Joss Whedon Allegations: The Undoing of the "Buffy" Creator

[Umbran]

Not that this makes Whedon less of a jerk, but I do think he had some legitimate complaints about Carpenter.

Oh, come on. Any time we have a sentence of the form, "Not that this means X, but...," the effect is to press X.

Folks on the set could not leave Whedon alone with an underage female cast member, for fear of the abuse he'd put upon her. Whatever "legitimate complaints" he had are irrelevant in comparison to that.

 

[Bolares]

I don't disagree with holding creators accountable. But in my mind, holding people accountable means a black bag, van ride, and an isolated location. Extreme if taken literally, but a direct action aimed directly at the perpetrator.

Boycotts are drone strikes as hitmen with rifles are to assassination. Explosions take out bystanders. A good rifle takes out the man. So it is with accountability actions. Joss ain't hurting. At best he's sidelined, living comfy in his rich man's house.

Surely you prefer to hurt Joss while sparing the gaffer. Accept that some folks don't like using explosives to take out targets.

Other way to look at it is that boycotts may make the industry think twice before hiring the abusers (knowm or open secrets). I don't know if a whole production "deserves" to be boycotted because of one person, but at the same time abusers shouldn't have space in large productions.

 

[Parmandur]

From the article, it looks like there were some ongoing problems with Carpenter. She was having difficulties remembering her lines, she once got her hair cut shorter while an episode was still in production, and of course there's the tattoo. Not that this makes Whedon less of a jerk, but I do think he had some legitimate complaints about Carpenter.

How about his mockery of her religious beliefs...?

 

[Umbran]

Surely you prefer to hurt Joss while sparing the gaffer. Accept that some folks don't like using explosives to take out targets.

The gaffer is paid before the film ever hits the screen. They are not waiting for ticket sales or advertising revenues for their compensation.

 

[Willie the Duck]

I don't know... The victim doesn't have to be a saint. Carpenter is human, and will make mistakes and bad choices as everyone else. I don't see the point in looking at her flaws when discussing how abusive Whedon was. If Whedon was abusive it kind of doesn't matter if Carpenter's work ethic wasn't the best.

If an employee, or something similar, isn't doig what they are supposed to do you have to be professional and take the problem to the relevant people. Talk to the studio, to her manager, something like that. Nothing excuses, explains or makes what Whedon did understandable.

Bringing it back to TTRPGs, if you have a problem players you kick them from your table, you don't take a dump on their lawn.

Outside of the racism/misogyny factors, this seems like the fundamental problem Hollywood has -- it seems to think that it acts differently than other places of business. Mind you, everywhere else has had to have their learning curve, and some places still have ways to go, but right up until MeToo, Hollywood seems to have pretended that it's special and gets to play by different rules. It seems, frankly, that they were right.

The gaffer is paid before the film ever hits the screen. They are not waiting for ticket sales or advertising revenues for their compensation.

I am hardly an expert, but I think it is only actors who are routinely paid using the royalty model. Everyone else is paid by the day of shooting, IIRC.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I don't disagree with holding creators accountable. But in my mind, holding people accountable means a black bag, van ride, and an isolated location. Extreme if taken literally, but a direct action aimed directly at the perpetrator.

Boycotts are drone strikes as hitmen with rifles are to assassination. Explosions take out bystanders. A good rifle takes out the man. So it is with accountability actions. Joss ain't hurting. At best he's sidelined, living comfy in his rich man's house.

Surely you prefer to hurt Joss while sparing the gaffer. Accept that some folks don't like using explosives to take out targets.

This is an extremely inappropriate set of analogies.

 

[Janx]

The gaffer is paid before the film ever hits the screen. They are not waiting for ticket sales or advertising revenues for their compensation.

good point. probably bad example. But somebody gets paid residuals on DVD sales besides Whedon.

My point is, not everybody approves of drone strikes because of the collateral damage.

Crapping on people for being concerned about that isn't a good look.

 

[Jer]

In that case you might want to avoid reading anything written more a couple hundred years ago. Especially the works of classical antiquity.

Except of course that I go into reading those things understanding the context of the time. So, you know, it's not exactly the same as going back to read a book I enjoyed in my youth after finding out that the author was a serial child abuser.

 

[Janx]

This is an extremely inappropriate set of analogies.

it sure is. But ultimately, while I agreed with the rest of your posts.

I disagreed with your implying that people who were concerned about royalties for others were therefore actively supporting Whedon.

Your concern is not the only concern. Your way is not the only way.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

it sure is. But ultimately, while I agreed with the rest of your posts.

I disagreed with your implying that people who were concerned about royalties for others were therefore actively supporting Whedon.

Your concern is not the only concern. Your way is not the only way.

I implied no such thing, so keep your moralizing to yourself.