• oʍʇǝuoǝnu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    29
    ·
    1 year ago

    Guess I’m not going to be watching/paying for anything Ryan Reynolds in the future. He made that one easy for me, his shtick was getting old anyways.

    • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      47
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      There’s nothing indicating that Reynolds has anything to do with this, nor any reason to believe he could have anything to do with this. Only the rights holders can bring legal actions over copyright. Acting in a movie doesn’t make Reynolds the rights holder.

      I really don’t feel like I should even be having to explain this.

      • Em Adespoton
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I have to wonder if the aptly named Hitman Two Productions was even aware that this shakedown was going on.

        • ttmrichter@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          “Something must be done! This is something, ergo it must be done!”

          Hitting Ryan Reynolds makes absolutely zero sense in this, unless there’s evidence I’m unaware of that he was a) aware of, and b) on board with these legal actions. Randomly spraying bullets in a crowd that might have a murderer in it isn’t how you punish murderers. I find it really hard to believe I even have to say this.

        • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          You do know that the days of actors being tied to a single studio ended quite some time ago, right? As in, “before most of us were born.”

          If you’re going to exact punishment, it generally helps to apply it to the people responsible, not innocent bystanders.