cross-posted from: https://sh.itjust.works/post/1162068
There’s a lot of ways to lose their house. You wish that on people, you wish that families starve while you’re making 27 fucking million dollars a year. Be careful motherfucker, be really careful.
love the call out that they dont create anything. tired of money giving evil old fucks creative ownership
I’ve been calling them WORMs for about a year. White, old, rich, men. See the republican party as well lol.
That’s pretty good. Though maybe ‘wyrm’ is more accurate, since they hoard wealth and destroy everything else.
I doubt too many white young rich men are in CEO positions (some sure, but not the majority)
No, but their trust funds are bad enough.
This is retarded and we should not be congratulating this person on this racist behavior. Shitty evil rich people exist from both genders and from all races and ethnicities, and have now for 30+ years. This might’ve been true back in the day with no women’s rights or no minority rights but it’s not now.
Evoke3626
This is retarded and we should not be congratulating this person on this racist behavior. Shitty evil rich people exist from both genders and from all races and ethnicities, and have now for 30+ years. This might’ve been true back in the day with no women’s rights or no minority rights but it’s not now.
Bigoted, racist, and throwing out no such thing as white men still being disproportionately in power dog whistles…
But look at alllll these outliers! Just because 73% of millionaires were white in 2013 doesn’t mean 8% weren’t black, Asian, or Hispanic! We’re ina post-Racist power hungry oligarch era now!
https://www.statista.com/statistics/300528/us-millionaires-race-ethnicity/
Out of 724 billionaires… 7 are black. So less than 1% when this article came out.
https://afrotech.com/black-billionaires-america
I know you’re a troll, but c’mon lol. Be better.
It’s unhealthy to assume everyone on the internet is a troll. If you’re trying to make a point via my username, it’s randomly generated from a password manager and entirely irrelevant.
The real irony about the AI controversy is that I could see AI replacing the studio execs long before it can replace the creative people.
An AI compare scripts to existing scripts that are popular. Send the scripts to actors and directors based on similarity to the work they’ve done before. If there’s enough popular actors agreeing to work on the project and if it’s part of an existing popular franchise, green light it.
Of course having AI do the jobs of studio execs would mean we’d have a lot of big budget movies that are kinda unoriginal and a lot of typecasting. But that’s exactly what we have now.
AI could easily do the job of a studio exec.
money giving evil old fucks creative ownership
The creator sells the ownership rights. That’s how they get paid if they don’t produce it themselves.
Right, because they need things like food and house. And some guy that was born rich provides that money, so that theyll make even more money for no other reason than they already had money. To buy ownership of more money making ideas they didnt come up with.
If I saw Ron Perlman kill someone, I would assume it was for a good reason. And then provide him with an alibi.
Removed by mod
Is that… are you treating him as fascist? Is that a new expression? Are you trying to make it a thing? Genuinely I don’t understand. Edit: You aren’t even brave to use the term you want to, dude. C’mon.
I believe he’s calling him a faggot.
Oh, I see. Well that definitively wasn’t a compliment. Thank you!
That phrase uses to mean something else back then. He’s trying to skirt around the more modern meaning of that word, with is no longer a politically correct insult.
English is not my mother tongue so sometimes I come across expressions like this one and I try to connect them to things that could resemble them; that’s why I asked about the fascism thing. @boonhet let me know about the expression in particular, so I understand now. Thank you!
They should send him to the negotiation table. Just sit there and stare at the execs on the other side.
Holy shit. I wouldn’t want Ron Perlman out to get me, he’s one scary MF.
If it really was him, then along with the “it’s very disturbing” public comment, Bob Iger seems to have lost his knack for negotiating.
Bob Iger is a jackass who got greedy coming back to Disney and expected he swoop in and save the day.
I’m all for naming and shaming, but what’s the evidence it was Iger? I’m not doubting it, just would rather have the receipts if they exist.
Perlman specifically mentions $27 million, and it’s known that Iger’s deal with Disney was for $54 over over 2 years. Maybe he’s not the only CEO earning that, but he’s the one that most people would associate with that figure.
Okay, so it’s pretty clear Iger is who Perlman is hinting at, but is there solid reason to believe Iger was the quoted exec? That vile sentiment could have come from any number of bastards at the top.
Only that Perlman is saying “we all know who it is”, which suggests there aren’t other candidates up for debate as for who it could be.
During previous strikes, I think it was relatively small groups of men who actually got the negotiating done on the AMPTP’s behalf, rather than the AMPTP itself. Iger was a part of those groups in the past, so maybe that’s another reason.
When I was on twitter, I followed less than 10 people. But Ron Perlman was one of those that I followed.
Dude’s always saying things that are exactly the kinds of things you’d expect Ron Perlman to say.
And the person who said it is who exactly?
I had no idea he was a New Yorker! This is such a New York accent.
Now who in the industry made $27m?…@cyu
Why do people continue to say stupid things on public forums? I understand the feeling, I don’t understand the posting.
He seems very angry and I understand why. I agree with him actually. My guess is that he believes the strong language threatening homelessness to people deserves strong language demanding class action back.
Yes, I totally agree with him, there are just better ways to get his point across.
More effective ways? Maybe. More diplomatic ways? Definitely. Better ways? I don’t think so.
Like what? Would anyone be talking about it if he was more gentle?
He publicly threatened to set their houses on fire, that’s not a smart thing to do.
They publicly threatened to make writers and actors homeless. He’s just being more direct about it.
He’s very right to be angry. He’s also incriminating himself.
He isn’t.
It’s like a mafia threat. It’s definitely implied, but still ambiguous enough that it would be hard to press charges based on that alone.
He didn’t, not really. As he clarified, it was only an expression of frustration and a warning to execs that saying shit like that can lead to a type of escalation that neither side really wants.
Yeah it’s human.
Hope they don’t use it as an excuse to attack him. You don’t often get the benefit of the doubt these days.
It’s very unclear from the quoting here, but he’s responding to an anonymous executive who said they should just drag out negotiations until they start losing homes to force them into a deal. So Perlman is defending the good folks here.
