|
Post by ellie on Oct 13, 2017 21:42:17 GMT
I also have no sympathy for Bob Weinstein and others in his company who, at best, enabled this behavior for decades. In fact, I hope they do lose their company. If they have to face deep anger, contempt, and hard questions, they have brought it on themselves. We really don’t know that though do we? We don’t yet know what exactly went on behind the scenes in the organization with regard to HW’s behavior. They may well have tried to stop him. I don’t think one should rush to judgment on that.
|
|
|
Post by coolclearwaters on Oct 13, 2017 21:47:40 GMT
I actually think Weinstein is done. He has bullied and angered too many of his competitors and coworkers over the years and is widely hated. That is probably why he is being brought down now, when he no longer has the power he once had ...and multiple rapes over time is not the same as the disgusting drunken rants of a Mel Gibson.
Things will only change if people, women mainly, are angry enough and committed enough to demand that safeguards be put in place. The unions can and should play a part. There are serious strategies being discussed. I hope they can, at least, make a dent in the ability of these megalomaniacs to continue business as usual.
|
|
|
Post by coolclearwaters on Oct 13, 2017 21:52:20 GMT
They were certainly aware of all of those settlements and non-disclosure agreements, at the very least. In fact, some employees have said that they were also made to sign suffocating non-disclosure agreements just to work there.
BTW, Bob Weinstein is widely regarded as a bigger bully than his brother.
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Oct 13, 2017 22:09:12 GMT
I'm thinking in that article in which some employee said that without Harvey there wasn't a vision in the studio. If I remember well Peter Biskind said in his book that from the two brothers Harvey was the one who really loved movies, especially foreign artistic films. Bob was just in the business for the money, that's why he was the one who managed Dimension, they always saw the horror section as the one that gave them money. They never cared for the genre.
The most silly article I have read about the scandal is by one of the Variety's TV critics. Apparently she is very young because she was just a teenager when The Hours was released. Her favorite movie. She came to the conclusion that Weinstein didn't understand that movie because he called the main characters "lesbians" then and she (probably influenced by queer theory) don't think the term "lesbians" describes them. So yeah! He didn't understand his own movies because he is EVIL!!! He probably haven't read Judith Butler! The bastard! She then creates this crazy theory about how he probably did those melodramas with women in the main roles because he wanted to manipulate women or something like that. Why people can't accept the guy actually loved movies? He is a cinephile. He has always been. He discovered a lot of great talents and really liked mediocre films with progresive themes like The Hours! He is also a rapist and harasser who deserved to be denounced! There are morally corrupt cinephiles, too! And the thing is, it seems to me the studio is finished without him. He was the soul and the brain of that studio. The scandal is destroying it but even if they survive to it they would have to survive to not having him anymore.
|
|
|
Post by ellie on Oct 13, 2017 22:51:47 GMT
BTW, Bob Weinstein is widely regarded as a bigger bully than his brother. Good Lord what a charming family they must be. You have to wonder what their parents were like. As as for who knew what and when in the organization, I guess it will all come out as this sordid saga unfolds.
|
|
|
Post by ellie on Oct 13, 2017 22:56:11 GMT
By the way has he been accused of rape? I read about numerous harassment stories but I see the stories about him being an actual rapist. I’m not suggesting they don’t exist, I’m just asking because I haven’t seen them
|
|
|
Post by coolclearwaters on Oct 13, 2017 22:59:54 GMT
Yes, in the New Yorker article, three women accused him of rape, including Asia Argento.
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Oct 13, 2017 23:03:52 GMT
Yes, the New Yorker article has a few. The New York Times was the first one but the explosive was the one by Ronan Farrow. Also Rose McGowan is now saying directly that she was raped by him.
|
|
|
Post by roverpup on Oct 13, 2017 23:13:08 GMT
Ellie said: And I think it is also important to remember that the bottom line depends on the appetite of their customers - the audience that they are catering to. If there are lots of scandal stories it’s because that is what they think their customers are interested in.
Whenever you are talking about “the media” it means the readers and watchers of that media. They are the ones who drive the content.
So the public is a key element in all of this. This doesn’t happen in a vacuum. It is the public that also thrives on scandal.
Ellie also said: Well said Ellie.
|
|
|
Post by roverpup on Oct 13, 2017 23:24:16 GMT
|
|