Scene cut from The Predator due to sex offender casting

[Johnny Handsome]

Amazingly on the issue of a director quietly hiring a convicted sex offender on their film, the person who spoke up about it is the one having their credibility and integrity questioned. Get the f**k out of here with that shit.

Sure the issue could have been dealt with quietly, but this way at least sends a message to the rest of Hollywood that there are people who won't stand for it anymore. To deal with the issue quietly changes little and to approach it with willful silence is to allow it to continue. Not to mention there's the victim's response, who has publicly thanked Olivia Munn for speaking up on the issue, her experience and validating her.

Did i ever say that the fact she spoke up was wrong? Did i ever say that Black hiring this guy was right? Did i ever say that people molesting others should be kept quiet? No, i didnt.

My opinion still stands though, the timing was shit. It's no help for the victim or any other campaign for this movie to bomb because of controversy, and threaten careers and employments from people who were out of control of this situation.

She can do this decision for herself, but she did it for the rest of the cast, no matter how good a service she did to the victim or the metoo or any other campaign, that is wrong, and that's the only thing i'm and others are criticising.

What she did was right, how she did it was plain revanchist, and i don't agree with that.
And i have the right to say that, it's my opinion.

[Huggs]

My opinion still stands though, the timing was shit. It's no help for the victim or any other campaign for this movie to bomb because of controversy, and threaten careers and employments from people who were out of control of this situation.

None of that would even be possible if the studio had done their due diligence. If safeguards were put in place to where offenders couldn't be involved, then there would be no financial risk to anyone right now. I think Shane knew everything. I don't see how he couldn't. But the studio should've planned for something like this. I'm not sure if any innocent person's career is in jeopardy though.

And frankly, if the movie bombs, I think it will be mostly because it sucks.

[BigDaddyJohn]

No problem man ! Mac loves a little fun arguing sometimes ! 

Not a man, but thanks!

Oh ok !

By the way, did anyone saw anything about Munn speaking on Bryan Singer's bad deeds on the same subject ? I saw nothing, and have trouble imagining she doesn't know about it.

She may legitimately not have known about the Singer allegations; as far as I know, they were only allegations (ie: not full-on guilty verdict as in this case) and only came out after the movie had been released. In this case, the guy's guilt was a matter of public record AND mirrored the character he played in the movie exactly. It's a slightly different animal, though I can see where you're coming from.

Ok, i thought he was convicted one time, but he wasn't. Thanks for clarifying that.

[Gazz]

My opinion still stands though, the timing was shit. It's no help for the victim or any other campaign for this movie to bomb because of controversy, and threaten careers and employments from people who were out of control of this situation.

The timing was perfect for maximising publicity around the issue as evidenced by the continued press coverage. That certainly has helped the victim according to her own words. And if the movie bombs because a convicted sex offender was knowingly hired (which, let's face it, this was never going to make money), then good. Great in fact. What better way to send a message. As the old saying goes, money is the only language Hollywood understands and this will certainly make some studios think twice.

[The Old One]

Agreed.

[BigDaddyJohn]

Obviously the guy can still work, but most of us seem to agree that casting him in the role of an insistent hit on a chick guy is in poor taste, or at least very misinformed.

[The Old One]

The guy can still work, whether he should or not is another matter.

[Huggs]

The guy can still work, whether he should or not is another matter.

Oh he definitely should. He can clean the bathrooms at some arctic station that's staffed by 3 or 4 large men with IBS. His pay would simply be room and board. They could set him up in a nice little shed out near the perimeter. 

[Original Predator]

Obviously the guy can still work, but most of us seem to agree that casting him in the role of an insistent hit on a chick guy is in poor taste, or at least very misinformed.

This is actually a good point. Put him in a scene with a Pred dog....Munn may not have an issue.  I can see how she's not comfortable with the scene.  Black was tone deaf on that, that's on him. 

Munn tho better wake up and be consistent tho.  Her employers are the same thing she's standing against, minus the legality trail to their names.

[D88M]

On a side note of everything that has been said here, Munn introduction scene was awful and it really showed that footage was missing, could have not just reshoot that scene with another actor?
The first 40 minutes of the movie were not totally bad but it was already very noticeable the awful editing with lots of missing stuff.

[Naginata]

^ I don't see how that's relevant?

[Uncanny Antman]

The subject heading is "Scene cut from The Predator due to sex offender casting"  D88M is talking about the missing scene.

[BigDaddyJohn]

The guy can still work, whether he should or not is another matter.

Oh he definitely should. He can clean the bathrooms at some arctic station that's staffed by 3 or 4 large men with IBS. His pay would simply be room and board. They could set him up in a nice little shed out near the perimeter.