• Thank you for visiting Buffy-Boards. You obviously have exceptional taste. We just want you to know that:
    1. You really should register so you can chat with us!
    2. Twelve thousand people can't be wrong.
    3. Buffy-Boards loves you.
    4. See 1 through 3.
    Come on, register already!

Accusation Against Joss Whedon about Justice League filming

DeadlyDuo

Scooby
Joined
Jul 29, 2016
Messages
8,808
Age
30
I don't recall them saying they found nothing. Saying the investigation was over and action was taken is not the same as saying they found nothing.
Read between the lines. If they found something, WB would've gone out of their way to make absolutely clear how Whedon's behaviour was 100% against their values, how they don't condone such behaviour, how it has no place at WB etc. Fisher is going on about it and yet they've said nothing. Why is that? Because they found nothing that constitutes racism. Gal Gadot had issues with Whedon and that was dealt with at the time, not 3 years later. Is it possible that Whedon's behaviour was unprofessional? Sure, and he does have history of that. However, just because the person on the receiving end was black doesn't make it racism, and that is the crux of the issue. Fisher is accusing Whedon of racism.

There is a big difference between someone being a jerk and someone being a racist.
 

Spanky

Scooby
Joined
Aug 12, 2008
Messages
22,559
Black Thorn
WB would've gone out of their way to make absolutely clear how Whedon's behaviour was 100% against their values,
Unless they were afraid of bad press by announcing everything they found out. The investigation was focused on more than just Whedon.

...says next to nothing.
And one would assume if they in fact found nothing, they would have said they found nothing so as not to further besmirch their reputation with the possibility they did find wrongdoing. Certainly they would not have said they took actions if there was nothing to take action against.
 

DeadlyDuo

Scooby
Joined
Jul 29, 2016
Messages
8,808
Age
30
Unless they were afraid of bad press by announcing everything they found out. The investigation was focused on more than just Whedon.
One of the other guys Fisher accused is still working at WB. Fisher accused Hamada of being an enabler, Hamada has signed a deal for at least 3 more years at WB. Why would they do that if Fisher's claims were legitimate? Also why would WB continue with a show that was created by a "racist" if Fisher's claims are true. Fisher is shooting his mouth off on Twitter so if stuff was found out, they'd be no keeping it quiet.

And one would assume if they in fact found nothing, they would have said they found nothing so as not to further besmirch their reputation with the possibility they did find wrongdoing. Certainly they would not have said they took actions if there was nothing to take action against.
Yeah, because accusing a black man of lying about racism in the current climate is really going to go down well with the SJW crowd who think that all black people are victims on virtue of being black.

I would argue that WB have basically said they found nothing but they can't outright say that. "The investigation has been concluded, action has been taken, it's time to move on". There are no apologies there. Basically they're saying "It's done. Let it go".
 
Joined
Oct 23, 2018
Messages
542
Age
35
Location
England
Basically they're saying "It's done. Let it go".
But to me that just reads as a power play. 'We're not willing to do any more so shut up about it or face the consequences.'

Being told to let something go is a classic move by wrongdoers. Remember when we all had to let Classic Dom's eyesight testing trip to Barnard castle go?

Being told the case is closed does not mean the person who brought the case was actually in the wrong. It means no one is in power is willing to listen to them any more.
 

TriBel

Scooby
Joined
Jun 25, 2017
Messages
2,469
Location
Manchester
There is a big difference between someone being a jerk and someone being a racist.
In Whedon's case I'm not so sure. The man's creative, clever and has a vision - a vision he can't always get across. When people don't get his point he gets defensive - and sarcastic (as he did when people - including Marsters - couldn't fully understand the context in which Spike gets a soul).

So...take the skin lightening or darkening episode (for instance). I can understand how, because of colourism, a person of colour would be sensitive to this (and rightly so. It was a contentious issue in the black community that affects light skinned people as well as those with dark skin). I can also understand how a white person could misconstrue this as a PoC being "over-sensitive" to race...particularly if the reason for make-up was purely pragmatic. I can also imagine how one wrong (or snide) word could tip the very delicate balance. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that the whole situation was based on a genuine misunderstanding that's more to do with white privilege (white people don't generally have to consider skin tone - although at one time it was a marker of class) than capital R racism and no-one's entirely wrong or right.
 

The Bronze

Rogue Demon Hunter
Joined
Jul 11, 2013
Messages
3,253
Age
34
Location
Essex
Black Thorn
My limited take on this is that the Fischer case appears to be a creative dispute turned nasty and I'm pretty sure Heard is the majority guilty party. However:

The public doesn't take kindly to liars.
Come on now. No one paying the tiniest bit of attention to the US or UK over the years can come to that conclusion. They could just as soon be elected president as be black listed.
 

DeadlyDuo

Scooby
Joined
Jul 29, 2016
Messages
8,808
Age
30
But to me that just reads as a power play. 'We're not willing to do any more so shut up about it or face the consequences.'

Being told to let something go is a classic move by wrongdoers. Remember when we all had to let Classic Dom's eyesight testing trip to Barnard castle go?

Being told the case is closed does not mean the person who brought the case was actually in the wrong. It means no one is in power is willing to listen to them any more.
I disagree. This was an independent third party investigation approved by Fisher, they spoke to over 80 people, and yet nothing has come out of it except Fisher's initial vague accusations. Even in the article where Fisher somewhat elaborated on his accusations, a word that kept coming from his mouth was how he was "informed" of something happening, so he never actually witnessed these things he was accusing Whedon of, he was just "informed" of them, that in itself does not make for reliable evidence. The crux of the whole matter seems to be that Whedon changed the role of Fisher's character in the film which Fisher was unhappy about then wouldn't change the script as Fisher demanded.

What more can WB do if they've had the investigation and found no wrong doing? They can't fire people just because Fisher demands it because his feelings are hurt.

WB have gone woke. They're owned by AT&T who are killing DC comics big time with their wokeness. Do you really think they'd pass up the opportunity to show off their woke credentials by not condemning racism from a straight white guy, particularly if they had no intention of working with him again? It's the lack of "Look how we defend black people and punish wrong doers" from WB that suggests they've got nothing to use. To claim Whedon is a racist would get them sued for slander/libel by Whedon because it damages his reputation.

Cummings' excuse was completely pathetic "I was worried about my eyesight for driving so I decided to drive to check it was okay for driving". Cummings ended up leaving though in the end and it did do damage to the public's willingness to stay home so the public didn't let it go. The difference with that is that there was hard evidence.

In Whedon's case I'm not so sure. The man's creative, clever and has a vision - a vision he can't always get across. When people don't get his point he gets defensive - and sarcastic (as he did when people - including Marsters - couldn't fully understand the context in which Spike gets a soul).
Whedon can be unprofessional, he has history of it and nobody is disputing that, however this case isn't about whether or not he was unprofessional but about whether or not he was racist. Given that Fisher's "evidence" consists of "I was "informed" this happened by a third party even though I didn't witness it myself", that is not good solid evidence to claim racism on Whedon's part.

So...take the skin lightening or darkening episode (for instance). I can understand how, because of colourism, a person of colour would be sensitive to this (and rightly so. It was a contentious issue in the black community that affects light skinned people as well as those with dark skin). I can also understand how a white person could misconstrue this as a PoC being "over-sensitive" to race...particularly if the reason for make-up was purely pragmatic. I can also imagine how one wrong (or snide) word could tip the very delicate balance. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that the whole situation was based on a genuine misunderstanding that's more to do with white privilege (white people don't generally have to consider skin tone - although at one time it was a marker of class) than capital R racism and no-one's entirely wrong or right.
Firstly, the only one who gets to decide whether or not to be offended by this alleged skin lightening/darkening thing is the actor who skin was lightened/darkened. The whole practice of getting offended on behalf of others needs to stop. For all anyone knows, the post production crew could've reached out to the actor out of courtesy about how they needed to lighten/darken their skin tone for whatever reason and they may have been totally okay with it if it was a genuine issue eg a lighting issue during a night scene where they're slightly difficult to make out against the darkness. However because Fisher was "informed" that this skin tone change had happened without the full information as to why, he decided to get offended by it and claim racism.

Secondly, this whole "white privilege" narrative needs to stop. It's basically used as a way to invalidate a person's opinion and cast them in a negative light on the basis of skin colour. In the olden days, such discrimination would be called racism, nowadays "racism" is thinking that all races should be treated equally rather than one particular race being given special treatment. "Anti-racist" does not mean non-racist, it's the same as how "anti-clockwise" does not mean non-clockwise. The hands are still moving, just in the opposite direction.

Come on now. No one paying the tiniest bit of attention to the US or UK over the years can come to that conclusion. They could just as soon be elected president as be black listed.
There are certain things you just don't lie about (even as a politician). Pretending to be a victim of a serious issue such as racism or domestic violence is one of them as it makes a mockery of genuine victims.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 23, 2018
Messages
542
Age
35
Location
England
I just think you really really want Ray Fisher and Amber Heard's careers to be over but nothing about the way the world works suggests that this is what will happen. It really is getting a bit circular and only time will tell.
 

TriBel

Scooby
Joined
Jun 25, 2017
Messages
2,469
Location
Manchester
Secondly, this whole "white privilege" narrative needs to stop.
Why? Because you say so?
It's basically used as a way to invalidate a person's opinion and cast them in a negative light on the basis of skin colour.
Yup...what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
In the olden days, such discrimination would be called racism, nowadays "racism" is thinking that all races should be treated equally rather than one particular race being given special treatment.
“When people get used to preferential treatment, equal treatment seems like discrimination...is kind of a double edged sword...it cuts both ways.

Please - don't bother to reply...we're just going round in circles.
 

DeadlyDuo

Scooby
Joined
Jul 29, 2016
Messages
8,808
Age
30
I just think you really really want Ray Fisher and Amber Heard's careers to be over but nothing about the way the world works suggests that this is what will happen. It really is getting a bit circular and only time will tell.
Time will tell and the whole world is turning to crap right now (America in particular) so it would be par for the course.

I think with Heard in particular, because of the severity of the lies she has told and because of her criminal behaviour (Fisher at least hasn't done anything illegal), I think she should be fired. Whether she will be or not is the question (Hollywood is not a good place) but if there is justice, there should be some form of punishment for her because her behaviour is just awful.

Why? Because you say so?
No, because it's racist.

Yup...what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
So basically you're saying white people should be punished because black people were treated badly in the past so now it's white people's turn to be treated badly despite the fact white people today had nothing to do with what happened in the past?

“When people get used to preferential treatment, equal treatment seems like discrimination...is kind of a double edged sword...it cuts both ways.

Please - don't bother to reply...we're just going round in circles.
I will reply.

Basically what you're insinuating with that quote (which comes from Thomas Sowell so may not be meant in the way you are using it) is that because black people suffered in the past due to their skin colour, white people deserve to suffer now because of their skin colour. For SJWs, equality isn't about improving things, it's about making someone else suffer instead as revenge.
 
Myheadsgonenumb
Myheadsgonenumb
'IF there is justice' - you know what's wrong with that statement, right? 😂

TriBel

Scooby
Joined
Jun 25, 2017
Messages
2,469
Location
Manchester
I knew who the quote came from and the meaning it was intended to convey which is why I used it. I'm not saying any more because a) it's going off topic b) we have conflicting views on racism and c) the conversation will become explicitly (rather than implicitly) political and I'm not wasting time on something that will get pulled.
 

Anyanka Bunny Slayer

Sorgens Kammer 💀
Joined
Dec 17, 2015
Messages
8,518
Location
Soviet Union 2.0
Black Thorn
The 2020s are the new 1960s.
Actually, I've been thinking the same thing for about a week! 😂

Slightly off-topic, but its rather eerie how many Jefferson Airplane songs describe the current situation in America. Not this song, but I'll use any excuse to see Grace Slick perform.

 
Last edited:

Priceless

Scooby
Joined
Jan 25, 2016
Messages
7,834
Location
UK
'and I am willing, at any point, to submit to a polygraph test to support my claims' - this makes him sound unwell. I am not saying Fisher hasn't been driven to distraction by what's happened to him, but I think he needs a break and he needs to get away from it. If he has family and friends, they should be advising him to take a holiday, if only to repair his strength and come back fighting.
 

Spanky

Scooby
Joined
Aug 12, 2008
Messages
22,559
Black Thorn
'and I am willing, at any point, to submit to a polygraph test to support my claims' - this makes him sound unwell.
But when you have a deluge of social media people telling you you're lying and making it all up for publicity, that statement makes more sense.
 

TriBel

Scooby
Joined
Jun 25, 2017
Messages
2,469
Location
Manchester
'and I am willing, at any point, to submit to a polygraph test to support my claims'
it could be paranoia...it could be, as he says, he's reached a point where he has to make a stand and he feels it's the only recourse he has to "objective truth". I dunno... I kinda feel for him one way or the other.
But when you have a deluge of social media people telling you you're lying and making it all up for publicity, that statement makes more sense.
I saw the statement last night on Twitter - there was some support there but elsewhere... 🙄
 

Priceless

Scooby
Joined
Jan 25, 2016
Messages
7,834
Location
UK
it could be paranoia...it could be, as he says, he's reached a point where he has to make a stand and he feels it's the only recourse he has to "objective truth". I dunno... I kinda feel for him one way or the other.
Yeah, it is paranoid, but that's understandable if he's being gaslit. I feel for him too, it's a horrible position to be in no matter what. Maybe it's because we don't have polygraph's here that the statement seemed so desperate, and desperately sad.
 
Joined
Jul 10, 2020
Messages
33
Age
47
'and I am willing, at any point, to submit to a polygraph test to support my claims' -
I havent followed the whole story, but didnt Ray Fisher originally say that he was making these claims on behalf of others rather than things he witnessed personally? So what good would a polygraph test do anyway? Even if polygraphs are accepted it would only confirm that others made these claims to him not that they actually happened
 
Top Bottom