Jump to content
rllmuk
kerraig UK

Harvey Weinstein and other Hollywood predators

Recommended Posts

An article about the George Takei accusation:

 

http://observer.com/2018/05/george-takei-accuser-scott-brunton-changed-his-story-of-drugs-assault/

 

There's a bit more nuance to the story than is implied by the "EXCLUSIVE: His Story Is Inconsistent, So He Can't Be A Victim! Gotcha!" headline. (Though the article does occasionally come across like it's about to say that.)

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Freeman apologizing, saying he never meant to make anyone feel uncomfortable made me laugh, as though he's taken aback by someone being made to feel uncomfortable by being asked if they're wearing underwear.

 

 

Basically everyone in Hollywood is scum. Quelle surprise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel sorry for all those children, both stories could well be true. If Mia has decided to coach Dylan post the abuse she maintains happened to her then she's done her a huge disservice. Any evidence tarnished by such coaching is completely inadmissible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In related news George Takei appears to have been exhonerated.

 

https://news.avclub.com/george-takei-says-i-wish-him-peace-after-accuser-wa-1826349827

 



one of the more painful accusations to come out of the entertainment industry’s outing of sexual predators in its midst came from a man named Scott Brunton, who said in November that beloved Star Trek actor and social-media personality George Takei had drugged and groped him after a night out in 1981. Now, Brunton has walked back his story in a new report from Observer, and Takei has responded with forgiveness.

In the Observer story, which was published on Thursday, Brunton acknowledges there are some inconsistencies in his story—which doesn’t necessarily mean he’s lying, given the fallibility of long-term memory. But he does say that, unlike what he told The Hollywood Reporter in the interview that broke the story, he doesn’t remember Takei touching his genitals, a detail that elevated the story into the criminal realm of sexual assault. He also admits that he did not meet Takei again in the mid-’90s to talk over coffee, a detail that led some to believe Takei was lying about not remembering Brunton.

Brunton also says that he wasn’t traumatized by the incident.

 

More as always at the link.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

We'll never know the truth about the Woody Allen vs Mia Farrow thing. They could both be true allegations, either or neither. I don't like the way there are such strong allegiances and the way the siblings are dismissing each other's accounts, whilst each saying they have perfect recall of one specific evening decades ago when they were young children. The whole family sounds really messy and dysfunctional, with so many allegations, so much conflict and so many suicides :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/john-lasseter-exit-disney-at-end-year-1069547

 

Quote

John Lasseter, the creative force behind both Pixar Animation and Walt Disney Animation, is officially exiting his post as chief creative officer of both animation studios at the end of this year, the Walt Disney Co. said today. His departure follows his admission last year that he had committed unspecified "missteps" that left some employees feeling "disrespected or uncomfortable."

 

Until Dec.  31, he will have a consulting role with the company.

 

Disney did not immediately name replacements for Lasseter, but animators Pete Docter, of Inside Out, and Jennifer Lee, of Frozen,  are expected to take on added responsibilities at Pixar and Disney Animation, respectively.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hadn't heard of that incident. from 2015 ?

 

Quote

Actor Emile Hirsch has been sentenced to 15 days in jail for choking a female movie executive in a violent altercation at Sundance Film Festival.

 

He was charged with aggrevated assault and intoxication after allegedly assaulting Daniele Bernfeld at an after-party at the film festival earlier this year.

 

In a statement, Bernfeld, who is an executive at Insurge Pictures, part of Paramount Pictures, said she was being choked so violently by Hirsch she felt as though "the front and back of her throat were touching" and she temporarily blacked out. She was reportedly grabbed from behind, dragged from a table and thrown to the floor before Hirsch choked her, and it took the combined strength of two men to remove him.

 

Hirsch was facing up to five years behind bars for felony and misdemeanour charges, but was given the much smaller sentence after pleading guilty as part of a deal.

 

He is ordered to pay $4,750 (£3,000) and perform 50 hours of community service, and an additional payment of restitution will be going to Bernfeld, which will be determined at a later date in a civil court.

 

Bernfeld’s statement regarding the ordeal, which was read out before the sentencing, said she thought she was going to die were it not for the two people who pulled Hirsch off her.

 

“I was subject to a violent and unprovoked attack by a complete stranger. The defendant, Emile Hirsch, put me in a chokehold, pulled me off my feet and threw me to the floor,” she said.

 

“With the full force of his weight, he choked me until I blacked out.”

 

Hirsch told the court that there was ‘no excuse’ for his behavior and that it was ‘wrong’ and ‘reckless’. Earlier this year his attorney said his client had no memory of what happened at the time of the allegations. The actor has since completed a stint in rehab for alcohol abuse.

 

Following the sentence, Bernfield said she believed the punishment "does not fit the crime" and while Hirsch has a short sentence he may never actually have to serve in full, she will remain traumatised by the attack for the rest of her life.

 

“This act of violence has greater implications than the physical injuries I sustained. The long-lasting effects of this assault will remain with me,” she said.

“While the Park City Police Department treated me with courtesy and respect, this plea deal meets the bare minimum required to placate the regulations of our legal system.”

 

wtf??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's so difficult, so horrible this stuff. I am near the end of Horace and Pete which, if you didn't know, is a play-like TV drama which, "Louis C.K. finance[d] and distribute[d] entirely on his own as well as directing, writing and producing each episode".

 

It stars Edie Falco, Jessica Lange and Steve Buscemi, along with a bunch of other fantastic actors and comics - notably Alan Alda, playing totally against type. It's sad, honest, nihilistic, hilarious at times, and really moving. You can't watch it and question Louie's insight into humanity - it's startling, quite brutal but also tender and forgiving.

 

And yet, and yet.  I loved Louie but can't bring myself to watch it ever again.  If I hadn't been 3 episodes from the end of H&P, I would have abandoned that as well. I don't know what my point is, other than how damaging these revelations are, and how similar they make you feel to your actual, real life sadnesses and disappointments.  Separating art from artist is just not something I can do anymore.

 

Anyway, i'm rambling and don't think I really have a point to make, other than people being harmful to others ends up hurting everybody, in the long run.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm the same with Horace & Pete, have had about two episodes to go for 6 months. I will probably watch them, but i'm not enthusiastic. Separating art from artist goes on a spectrum, I think. Like fuck am I not listening to Miles Davis and James Brown, but I held off buying even the soundtrack to any film with Klaus Kinski in it. I bought the soundtrack to Aguirre just this week, but not the one with his mug on the cover. I will certainly never watch anything with him in it again. What he did was far, far worse than anything Louis CK did though.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had that reaction too. I'd seen Aguirre before the revelations, but made the mistake of trying to watch Fitzcarraldo after. I couldn't do it, I felt grimy doing it. Turned it off. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/06/2018 at 15:01, Loik V credern said:

I hadn't heard of that incident. from 2015 ?

 

wtf??

 

If it had been a black waiter at the event instead the reaction from the authorities would have resembled Mr Kinney meeting ED-209.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was pondering this on my way to work, it is not really about this thread but it seemed the best place for it. 

 

Isn't it a bit strange that we still have separate acting categories for women and men?  There doesn't seem to be a specific reason why this type of separation exists. It is not like sports where a male athlete may have a natural advantage, it is acting which is completely open to both sexes. 

 

I did wonder if it was a useful way of promoting women who may be under-featured in prominent roles in TV and movies and whilst that thought holds up to a certain extent, it doesn't really explain why you would then not have further sub-categories if it was about featuring a category of persons who would otherwise not be represented (children, over 60's etc.). 

 

It just seemed slightly strange in 2018 that we still have a separate prize for male actors and a separate prize for female actors. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is strange. There's probably a future where it's unnecessary, but I think a lot of people would argue that great roles for women are more scarce, and so best actor in a non-segregated category would just be men men men.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Uncle Mike said:

It is strange. There's probably a future where it's unnecessary, but I think a lot of people would argue that great roles for women are more scarce, and so best actor in a non-segregated category would just be men men men.

 

I do appreciate that point but equally if you go down that route you could argue that good roles for older actors are scarce as well.  Should they have their own category? I also thought, but thought it was too on the nose to post in my previous post, that you could make that identical argument for a category for black actors but no one would propose we segregate on colour so why do we so readily accept segregation on grounds of sex?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.