|
Calaveron posted:I mean the character would've been in his 80s and lord knows Marty loved his fatty foods and beer I don't disagree, but having just finished a rewatch of the entire series (sweet Jesus I had forgotten how much garbage is in Season 11), it really stuck out to me just how much Martin was the glue of the show.
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 20:25 |
|
|
AMC has a fuckton level of exposure if something damning pops up at this point, so I really don't think they would have done a dog and pony show investigation just to get him back on the air.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:02
|
|
|
zoux posted:Looks like four of the five GoT prequels aren't happening Just like it was literally reported would happen from the very beginning. At no point were they considering doing 5 spinoffs and they were very open about that fact. The game of Bad Journalism Telephone just twisted it into something it never was.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:13
|
|
|
Yeah iirc it was never confirmed all five pitches would even happen, just that they were throwing around several different ideas for what to do after GoT ends.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:14
|
|
|
A Game of Pilots
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:15
|
|
|
 loving casuals!!
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:15
|
|
|
lmao didn't he also say 'well at least the people who don't like the show are still talking about how much they don't like the show!' I mean any publicity is good publicity so he's not wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:16
|
|
|
zoux posted:
Ah yes, it's my fault for hating your bad show.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:17
|
|
|
zoux posted:
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:18
|
|
|
feedmyleg posted:Ah yes, it's my fault for hating your bad show. Git gud (at watching TV) noob
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:20
|
|
|
zoux posted:
 What do they mean by ‘casual’? 95% of the people watching it?
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:21
|
|
|
Rageaholic Monkey posted:Even if they cleared him, that still seems like believing the abuser and not the abused to me, and it's a real bad look for AMC to hire him back after he just caused all this controversy recently. I mean, they hired people who do a thorough investigation, to do a thorough investigation, and they cleared him. That sounds like “believing the investigators” more than anything else. Should any accusation of being a sex pest brand someone for life?
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:21
|
|
|
Rageaholic Monkey posted:Even if they cleared him, that still seems like believing the abuser and not the abused to me, and it's a real bad look for AMC to hire him back after he just caused all this controversy recently. I get your point and I agree. I mean none of us really know is the thing here. If she has proof as she says she done this is about to turn into something else altogether. But when you say it's siding with the abuser, if you have done what you said you did and come to this conclusion then you are not siding with the abuser. You are essentially telling people he was not an abuser. And that's what they've essentially done. And if they didn't do the right thing here they've just hosed up in a serious way. But on the back of this investigation and if they really did find it to be false or whatever, why shouldn't he get his job back? I think this is something only those involved really know the answer to. We can't speculate because all we have is one of the story and a supposed investigation that clears the other side. They better pray they got this right though, that's for drat sure.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:22
|
|
|
LadyPictureShow posted:
He meant "you have to pay attention" but I just posted the attention grabbing headline for the quotes  X-O posted:They better pray they got this right though, that's for drat sure. Yeah AMC must be pretty confident in the investigation, because if not, executive heads will roll.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:22
|
|
|
People repeated "they're Thunderdoming the scripts, only one show is getting made" so much, I guess some people who love GoT insanely just ignored it and made-believe they were making five shows.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:25
|
|
|
Ugly In The Morning posted:I mean, they hired people who do a thorough investigation, to do a thorough investigation, and they cleared him. That sounds like “believing the investigators” more than anything else. Should any accusation of being a sex pest brand someone for life?
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:25
|
|
|
Cheers to AMC for even doing an investigation, typically he'd be fired without anyone looking into it. And yes, she hasn't come forward with any of the proof. Edit; if he apologizes, he admits guilt which he said he was absolutely not guilty.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:25
|
|
|
Rageaholic Monkey posted:Even if they cleared him, that still seems like believing the abuser and not the abused to me, and it's a real bad look for AMC to hire him back after he just caused all this controversy recently. Your concept of how the justice system works fascinates me. Tell us more please? Like, after an accuser is automatically believed, an apparently legit investigation has been ignored because you don't like result, and the accused has had to prove his innocence rather than the accuser having to prove guilt, then what happens?
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:26
|
|
|
zoux posted:
I mean "not casuals" is kind of the nature of your viewers to start with when you have a paid-subscription-only network, so when those people think your show sucksv idk man I don't think the viewers are the problem.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:26
|
|
|
Some HBO execs are probably really depressed that Westworld isn't becoming their megahit to replace GoT next year.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:29
|
|
|
Norwegian Rudo posted:Your concept of how the justice system works fascinates me. Tell us more please? Like, after an accuser is automatically believed, an apparently legit investigation has been ignored because you don't like result, and the accused has had to prove his innocence rather than the accuser having to prove guilt, then what happens? I saw several people backing up Dykstra, so I don't know what the investigation could've found. And it's far too soon to make a decision on this either way. The controversy just happened.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:29
|
|
|
Rageaholic Monkey posted:Even if they cleared him, that still seems like believing the abuser and not the abused to me, and it's a real bad look for AMC to hire him back after he just caused all this controversy recently. I'd agree it's probably a bad look to rehire him so quickly, but if they did a thorough investigation and found out he's innocent, shouldn't we then believe that he's innocent instead of believing the alleged abused? As hosed up as that sounds. Personally I'm just going to sit on any real judgment til we see if anything comes of this. If Dykstra still has proof (assuming a thorough investigation didn't already look at the proof she said she has and found it insubstantial) and she brings it forward, then we'll know. If this all just goes away quietly I'll continue feeling kind of torn about it, I guess. Like I 10000% prefer to err on the side of the victim, but if it's a case where the victim is found to not be one then I'm not going to side with that person any more-- at least in terms of publicly shaming or trying to get the alleged abuser out of the business. It could have still been a very hard or volatile relationship without him doing anything we might classify as a crime or 'real' abuse and I'll still feel for her for that. It's a tough situation. Rageaholic Monkey posted:If they express genuine remorse and apologize to their victim(s), which Hardwick hasn't really done, then no. He just seems like a dick and AMC seems really negligent in barely waiting for the dust to settle on this at all to give him a job in front of a camera again. I mean, if the investigation was right and he is indeed innocent, then why should he have to apologize for something he didn't do?
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:29
|
|
|
I do agree that it being so far removed from when the events were supposed to have happened muddies the waters a lot. Like how thorough or accurate can the investigation have been, etc.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:32
|
|
|
There are other nerds in the world to hire to host poo poo that aren't sex predators or even accused sex predators for gently caress's sake. I don't see why AMC thinks he's the only one who's worthwhile. He's not even that funny.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:33
|
|
|
esperterra posted:I do agree that it being so far removed from when the events were supposed to have happened muddies the waters a lot. Like how thorough or accurate can the investigation have been, etc. That’s why statute of limitations exist in law for when someone can be charged with something. Rageaholic Monkey posted:There are other nerds in the world to hire to host poo poo that aren't sex predators or even accused sex predators for gently caress's sake. I don't see why AMC thinks he's the only one who's worthwhile. He's not even that funny. So do you just want everyone who’s accused of anything to be instantly fired and never hired for anything again, even after they’re cleared?
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:36
|
|
|
Ugly In The Morning posted:So do you just want everyone who’s accused of anything to be instantly fired and never hired for anything again, even after they’re cleared? He can get another job somewhere else, whatever. Just don't put him back in front of a camera for millions of people to see right after he got accused of doing skeezy poo poo to women. It makes me lose respect for AMC.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:41
|
|
|
So the answer is yes, anyone that is accused of harassment should be fired.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:45
|
|
|
esperterra posted:I do agree that it being so far removed from when the events were supposed to have happened muddies the waters a lot. Like how thorough or accurate can the investigation have been, etc. Looking into it some more, TMZ apparently got a hold of some texts that showed Dykstra was trying to reconcile with him several months after they broke up. Now, that doesn’t mean she was lying, she may not have cottoned on to the fact that she was a victim of abuse until later, but it doesn’t help corroborate her allegations. It certainly muddies the waters. It was a lot easier when there was either an admission of guilt like with Louis CK or strong reporting like with Weinstein, these less clear cases seem to just allow people to project whatever their personal feelings about power and sex dynamics onto the facts. I guess for now I have no reason to believe that the investigation findings are false, but I'm also open to further evidence that disputes that
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:46
|
|
|
As far as I can tell they didn't actually fire and rehire him. He was replaced pending investigation, which according to them cleared him and so he's back.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:48
|
|
|
muscles like this! posted:As far as I can tell they didn't actually fire and rehire him. He was replaced pending investigation, which according to them cleared him and so he's back.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:51
|
|
|
Rageaholic Monkey posted:lmao, this makes me lose even more respect for AMC. Instead of firing him outright when they heard all the accusations, they were like "Now hold on, let's just put him in the doghouse for a little while and see what we can do to get him out quickly." Yes, there is nothing better than hair-trigger reactions before any facts are hashed out. Innocent until proven guilty is such a dumb principle.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:53
|
|
|
Rageaholic Monkey posted:lmao, this makes me lose even more respect for AMC. Instead of firing him outright when they heard all the accusations, they were like "Now hold on, let's just put him in the doghouse for a little while and see what we can do to get him out quickly." So you're seriously advocating for any person that is accused of a crime past or present without proof to be fired immediately on the spot? Is that what you're really asking for? I mean if it is, ok, but that's a hell of a slippery slope.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:54
|
|
|
Ugly In The Morning posted:Yes, there is nothing better than hair-trigger reactions before any facts are hashed out. Innocent until proven guilty is such a dumb principle. X-O posted:So you're seriously advocating for any person that is accused of a crime past or present without proof to be fired immediately on the spot? Is that what you're really asking for? I mean if it is, ok, but that's a hell of a slippery slope. It seems like they want to hold onto him as much as possible no matter what he did, which sucks. Rageaholic fucked around with this message at 22:58 on Jul 25, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:56
|
|
|
Replaced pending investigation is really the middle ground of taking the accusation seriously while still respecting the rights of the accused, so losing respect for them over that is just so weird to me.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:56
|
|
|
Rageaholic Monkey posted:Your posts reek of defending an rear end in a top hat to me, just FYI. I'm far more inclined to believe Chloe Dykstra after what I heard Hardwick did to her. I'm not about to jump to his defense. I think most people here seem to be having thoughtful discussions on the subject about the mixed feelings they have on it. You seem to be one of the only ones not to be honest.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:57
|
|
|
My take on this is that I no longer feel qualified to have an opinion on it. It's just weird from so many angles now. Like, obviously he should lose his job if he did it, and shouldn't if he didn't, but this whole mess is so overcomplicated, jeez.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:58
|
|
|
X-O posted:I think most people here seem to be having thoughtful discussions on the subject about the mixed feelings they have on it. You seem to be one of the only ones not to be honest. Everyone's made mistakes, but I don't think people who made mistakes like that deserve to have a platform.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 23:01
|
|
|
I can understand being super apprehensive about whether the investigation bore any real fruit, whether it's even possible to fully clear him after this much time, etc. But I just can't get behind the idea that people should instantly be punished/fired when accused of something, barring it being like a Cosby situation where a shitton of people come forward to corroborate claims or with their own stories of abuse. As far as I know it's been kind of back and forth with Hardwick even before this investigation, with people backing Dykstra's story and people, even former exes, coming forward to back Hardwick. Like it just isn't as cut and dry a situation as it would need to be for me to agree with him needing to be fired right away, or to agree with the idea that he shouldn't be allowed to have his job back if his name has been cleared. It's a super slippery slope indeed!
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 23:02
|
|
I loving love Frasier but I don't want it to come back in 2018, any more than I'd want a departed loved one to return as a cursed undead.muscles like this! posted:It was a weird time when people tried to bring stuff back as internet videos. Like Jim Mallon tried to "revive" MST3K lke 15 years ago but instead of anything with the actual concept of the show he just ordered lovely Flash videos starring the bots. But not really because he didn't get anybody back and had like Paul Chaplin do a voice instead. Anyone remember the Princess Bride flash series?
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 23:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 20:25 |
|
|
esperterra posted:I can understand being super apprehensive about whether the investigation bore any real fruit, whether it's even possible to fully clear him after this much time, etc. But I just can't get behind the idea that people should instantly be punished/fired when accused of something, barring it being like a Cosby situation where a shitton of people come forward to corroborate claims or with their own stories of abuse. As far as I know it's been kind of back and forth with Hardwick even before this investigation, with people backing Dykstra's story and people, even former exes, coming forward to back Hardwick. Even Cosby got a trial. Presumption of innocence is the bedrock of American jurisprudence, and our criminal justice system's extreme abuses aside, it's a laudable value. Now, the court of public opinion doesn’t have to adhere to those standards but I think people should get due process
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 23:15
|
|