Television The Mandalorian OT - This is the Way

[Greatoneshere]

16 minutes ago, ort said:

Just, how... how fucking deranged would you have to be to see the last 5 years or whatever and have that ridiculous, utter shit, garbage opinion be your take-away?

 

It's crazy to think Trump announced his candidacy for president on June 16, 2015, riding down that fucking escalator. We're almost at 6 years since then, damn. Obviously he took office on January 20, 2017 but the misinformation and disinformation started then and there (I mean, the tea party and alt-right already existed for a long while, but this took it to the next level). 

[Ghost_MH]

2 hours ago, Kal-El814 said:

It’s fine to be naive to politics or political takes, everyone has to start somewhere. But if your foot in the door involves comparing yourself to Jews in Nazi Germany, maybe cool off for a fucking minute before mashing send? Come on, now. I didn’t know any Armenians or about Armenian genocide until I moved to Watertown, MA, and my first reaction wasn’t to talk about how my specific struggles were  pretty similar. This isn’t difficult.

 

And unless my recall of events is wrong, Pascal talked to her about her putting something like “beep/boop/bop” in her twitter bio to poke fun at people listing their pronouns wasn’t cool, so it’s not like this was the first time, either.

 

Tom Brady is an idiot that's just really good at football. He was all in with Trump, but even his political naivety didn't lead him down the Nazi hole. I think the last time anyone asked him his response was something like "my wife said I shouldn't get involved with politics because I don't understand it", after which he rolled over for belly rubs. There's just more steps to take between MAGA hats and comparing yourself to victims of the Holocaust.

 

This isn't even something that should need to be said, but then again, there's half the country that feels otherwise.

[Brick]

2 hours ago, Kal-El814 said:

It’s fine to be naive to politics or political takes, everyone has to start somewhere. But if your foot in the door involves comparing yourself to Jews in Nazi Germany, maybe cool off for a fucking minute before mashing send? Come on, now. I didn’t know any Armenians or about Armenian genocide until I moved to Watertown, MA, and my first reaction wasn’t to talk about how my specific struggles were  pretty similar. This isn’t difficult.

 

And unless my recall of events is wrong, Pascal talked to her about her putting something like “beep/boop/bop” in her twitter bio to poke fun at people listing their pronouns wasn’t cool, so it’s not like this was the first time, either.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if Pascal was involved in getting her contact not renewed. He could have told producers and showrunners that he doesn't like working with her after her transphobic shit, even though he tried talking to her about it. Again, his sister came out as a trans woman, so of course he's going to take that shit personally. 

 

If you create a toxic work environment where people don't like working with you, don't be surprised when you're not asked to come back to work. Forget politics, or cancel culture, or whatever, you're just being a bad employee. 

[Guest]

43 minutes ago, Brick said:

If you create a toxic work environment where people don't like working with you, don't be surprised when you're not asked to come back to work. Forget politics, or cancel culture, or whatever, you're just being a bad employee. 

 

By definition the things you do outside of work don't create a toxic work environment. Maybe Carano was an insufferable git in the office too, though up to this point I don't think anybody has ever accused her of such. It really is simple, she got canned because she created a headache for Disney they didn't want to deal with. There are tons of actors and directors who actually create toxic work environments that they will happily employ so long as the toxicity doesn't hurt the company or brand. Carano was hurting the brand, so she gotta go.

[Ghost_MH]

2 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

 

By definition the things you do outside of work don't create a toxic work environment. Maybe Carano was an insufferable git in the office too, though up to this point I don't think anybody has ever accused her of such. It really is simple, she got canned because she created a headache for Disney they didn't want to deal with. There are tons of actors and directors who actually create toxic work environments that they will happily employ so long as the toxicity doesn't hurt the company or brand. Carano was hurting the brand, so she gotta go.

 

This world is too connected for that to still be true. Things you do outside of work don't create a toxic work environment, but things you publicly blast on social media do. If I know my colleague is racist, that will lead to issues that aren't the fault of me as a brown man. I also wouldn't feel comfortable working for a racist and I've had to leave places I REALLY like working at for that very reason. That's bullshit and things shouldn't work that way. Star actors and actresses already get more pull on the set compared to all the assistants and riggers and so on. If they're going to be racist/transphobic/whatever in public, then it should be in a company's employees' best interests to see that toxic person removed from the equation.

[skillzdadirecta]

35 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

 

By definition the things you do outside of work don't create a toxic work environment. Maybe Carano was an insufferable git in the office too, though up to this point I don't think anybody has ever accused her of such. It really is simple, she got canned because she created a headache for Disney they didn't want to deal with. There are tons of actors and directors who actually create toxic work environments that they will happily employ so long as the toxicity doesn't hurt the company or brand. Carano was hurting the brand, so she gotta go.

As I said before, working for Disney they take into account your social media posts. We got CONSTANT emails about our social media especially during the election. Its part of their corporate policy and you are an employee AT WILL with these companies especially actors who probably have all kinds of morality clauses in their contracts especially when they are signing on to be part of such big franchises.

The actress who played Shuri in Black Panther was warned about her social media as well... did she double down and keep shit posting? No. She took her Twitter down completely. 

 

A lot of speculation in this topic about what went down here when you guys are REALLY making this more complicated than it actually is.

[legend]

33 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

 

By definition the things you do outside of work don't create a toxic work environment. Maybe Carano was an insufferable git in the office too, though up to this point I don't think anybody has ever accused her of such. It really is simple, she got canned because she created a headache for Disney they didn't want to deal with. There are tons of actors and directors who actually create toxic work environments that they will happily employ so long as the toxicity doesn't hurt the company or brand. Carano was hurting the brand, so she gotta go.

 

I think you're right that the real reason Disney got rid of her is because she was a headache and caused an image problem for Disney. But I do think that when you publicly share things on on large platform that you know your co-workers will see, you run the risk of it feeding back into the work environment like @Ghost_MH said. I don't envy HR in today's world  

[Brick]

33 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

 

By definition the things you do outside of work don't create a toxic work environment. Maybe Carano was an insufferable git in the office too, though up to this point I don't think anybody has ever accused her of such. It really is simple, she got canned because she created a headache for Disney they didn't want to deal with. There are tons of actors and directors who actually create toxic work environments that they will happily employ so long as the toxicity doesn't hurt the company or brand. Carano was hurting the brand, so she gotta go.

 

Except when it comes to being a Disney star where they sign very strict contracts, and they have to watch their social media presence. She was hurting Disney's brand with her constant shit posts. She became more trouble than she's worth (and judging by people's reactions to her acting she wasn't worth much to begin with), so they decided she wasn't a right fit for the company anymore. 

[skillzdadirecta]

Just now, legend said:

 

I think you're right that the real reason Disney got rid of her is because she was a headache and caused an image problem for Disney. But I do think that when you publicly share things on on large platform that you know your co-workers will see, you run the risk of it feeding back into the work environment like @Ghost_MH said. I don't envy HR in today's world  

Again... DISNEY HAS A POLICY REGARDING SOCIAL MEDIA POSTS. I don't know how many times I have to say it. It's pretty black and white too.

[legend]

3 minutes ago, skillzdadirecta said:

Again... DISNEY HAS A POLICY REGARDING SOCIAL MEDIA POSTS. I don't know how many times I have to say it. It's pretty black and white too.

 

We're agreeing, right?  

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

There is a reason why many companies will tell employees not to out that they are employed by said company on their social media. And tell employees not to wear company branded garb if they go out drinking/partying/etc 

 

Not that you still can’t/won’t get fired for something you do outside of work or on social media, but it can reduce the chances of the company immediately having to deal with embarrassment/blowback over something. Actors and Actresses are far more in the public eye, so everyone knows who employs them. 
 

[skillzdadirecta]

Just now, legend said:

 

We're agreeing, right?  

We are but not for the reasons you think  She violated company policy and probably violated some provisions of her contract too. It's not just a public relations thing... she was warned too and probably would have been ok if she didn't keep doubling down.

[legend]

12 minutes ago, skillzdadirecta said:

We are but not for the reasons you think  She violated company policy and probably violated some provisions of her contract too. It's not just a public relations thing... she was warned too and probably would have been ok if she didn't keep doubling down.

 

I see, but my guess would be that corporate policy and contract constraints exists for the same motivation (PR nightmare and image problem), or do you think it exists for other reasons?

[Guest]

29 minutes ago, Brick said:

 

Except when it comes to being a Disney star where they sign very strict contracts, and they have to watch their social media presence. She was hurting Disney's brand with her constant shit posts. She became more trouble than she's worth (and judging by people's reactions to her acting she wasn't worth much to begin with), so they decided she wasn't a right fit for the company anymore. 

I’m not sure where the “except” comes in. This is exactly the point. 
 

23 minutes ago, skillzdadirecta said:

We are but not for the reasons you think  She violated company policy and probably violated some provisions of her contract too. It's not just a public relations thing... she was warned too and probably would have been ok if she didn't keep doubling down.

The existence of these requirements is a PR thing, so, yeah it is a PR thing.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Ghost_MH said:

If I know my colleague is racist, that will lead to issues that aren't the fault of me as a brown man.

 

I am asking you this sincerely: why does your co-workers beliefs matter to you?
 

 

I really don’t care what people believe, I care what they do.

[Ghost_MH]

15 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

I am asking you this sincerely: why does your co-workers beliefs matter to you?

 

 

I really don’t care what people believe, I care what they do.

 

It's easy to ignore that someone you're professional equal or below is racist and thinks you might be less than human. It sucks knowing that you're colleagues think less of you and your family just because of the color of your skin, but I've ignored plenty of racist people in my life (Yay for working in the tech industry in the Boston area). 

 

It's different if that person is in a position of power. There's is absolutely no way of separating managerial decisions or the treatment of employees further down the ladder from their racist views. Even more so if they feel comfortable enough in their racism to declare it publicly. I've never worked for someone that just jumped on Facebook and told everyone that they just hate minorites. To me, it's no different than being stuck trying to work with someone if I found out they posted on Facebook that they thought my kids were stupid and ugly.

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

57 minutes ago, legend said:

 

I think you're right that the real reason Disney got rid of her is because she was a headache and caused an image problem for Disney. But I do think that when you publicly share things on on large platform that you know your co-workers will see, you run the risk of it feeding back into the work environment like @Ghost_MH said. I don't envy HR in today's world  

In the case of whether or not Pascal pressured Disney to fire her, it is possible. Her show hadn’t even begun full production yet, and he’s the main star of a very successful and profitable series. At that moment he is worth far more to Disney than she is. 

 

as for more traditional work places, I’ve worked at places that even made me sign social media adherence policies. The gist was don’t embarrass the company or present the company in a bad light. But yeah HR departments have to treat social media like an extension of the work place far too often. Some have cracked down on the types of claims people can make though. Like you can’t or won’t be fired for sexual harassment for having a picture of your hot girlfriend/boyfriend in extremely revealing clothes in your feed just because one of your coworkers doesn’t like it. 
 

 

[skillzdadirecta]

2 hours ago, legend said:

 

I see, but my guess would be that corporate policy and contract constraints exists for the same motivation (PR nightmare and image problem), or do you think it exists for other reasons?

One other reason... corporate liability.  Media companies are TERRIFIED of being sued. Look at what's happening to Fox News right now. You think they aren't scared? Trust me they are.

 

2 hours ago, sblfilms said:

I’m not sure where the “except” comes in. This is exactly the point. 
 

The existence of these requirements is a PR thing, so, yeah it is a PR thing.

 

See the above. I've had to sit IN the meetings with the lawyers... So no, its not JUST a "PR thing". That's part of it, sure... but they take just as much of a PR hit from a significant portion of the country when they make moves like this. 

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

4 hours ago, sblfilms said:

I really don’t care what people believe, I care what they do.

 

Personally, I actually don't draw a distinction between the two. 

 

An individual's actions and beliefs are synonymous in my eyes.

[Greatoneshere]

1 hour ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

 

Personally, I actually don't draw a distinction between the two. 

 

An individual's actions and beliefs are synonymous in my eyes.

 

Same for me, for the most part.

[Guest]

Hogwash. You both harbor some...harsh...beliefs, and yet function in society like normal people because actions and beliefs are decidedly not the same thing.

[Brick]

6 hours ago, sblfilms said:

 

I am asking you this sincerely: why does your co-workers beliefs matter to you?
 

 

I really don’t care what people believe, I care what they do.

 

Trivial beliefs like which fruit is best don't matter, but we're talking about racism here. Why wouldn't the beliefs of a racist coworker matter to him as a POC? Even if that coworker doesn't act on anything, the fact that he thinks he is better than him because he's White is deeply troubling. Why wouldn't @Ghost_MHbe uncomfortable working with someone who looks down on him?

 

Let me ask you something sincerely; would you be comfortable hiring someone who was racist against Black people? Even if he doesn't do anything physically, and is in fact a good worker, would you still want to hire and employ him knowing the fact that he thinks he's better than you because of the colour of your skin? 

[Keyser_Soze]

There were two places I worked at when I was a security guard. One you had to work with 3 other people, the other one by yourself. I liked the by yourself one because when I worked with the other people they were nuts.

1. One guy would sit around watching liveleak videos, and he said something about how the OKC bombing was a hoax

2. Another guy would sit around listening to Alex Jones full blast. He also had a lot of faith in Trump (before he was elected) and was very cautious about cell phones (he'd buy like kevlar lined cases to put his cell phone in)

3. Some other guy thought it was funny to say asian vaginas are sideways. Then he also was boning one of the front desk people who was cheating on him with whoever she was dating or whatever (I think she was also married with a kid)

 

So the further I could get away from that the happier I was.

[Greatoneshere]

3 hours ago, sblfilms said:

Hogwash. You both harbor some...harsh...beliefs, and yet function in society like normal people because actions and beliefs are decidedly not the same thing.

 

My beliefs don't in any way actuate into passive or non-passive actions that hurt others (for the most part). Carano's do, even if they are intangible in nature, as @Ghost_MH outlined. Negative beliefs, hurtful ones like racist ones, inherently hurt others by the nature of the belief is the key here, I think. 

 

And I do live out my beliefs - I'm generally an easy going guy but I have a very low tolerance for bullshit, and am pretty direct with most everyone I meet, which match my beliefs. I express my judgments freely, the key difference is I don't stop anyone from doing what they want, etc. but I certainly express myself.  

[Mercury33]

So how bout that Luke Skywalker showing up!?!? Amazing huh??

[Keyser_Soze]

1 minute ago, Mercury33 said:

So how bout that Luke Skywalker showing up!?!? Amazing huh??

 

My mom was into it.

[Mercury33]

2 minutes ago, Keyser_Soze said:

 

My mom was into it.

I know we’ve talked about it at length. 

[TheLeon]

I still can’t picture what season 3 is going to be. Mando+Grogu is the entire show. People are gonna tune out if the little one is out of the picture while we follow the fight for control of Mandalore or whatever. 

[Pikachu]

I think that makes it more exciting. It's a clean slate for the showrunners to do what they want. Some casual fans will drop off though unfortunately.

[Kal-El814]

There’s just no way they go the whole season w/o Grogu.

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

I think there was a confirm of a time skip. So maybe Grogu will have also leaped forward in mental development as well and he will find Din to go on a journey of discovery or whatever. 

[ort]

If they skip ahead 5 years and have him talking or whatever it will make even less sense than it already does...

 

Time to be a "that guy"... but I don't think Grogu being so baby-like at 50 makes any sense at all. If yodas live to be 900 and are comparable at all to human development... Grogu at 50 would be like a 5 year old in human years... not a baby. And even if it wasn't 10 Yoda years = one human year, a species where the babies are that useless for 50 years makes no sense. He seems to be similar to maybe a 20-24 month old on the show... so that means when he's 100 he'll be like a 4 year old? At 200 he will be 8? Does he hit a mental growth spurt in there somewhere? The time table makes zero sense.

 

And no, I don't actually give a shit about any of this, but I still think it's kinda weird.

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

There’s been a couple theories about the Child due to his seeking maturity and age. One is that Yoda’s species doesn’t age and mature the same way we all do. There could be a spurt that occurs that slingshots them forward. Granted it is Legends at this point, but Yoda became a Jedi master at age 100. 
 

the other is that something happened to Grogu during order 66 and the days of the empire that stalled or stunted his development. Like some stasis or cryonics. 
 

maybe one of these or another explanation is something that gets explored in Season 3

[Brick]

47 minutes ago, ort said:

If they skip ahead 5 years and have him talking or whatever it will make even less sense than it already does...

 

Time to be a "that guy"... but I don't think Grogu being so baby-like at 50 makes any sense at all. If yodas live to be 900 and are comparable at all to human development... Grogu at 50 would be like a 5 year old in human years... not a baby. And even if it wasn't 10 Yoda years = one human year, a species where the babies are that useless for 50 years makes no sense. He seems to be similar to maybe a 20-24 month old on the show... so that means when he's 100 he'll be like a 4 year old? At 200 he will be 8? Does he hit a mental growth spurt in there somewhere? The time table makes zero sense.

 

And no, I don't actually give a shit about any of this, but I still think it's kinda weird.

 

You're not the only one who has put way too much thought into that 

[dualhunter]

8 minutes ago, Spawn_of_Apathy said:

There’s been a couple theories about the Child due to his seeking maturity and age. One is that Yoda’s species doesn’t age and mature the same way we all do. There could be a spurt that occurs that slingshots them forward. Granted it is Legends at this point, but Yoda became a Jedi master at age 100. 
 

the other is that something happened to Grogu during order 66 and the days of the empire that stalled or stunted his development. Like some stasis or cryonics. 
 

maybe one of these or another explanation is something that gets explored in Season 3

 

It's not really Legends, in ESB he said he had trained Jedi for 800 years. You could quibble about the time between eps. V and VI and whether he was necessarily a master when he started training Jedi but according to the OT Yoda was training Jedi at around 100.