. The humor comes from saying something awful, but knowing it's not being taken seriously. And Gunn was doing a little high-wire act combining his own admitted fetishes (which everyone has, and most people aren't as honest about) with silly but pointed riffs on the the things that are never talked about in the text of the comics, but are obvious subtext from the art.
November 29, 2012 at 7:27PM ESTThere's also the fact that he uses blunt words, which not everyone is comfortable with. For some people just hearing the word "fuck" from a man in a sexual context is enough to raise their hackles. Which is fine. Maybe don't read a blog posting called "15 Superheroes I'd Like To Fuck", then.
I don't mean to be dismissive of all this, but yeah, I guess I am, because reacting to an offensive comedy piece just seems so 1989 to me. Comedy can be rough. It doesn't always work, and it's not always for everyone. But if you bleeped out the swears in Gunn's posts, there's nothing there a comic couldn't say on a late night comedy show.
r1pvanw1nkl3 Oh, I understand the comedy. I'm actually not offended by the article at all. I'm familiar with Gunn's sense of humor and I have read interviews with him that better reflect his true opinions on these subjects. People have the right to be offended by it (although I think most of them misunderstand Gunn's), but I'm not.
November 29, 2012 at 7:46PM ESTNo, I had trouble with the fact that you thought calling a woman "easy" because of her past sexual encounters wasn't mean-spirited.
r1pvanw1nkl3 *misunderstand Gunn's intent
November 29, 2012 at 7:47PM ESTJeffmc2000 Well, he wasn't saying "she's easy so shun her". In the context of an article about fictional characters you want to have sex with, easy isn't a negative, and there was no connotation that Gunn considers sexually experienced young ladies to be morally lax. I guess you could say that saying someone is easy is an insult regardless of context , and you wouldn't be wrong.
November 29, 2012 at 8:06PM ESTSo I'll give you that it's a mean joke, but I wouldn't agree that there was actual malice behind it.
cynic
November 29, 2012 at 6:17AM EST Reply to CommentThis isn't a "faux controversy" at all. Brett Ratner was fired from the Oscars telecast and basically disgraced for saying something that was far less incendiary than what Gunn wrote. Homophobic comments like those should never be tolerated. (Gunn can get away with the crass misogyny, of course, because this society is still extremely tolerant of that.)
mmcb105 The things Gunn said are crass, there is no debate about that, but not hateful. And definitely not near the same league as Ratner's f-bomb.
November 29, 2012 at 10:18AM ESTAdele Quested
November 29, 2012 at 7:33AM EST Reply to CommentWell, yes, of course there's nothing new or particularly shocking about it. Which is why it doesn't work as a satire or any kind of joke for that matter. It's just garden variety sexism and homophobia. I now know to expect nothing unconventional from that guy, which has effectively killed my interest in the movie. (Of course that won't necessarily predict doom for the commercial success of the movie; people in mass tend to be fond of the familiar.)
mmcb105 Slither was conventional?
November 29, 2012 at 10:20AM ESTJeff Mclachlan Compared to Super it was.
November 29, 2012 at 3:24PM ESTAdele Quested I vaguely recall having watched Slither because of Nathan Fillion. I guess I must have been reasonably entertained, because I don't remeber disliking it either, but there's nothing that particularly stayed with me. Sometimes competent acting can elevate mediocre material. That might be the case with the new project too, of course, so maybe, if they cast someone interesting...but I wouldn't bet on it.
November 30, 2012 at 1:32PM ESTmmcb105 I get you, but unconventional and good are not synonyms. I don't think Slither is that great of a movie (or even that particularly good beyond Nathan Fillion), but I don't think you can successgfully argue that it was conventional.
November 30, 2012 at 1:47PM ESTAdele Quested Well, I would never claim that good and uncoventional are necessarily synonymous. My argument was, that the movie was apparently good enough to entertain me for a while, but not unconventional enough to strike me as different enough to remember much of it. Some characters were slightly better developed than I would expect in that genre. Again, could also be the acting.
November 30, 2012 at 2:06PM ESTThere's certainly a place for conventional super-hero-fare - I've liked some of it on occasion in the past - but one could argue that there has been quite enough of that lately.
Adele Quested
November 29, 2012 at 7:37AM EST Reply to CommentWell, of course there's nothing new or particularly shocking about it. Which is why it doesn't work as satire, or any kind of joke for that matter. It's just garden variety sexism and homophobia, the kind of stuff that's parroted in locker rooms across the globe. I now know to expect nothing unconventional from this director, which essentialy kills any interest I could have had in his movie. Won't necessarily kill its chances at commericial success though; most people are fond of the familiar.
Norman Osborn Wouldn't actually watching Gunn's films give you a better idea what to expect?
November 29, 2012 at 10:28AM ESTAdele Quested Probably, but it would also cost me more of my time and attention, that might be better invested in more promising artists. Attention is a limited ressource. We all have to make certain calculations. So far he's got one strike against him and nothing particularly speaking for him, so that's probably a no for me.
November 30, 2012 at 1:28PM ESTDom
November 29, 2012 at 10:31AM EST Reply to CommentSo the usual 'professional moral outrage' mob have found a new target! What spiteful, nasty person held on to that article for all that time, just waiting to spin it in a negative direction in the hope of using it to damage Mr Gunn? How do you develop such an unpleasant mindset? Really, the person who started the controversy and dug out the article after all this time should be made to go public with their real name, address and a photo and provide clarification of their intentions. But we know they won't because it's just another case of petty, cowardly, jealousy being thrown out from behind the barricade of a fake web identity and an avatar.
HubertHawkins09
November 29, 2012 at 10:45AM EST Reply to CommentThis just in! Hugh Jackman will be reprising his role as Wolverine in "Guardians of the Galaxy."
DKT
November 29, 2012 at 11:35AM EST Reply to CommentI get that it was satire, but I'm a little bit baffled that people are so furious someone *else* would be upset by this. Reactions like this don't happen because people are "petty, calloused, and jealous, per se. It happens because people have been ridiculed and slammed with some of the same labels Gunn is satirizing. Not everyone laughs at every joke.
It doesn't help that Gunn deleted it, though. Did he ever give an explanation for that?
I think it's ridiculous to demand Gunn be put off the movie. I think it's far more reasonable to ask him for a clarification. Whether he decides to give one or not is entirely up to him.
Dom Why should Gunn have to swear any loyalty to any repressive framework? He wrote his article years ago and it should be allowed to speak for itself. That some spiteful little coward is playing silly buggers now just makes them look like a sad, obsessive inadequate? By offering 'clarification' he would effectively be admitting he had done something wrong, which he hadn't!
November 29, 2012 at 12:37PM ESTDKT Who said he had to swear loyalty to anything?
November 29, 2012 at 1:01PM ESTAdditionally, clarification is not an admission of guilt.
And I continue to assert that it's not cowardly to question homophobic or sexist attitudes.
Jeff Mclachlan Never apologize, never explain. That's the rule artists should always follow. If Gunn actually addresses this "controversy" in any way other than to make fun of it, I'll be very sad.
November 29, 2012 at 2:04PM ESTI would also like to personally thank James Gunn for giving me another way to make fun of people with goatees. I'd never heard "prison pussy" before, and it's a good one.
DKT @Jeff: Never interview! Never blog! Never tweet!
November 29, 2012 at 2:18PM ESTSeriously, though. I get the sentiment, but I think it's a bit Salinger-esque, and difficult to pull off in these internet days.
Jeff Mclachlan Well, you've got to do promotion, obviously, but once something's out there that you've created, it should be left to the lowly mortals to discuss among themselves. I know not everyone agrees with this, but too many promising artists have disappeared up their own ass because they love to talk about what they've done more than apply themselves to the next thing they're going to do. Not mentioning any names, Kevin Smith. And once you get to the point where you're actually arguing with people online, then it's really time to step back and realize that you're the artist and they're the public, and erasing that line is not going to make them like you more, it's only going to make them respect you less.
November 29, 2012 at 3:17PM ESTAnd explaining jokes is death, and should never be attempted by anyone ever. People who don't get it don't deserve it, and people who get it and don't like it, still won't like it no matter how well you explain it.
Shoumik
November 29, 2012 at 11:55AM EST Reply to CommentJust wanted to say that the source of a lot of this "controversy", The Mary Sue, is a good, legitimate website with good people who write good criticism of situations in which women/femininity/feminism interacts with "geek culture".
I think they were wrong about this inasmuch as, in this case, James Gunn was just trying to be funny in a risque way, instead of actually being offensive. But I still think they do a lot of good and would like those who are immediately dismissive of the people making the accusations to at least look at their site and some of the other stuff on it.
Yes, I am making an argument about giving the people the benefit of the doubt when they have not given other people that same benefit of the doubt.
Max
November 29, 2012 at 12:55PM EST Reply to CommentPolitically correct behavior is killing this country. Bunch of fucking over sensitive, pansy ass hand wringers who can't go a whole day without having to get 'outraged' over something. Pussies.
mmcb105 I'm offended by this statement because I am in fact a pansy ass hand ringer pussy.
November 29, 2012 at 1:14PM ESTChris
November 29, 2012 at 1:19PM EST Reply to CommentIf you go anywhere near ESPN, then you have surely seen Jack Huston as the narrator of those omnipresent Guinness Black Lager/"There's just something about black" commercials.
I like the idea of Lee Pace as well. Apologies to Eddie Redmayne and Joel Edgerton, but Marvel's already got enough brooding hunks.
MarkP
November 29, 2012 at 1:29PM EST Reply to CommentWelcome to the world of satire...
I mean, seriously, what Mr. Gunn wrote is pretty hilarious, if you take the entirety of his career into perspective. I find most of the comments are reading this one post, and extrapolating from that, without taking into account that Gunn's entire career has been about unsettling humor. That's his gig, be it the Troma films, SLITHER, or SUPER.
Granted, he trades in a VERY difficult form of humor, wherein you attempt to push things so far as to go past discomfort to laughter at the pure audacity of it all. You can turn off a HUGE swath of your audience, and I'm sure he accepts that, he probably also accepts that a large part of the audience will not understand his intentions at all.
But getting angry about it? That's just kind of ridiculous.
Jeff Mclachlan
November 29, 2012 at 1:56PM EST Reply to CommentJesus, I guess the people who find this shocking are the same people who've never seen a Kevin Smith movie? The gag is that these are fictional characters and Gunn knows it's ridiculous to fantasize about them, but also that there's something very real about how adolescent sexuality can be influenced by these characters. For a dumb, funny piece, there's a very smart under-current.
But oh-my-God, he called the White Queen a bitch. To the people offended by that, I will direct you to every reference to Joan Collins' role on Dynasty, and I expect equal outrage over the language used to describe her character there.
BigAl6ft6
November 29, 2012 at 3:31PM EST Reply to CommentOkay, when an article uses the phrase "Gambit is the Galactus of cock" and somebody actually gets up in arms about the content of the aforementioned article, then I officially have no idea exactly how one's brain works.
Also using a full body condom to have sex with Rogue is not offensive, it's just downright practical, since she sucks the life-force outta you and all.
I repeat: He used the words "Gambit is the Galactus of cock." Now try to be offended by that. Uh-huh.
Stacy
November 29, 2012 at 3:42PM EST Reply to CommentI wonder are the people who get offended are the same people who got offended at the zombie baby in "Dawn of the Dead". Dude likes to push to the limit and stay off the beaten path. Thats his M.O.
dustin
November 29, 2012 at 6:58PM EST Reply to CommentScrew the "controversy," they're looking at Jack Huston for the lead?
FUCK YES.
Bradley Valentine
November 30, 2012 at 4:53AM EST Reply to CommentThere’s nothing offensive about Gunn’s piece OTHER than towards people who bruise under bad language and hate their own bodies. Seems to me more about a blog writer who saw an opportunity to get some hits. And if she happens to get Gunn booted off the movie, then that gives her some juice. Win/win for her. And how can a blogger be plugged in enough to know those comic characters but not seen or heard of Gunn? It’s possible, but not likely. Maybe we should just hope the Juno girl from SUPER makes a statement vouching for Gunn’s integrity and the faux feminists go away excited Juno spoke to them.
Bradley Valentine
November 30, 2012 at 4:53AM EST Reply to CommentWrite a comment...There’s nothing offensive about Gunn’s piece OTHER than towards people who bruise under bad language and hate their own bodies. Seems to me more about a blog writer who saw an opportunity to get some hits. And if she happens to get Gunn booted off the movie, then that gives her some juice. Win/win for her. And how can a blogger be plugged in enough to know those comic characters but not seen or heard of Gunn? It’s possible, but not likely. Maybe we should just hope the Juno girl from SUPER makes a statement vouching for Gunn’s integrity and the faux feminists go away excited Juno spoke to them.
Bradley Valentine
November 30, 2012 at 4:54AM EST Reply to CommentWrite a commThere’s nothing offensive about Gunn’s piece OTHER than towards people who bruise under bad language and hate their own bodies. Seems to me more about a blog writer who saw an opportunity to get some hits. And if she happens to get Gunn booted off the movie, then that gives her some juice. Win/win for her. And how can a blogger be plugged in enough to know those comic characters but not seen or heard of Gunn? It’s possible, but not likely. Maybe we should just hope the Juno girl from SUPER makes a statement vouching for Gunn’s integrity and the faux feminists go away excited Juno spoke to them.
Bradley Valentine
November 30, 2012 at 4:55AM EST Reply to CommentThere’s nothing offensive about Gunn’s piece OTHER than towards people who bruise under bad language and hate their own bodies. Seems to me more about a blog writer who saw an opportunity to get some hits. And if she happens to get Gunn booted off the movie, then that gives her some juice. Win/win for her. And how can a blogger be plugged in enough to know those comic characters but not seen or heard of Gunn? It’s possible, but not likely. Maybe we should just hope the Juno girl from SUPER makes a statement vouching for Gunn’s integrity and the faux feminists go away excited Juno spoke to them.
jay
November 30, 2012 at 5:14AM EST Reply to CommentFreedom isn't always comfortable. Especially when the 1st amendment is involved. Get a friggin' helmet or move to the Middle East, where everything you say can be held against you.
mmcb105 This argument is annoying. Free speech works both ways. Although Gunn has the freedom to write whatever he wants about women and gays, Marvel also has the right to fire him because of those views.
November 30, 2012 at 1:56PM ESTFreedom of speech does not mean a freedom from all consequences for the things you say. It only means that the government can not restrict your speech (provided of course you do not infringe on others' rights). If he gets fired, it wouldn't be the government responding, it would be the market.
And remember, this is coming from a guy who doesn't really think Gunn did anything wrong here. I just get annoyed at people who think the first amendment gives you a complete pass to say whatever the fuck you want without any repercussions.
- 1
- 2
Next 70 Comments