With recent events about James Gunn that everyone knows about (and no need to discuss them extensively), is Gunn a valuable enough asset that Hasbro could take him on for a TF film (or any other Hasbro property for that matter - MASK by Gunn could be good), or is he too big a risk for Hasbro to hire?

I like to think that Gunn is an asset and that Hasbro should sign him on.

 

I personally like him, everyone says daft stuff in their lives and who knows he could have been wasted when posting those ( I’ve done those drunken posts and regretted and deleted many lol) but either way he’d already publicly apologised for those and it’s disney who have done the wrong thing there. I love guardians and think he’d make the universe amazing if he directed a transformer movie

 

That would be the single best move the franchise could make. And the timing couldn't be better. He's looking for job, they're looking for visionary franchise makers. Gunn's sensibilities as a director seem to lend themselves to the requirements of the concept of Transformers incredibly well. Must happen. Could we send him an invitation, as fans, maybe? Could we make this proposition viral?

 

Eh...I dunno. Don't misunderstand me, I'd take him in charge of the TF film franchise in a heartbeat; but considering their interests as a toy company, I can see where associating with a filmmaker who got canned from a major film franchise just for joking about pedophilia might be a bit troublesome as far as Hasbro's concerned.

Then again, considering some of the questionable s*** that's been allowed in the previous TF films, MAYBE they wouldn't be all that concerned. Can't really say.

 

I'd be shocked if he wants to be involved with TF.

 

Nothing that won’t be fixed, I’ve got a son who is 16....the shock humour stuff he comes out with is nothing I would come out with however given his overall personality I understand it and find it hilarious even though if he were to put it into words it would sound like he was the devils child....:eventually ‘context ‘ will have to apply and appreciate his ACTUAL position at the time.

 

I think he could make a good TF movie- but more crucial than getting someone on board, is getting Bonaventura off of it.

 

So your saying travis knight being on board was a bad choice cause hes seem better and knowing the test screening that happen people are saying it's the best one

 

I'm saying what I'm saying. That's what you are saying I'm saying.

 

NOPE.

You do NOT joke about abuse of minors, even when you’re sober.

 

Considering Disney is already associated with Hasbro via action figures and other items, I would say Hasbro wouldn't go near him since it would in effect go against Disney, placing issues on current and future contracts.

 

Nah, his career is dead  

 

As long as we're in the current continuity, having Gunn on board wouldn't change anything. We already know Travis a good director and hell, he's even familiar with the Transformers franchise but he still had to conform to the current continuity (Bee's old face).

 

I'll admit that thought has crossed my mind too!

I keep flip-flopping where I stand on the whole firing thing. First I sided with Gunn, and then I sided with Disney. Now I'm somewhere in-between. I don't approve of the crude jokes Gunn made, but I also don't like the decision to fire him. I think it was a rash decision, and I think Disney will regret it, especially if a different studio snatches him up for his talent. Plus, I really had my heart set on seeing his complete vision for Guardians. Maybe that's a selfish reason for not wanting him to be fired, but I am a big proponent of separating art from the artist.

This is my thought too. As I recall, he hesitated even signing onto Guardians. I'm not sure he'd want to be involved in a franchise that essentially started as a toy commercial. Also, he has Tweets criticizing the Transformers movies, so Paramount might not want him for that!

I think James Gunn is a talented storyteller, but I'm not sure he'd be a good fit for the brand. From what I understand, a lot of his pre-Guardians work is extremely vulgar and revolves around shock-value. He seems to be something of a weirdo, even aside from those controversial Tweets. Even Guardians is edgier than most Marvel movies, and apparently those are some of his tamer works. It might be better to find "safer", more family-friendly choices for Transformers directors in the future.

 

That's kind of a silly thing to say. Bee's face is the way it is because the character in that form is still very popular and well-known, and even then he's been drastically redesigned to be far more solid and cute and traditional, just with the same elements. (and IMO, executed far better)

I sometimes wonder if TF fans would know a good thing if they saw it. Not that the Bay movies were good by any stretch, or that Bumblebee is guaranteed to turn out good, but fans focus on such trivial and meaningless things to complain about and ignore important aspects of film. Who cares if BB looks like the old design, if the movie's good and it works in the context of the film, why should that be an issue? Likewise when people complained about characters not being the right colour as if that's the reasons the Bay films sucked and not the fact that they're awfully written, shittily directed trash fires. Or as a more recent example, the Starscream/Blitzwing thing. That character could be called Geoff for all I care, if the movie is good it doesn't matter. And the movie looks good. I'm not going to sit here after ten years of shit writing and insultingly dumb plots and turn away the first chance at a decent TF story on the big screen because Bumblebee doesn't have a mouth.

 

I think James Gunn would be a great choice for future live action TF movies!

The Guardians of the Galaxy sci-fi fun, light feeling would so perfectly harmonize with the TF universe!

As for "inappropriate", well, lets ask Michael Bay, executive producer of Bumblebee:



Also, imagine this article was posted in todays climate:

Transformers uses "Romeo and Juliet law" to sidestep statutory rape
But was it necessary?
But was it necessary?

 

If Hasbro, toy company, keeps these people around for more than 10 years and going:

Then... Why not Gunn?

 

Not our place to ask.

I don't see them making him an offer, at least not while he's in the news for the reasons he's in the news. Once the controversy dies down, however, and assuming Disney doesn't just bring him back on their payroll... well, worse directors have been brought back onto high-profile projects after way more awful conduct.

 

Actually it's our place to only ask. Unofficially, as fans. Like a community wish. Other than that, I agree with everything. We're not losing anything by trying, are we? Just, you know, to respectfully express our wish to both Hasbro and Gunn, as fans.

 

It's called YouTube or Twitter.

It worked for the Star Wars fandom when they were unhappy with how Disney is running the franchise and it certainly caught their attention.