James Gunn's Rehiring: Is The Info Accurate? (VIDEO SCRIPT)

Readers, I started my Friday morning relatively normal.

I woke up at around 9, took a shower, got dressed for and attended job interview that I have to constantly tell myself that I crushed in order to keep myself sane

/So when I came home to the news that James Gunn recently received his directing job back for Marvel Studios’ Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3, and that he’ll be working on it as soon as he’s done with DC and Warner Brothers soft reboot to Suicide Squad/ https://deadline.com/2019/03/james-gunn-reinstated-guardians-of-the-galaxy-3-disney-suicide-squad-2-indefensible-social-media-messages-1202576444/

The first thing I legit did upon finding this out was say out loud:

Is this real?

So to make sure this wasn’t the work of some asshat doing April Fools a bit early, I did the one thing you’re CLEARLY supposed to do in order to make sure that’s not the case. I went to Twitter.

What? If I went to 4Chan, I would’ve just disappointed myself.

Turns out, it was real, /and was verified as real by James Gunn himself in a thankful tweet that felt just as sincere as the SECOND apology he made for those tweets when he was fired in July of 2018/ James Gunn Tweet

Now Readers, while I was definitely glad to hear that not only has James Gunn had his place in the MCU restored, but that him coming back won’t interfere with his Suicide Squad movie

When I read the Deadline Hollywood article that broke the news, I couldn’t help but notice something a bit conflicting with past reports I’ve seen on the whole “Rehire James Gunn” saga

Specifically what caused James Gunn to get his old job back in the first place,

/In which Disney Chairman Alan Horn had sitdowns with Gunn since he was let go, and was moved to give him his job back after seeing his initial apology and how he handled the situation since then/ James Gunn Returns - Deadline

They’re of course talking about the apology he made for the tweets in question and how he proceeded to handle himself both in person and on social media since then, unlike someone else fired from Disney around the same time

(I thought the bitch was white Roseanne clip)

This was the bit that stood out to me the most, Readers

Because when I saw that portion of why Alan Horn changed his mind,

/I was reminded of an exclusive from Variety after the Rehire James Gunn movement was in full swing, saying that Disney was sticking to its guns in regards to keeping James Gunn Fired/ https://variety.com/2018/film/news/james-gunn-guardians-of-the-galaxy-disney-firing-1202907016/

The decision to keep him fired was made by the same person who gave Gunn back his job, Disney Chairman Alan Horn, /saying that despite said meetings he had with James Gunn that the Deadline article was referencing, Horn and the rest of the Disney execs were in fact standing behind their decision to not bring him back./ James Gunn Returns - Variety

Now I say the execs and not Disney CEO Bob Iger, because if you’ll recall in my last video I made on James Gunn’s relationship with Marvel Studios, it was Disney’s business executives according to Iger that were responsible for deciding to can him in the first place.

/Bob Iger just decided to go with the flow/ Bob Iger - Hollywood Reporter

And in that same article that broke the news back in August of last year that Disney had no intention on rehiring Gunn,

/The meeting in question that James had with Alan Horn was only a meeting of clarification and courtesy, and he had NO intention of giving James his job back/ James Gunn Returns - Variety 2

So with Deadline saying that it took a meeting with Gunn to get Alan Horn to reconsider his decision of firing him, while Variety stating that despite said meeting happening that Horn was sticking to HIS gun and only agreed to meet with him to clear the air, which information is the RIGHT information?

The answer is...they BOTH are

And that’s due to the fact that in regards to Deadline, the article that broke the news of James Gunn’s rehire said that there were MULTIPLE meetings between Gunn and Horn before the decision was made to rehire him, while the Variety article back in August only covered ONE of said meetings

Because this meeting in question is the only one the public has any knowledge of, you can clearly see how some individuals could say that the new information as to why he was rehired doesn’t really properly connect with the corner jigsaw segments we put together months ago, back when we thought doing a 1000 piece puzzle was actually a good idea

Don’t look at me in that tone of voice. You’ve had that thought once or twice in your life; you have a grandma

But Readers, the point is that such an inaccuracy can be easily avoided - and not just in the matter of piecing together James Gunn’s rehiring, either.

If anything, using this predicament between what Variety reported on in August, versus what Deadline reported on seven months later, can serve as an example of how to properly use context clues when analyzing information, or a situation that you have in front of you, no matter what it is.

Because I’m just gonna be real with you. If I didn’t take into consideration everything that was presented to me in regards to James Gunn being rehired for Guardians 3, then this would’ve been a completely different video.

Hosted by Grace Randolph.

And nobody wants that.