We talked about Benghazi for months and months despite the lower death toll and lack of new information.This is the kind of comment that caused me to abandon comments when I tried them in the first few months of the blog, this insinuation that I'm doing something devious by blogging about one thing when something else is more important and that this imbalance reveals that I favor one political side over another. When I restarted comments, later that year, I worked on not taking that bait. I write about what I find bloggable, following my various instincts. You can analyze what's happening in my head, but I don't need to wreck my momentum to examine and articulate why I'm writing about this and not that.
But Ann buries [the Las Vegas massacre] under a flood of Weinstein topics. Not even our pussy grabber in chief got such attention about his harrassing ways.
But on the Weinstein topic, I see that I did react, perhaps because that post is premised on the idea that the Weinstein story is so important that failing to address it on "SNL" means something. That is (I can see now), I was doing to "SNL" what commenters have done to me. Anyway, I wrote this in the comments:
The idea that people don't know Weinstein is ridiculous. The movie business is one of the businesses that Americans are most interested in. We consume the product in mass quantities.Ashley Judd was important. Three days before that SNL-didn't-talk-about-it post of mine, the NYT wrote about Judd in "Harvey Weinstein Paid Off Sexual Harassment Accusers for Decades."
Whether you recognize the name of one of the most prominent executives or not, his misdeeds are important news, especially since he was making decisions on what went into a product that we ingested into our brain and our culture.
Even if you yourself don't watch movies, you should care about what's going into the head of your fellow citizen.
Those who are trying to tell me I'm giving to much importance to this story could try addressing these reasons, not just emptily complaining that I'm giving this too much attention. I suspect that you are agitated by how damaging this story might be to something you care about.
By the way, I saw the movie Ashley Judd made at the time she had her encounter with HW. It was called "Kiss the Girls," and it came out in the 90s, when I consumed a lot of movies. I saw it because it was touted as "neo-noir" and supposed to be excellent. But afterward, somebody just reminded me, I said it was the wors[t] movie I'd ever seen. I'd forgotten that, but the person I saw the movie with remembered and said: "you thought it was sexualizing female victims and trying to titillate the audience when the women are crime victims, while acting like it’s taking a perspective that is against crime."
When Mr. Weinstein invited Ms. Judd to breakfast in Beverly Hills, she had been shooting the thriller “Kiss the Girls” all night, but the meeting seemed too important to miss. After arriving at the hotel lobby, she was surprised to learn that they would be talking in his suite; she decided to order cereal, she said, so the food would come quickly and she could leave."Kiss the Girls" triggered me when I saw it in 1997. I thought, as my movie companion vividly remembered, "it was sexualizing female victims and trying to titillate the audience when the women are crime victims, while acting like it’s taking a perspective that is against crime."
Mr. Weinstein soon issued invitation after invitation, she said. Could he give her a massage? When she refused, he suggested a shoulder rub. She rejected that too, she recalled. He steered her toward a closet, asking her to help pick out his clothing for the day, and then toward the bathroom. Would she watch him take a shower? she remembered him saying.
“I said no, a lot of ways, a lot of times, and he always came back at me with some new ask,” Ms. Judd said. “It was all this bargaining, this coercive bargaining.”...
The reason I'm talking about all of this now is that Judd's co-star in "Kiss the Girls" was Morgan Freeman, and this week, the big news is "Women accuse Morgan Freeman of inappropriate behavior, harassment" (CNN). (And here's a NYT article about the CNN reporter, "She Went to Interview Morgan Freeman. Her Story Became Much Bigger.")
I just wanted to note the Judd connection and to restate my hatred of that terrible movie, the one I called the worst movie I'd ever seen.
Posts
164 comments:
I wandered away from the blog for several weeks - longer than I ever recall doing in many years of reading here - in response to the glut of Weinstein stories. It was an uncomplicated response to the uncomplicated issue of boredom.
The plus side to Harvey is that next to him the other offenders don't look so bad. I don't think the offenses attributed to Freeman should be career ending. I also give President Bush a pass on his late life gropes.......I remember that Ashley Judd was in a few movies that I saw, but I can't remember a single thing about those movies. Maybe it was luck or maybe it was Harvey, but she never had a memorable role.
Weinstein is a victim of the 19th Amendment.
Without that setback, workplace misogyny wouldn't be the career killer it is today.
Gone are the days when you can be naked in your office and the women have no access to the criminal justice system.
Make America Great Again™
It is your blog, Professor, and we visit because there is no telling where your mind will take you next.
That said, we are buried in Harvey Weinstein et al., it being the scandal du jour and much more important than anything else in the world and, for me at least, it makes me feel icky all over to read about these people, if people they should be called.
The Freeman accusations seem a little weak to me, from what I've read. Oh, he was flirting with you and got a little too forward? And you rejected him, and that was that? Huh.
Well, flirting doesn't have well-defined rules, because it goes to the preferences and emotions of real human beings. Especially with big stars like him, the rules are different, and the reason these guys are so forward, no doubt, is because it often gets results. Some women dig it and are flattered. Some are desperate for roles, power, and influence, and willingly trade sex for those presumed opportunities (and everybody knows this). Etc.
As for the ones who didn't like it, and weren't into him, we're asked to not only believe their stories but to draw harsh conclusions about Freeman as a predator? Not sure I'm willing to go there based on these allegations.
Women had "Harvey Weistein is God" tattooed on their asses and Morgan Freeman played God. Coincidence? We should have seen it coming.
Speaking of things that did or did not get enough attention, this admission disappeared without a trace:
John McCain said, the Iraq war “can’t be judged as anything other than a mistake, a very serious one, and I have to accept my share of the blame for it.”
I guess no one wants to pile on to a dying man, but this squeamishness should be balanced by the hundreds of thousands of deaths generated by this 'mistake'.
"The Freeman accusations seem a little weak to me, from what I've read. Oh, he was flirting with you and got a little too forward? And you rejected him, and that was that? Huh."
If Freeman was too clueless or too indifferent or too egomaniacal not to make multiple women feel a degree of sexual attention in the WORKPLACE that was unpleasant and uncomfortable, then there is value in everybody knowing it so they can make their decisions accordingly.
You don't post enough about how sickening BC ARM is. Case in point, the "beloved commenter" part.
I agree with Hagar - you are free to write about what interests you and we are all here as it is interesting enough to us.
I bought Kiss the Girls and don't remember a thing about it.
Hot buttons are different for men and women.
However crime victim porn is just something to sit through while waiting for the plot, in general.
Freeman started out with 16 accusers and I don't know if the entertainment reporter at CNN is part of that total, because she had her own story of a constant barrage of inappropriate remarks. We will see other stories in the coming days and they will probably go beyond words and lifting skirts. Count on it.
In general, there's rules for guys with guys, and women sort of hover at the edges, looking for a way to enter the plot.
The guys with guys rules rule everything. They allow a guy to take an excursion with a woman from time to time. Guys know about that force, but it's still guys with guys rules that rule.
The woman in charge plot flicks are revenge flicks. That's a guy phenomenon too, the angry girlfriend.
Romcoms for guys are about getting the girl, and for women are about getting an apology from the guy, usually an apology for following guy rules.
The women want to know they're in the plot.
The guys know you have to consider her feelings, but that's just guy rules about keeping women.
Hot buttons differ accordingly.
This kind of "words and lifting skirts" is not "flirting."
OTOH, I think I saw a clip with Gloria Allred and a Freeman "accuser."
I've never understood the criticism of our hostess' blogging choices. I read what interests me, comment if I have what I think is relevant to the topic. I pick and choose. Why anyone would think our hostess doesn't have the same choice to select her topics is a mystery of the ages.
The 'me to stuff'? Don't care. I have learned with experience to invest energy in only those things I can effect. I talked to our kids about personal respect for self. We as parents modeled proper respect for each other. Explained to both our son and daughter that physical and emotional abuse was an absolute no, never, no second chance proposition. Doing it to others was a sign of weakness, and walking away from someone attempting it on them was exhibiting their strength.
If you want to fix this, parenting is the only fix.
"Kiss the Girls" was based on a book that was part of a series. "Along Came a Spider" was also part of James Patterson's Alex Cross series.
Guys will be guys. Rich guys will be more guys that other guys because more women let them.
Take it as an ordinary sexual difference and enjoy the comedy.
The other half of the sexual difference is women being women and getting upset about guys. It's woman's way. She wants an apology, as in a romcom.
If guys aren't actually interested in her in particular, she won't get it.
So bring in the law. Women like that, ratings gold. So here we are, ordinary life rejected in favor of soap opera.
Darrell said...
You don't post enough about how sickening BC ARM is. Case in point, the "beloved commenter" part.
Wasn't Blogger blocking you as a spammer? Sometimes we should place more faith in AI.
Lefties were trying to get you to drop Weinstein and get back to their narrative--impeach Trump. Nothing more than that. It is your blog and you are free to blog about anything that interests you. More often than not, it interests us, too. Even when we didn't think it would.
How old is the Roman Polanski story? And remember the "showbiz mother" episode in "The Godfather," supposedly from the 1930s?
It is very difficult to believe much in all this sudden outrage.
we should place more faith in AI
It wasn't AI because it would have been resolved if it were, the first hundred times Althouse restored my comments by choosing "Not Spam" in her control panel. And your comments have nothing to do with intelligence most times. Just Lefty talking points of the day.
An Unmarried Woman is the worst movie anyone has ever seen, not excluding Ishtar.
Darrell said...
It wasn't AI because it would have been resolved if it were, the first hundred times Althouse restored my comments by choosing "Not Spam" in her control panel.
Maybe Althouse should place more faith in AI. These programs have become quite sophisticated. It could have an algorithm to detect free-floating anger, although this wouldn't explain the inability to also block Mary and PMJ. Possibly the combination of a large number of posts, relative to content, plus a free-floating anger triggers the system.
"I don't have her stuffed down the front of my pants right now, I'm sorry to say, but I'll get her. Relax!
Down With Love was the last great RomCom, IMHO, The Proposal had too many venal motivations.
tim in vermont said...
An Unmarried Woman is the worst movie anyone has ever seen, not excluding Ishtar.
I went to see Ishtar because of the bad reviews (Fight the Power!). I've seen worse.
Yeah, me too. An Unmarried Woman.
When I read and then saw Kiss the Girls, I had the feeling that James Patterson was asking himself "If I was a serial rapist and killer and had ample money and time and access to an interesting location - such as convenient secret underground slave cells left over from the Civil War era that nobody else seemed to know about - how would I go about it - what would be my ultimate fantasy." So, yeah the whole think was pretty sick.
Didn't see "Kiss the Girls", but I do recall what a huge splash "Basic Instinct" made in the early 90s - lesbian sex crimes by hot Sharon Stone set in San Francisco. Same genre.
Hollywood is pretty much a cesspit. Fat Harvey Weinstein didn't invent the casting couch, but took it to another level.
I never saw a problem with the Weinstein/SNL story because it was part of a larger story, in that the show's parent, NBC, also was the network that attempted to spike Ronan Farrow's story on Harvey's alleged abuse, before he took the report to The New Yorker and ended up winning a Pulitzer for it.
So SNL refusing to touch the story seemed part of an overall effort by the network to keep the story from leaking out (and NBC also had a production agreement with The Weinstein Co., so there was even more money-over-morality here). Of course, by the time the show aired with almost a total blackout on Harvey's actions, trying to censor it by making no jokes about it on SNL had roughly the same effect on the public as Chip Diller standing on the sidewalk and yelling "All is well!" at the end of 'Animal House'.
"However crime victim porn is just something to sit through while waiting for the plot, in general."
Why would you care about a random plot if the stuff it's embedded in is not interesting to you? Plots are pretty repetitive. Who cares? It's like playing solitaire with a deck of cards: You never know exactly how it will play out, but it also doesn't matter? Why would any given plot matter? You could read the plot summary. What is added by sitting through a movie waiting slowly for the plot to be revealed? You're spending 2 hours instead of 2 minutes. Why do that?
Chuck Todd and Jake Tapper demand that Bill Clinton apologize to Monica Lewinsky for "ruining her life"?
B.S. Lewinsky was young, but plenty old enough to know what she was doing.
And I do not buy all these grandmothers now "coming forward" and complaining about Weinstein et al. taking advantage of them when they were "young and vulnerable". They knew then.
Why would you care about a random plot if the stuff it's embedded in is not interesting to you?
A plot keeps things moving. You want chases and explosions. Escapes. But I'm not into scary scenes, which are uniformly boring and not scary. I see the framing.
For embedding, I prefer good lines. Ghost Town (2008), Deadpool (2016), Three Billboards (2017) for that matter.
Romcom good apology speeches, Two Weeks Notice (2002); which from the guy's point of view was not an apology but women will see it as one.
The worst movie ever is "The Creeping Terror". The women-folk kicked their little feet while they were otherwise passively sucked into a pile of alien laundry because the original monster was stolen and they lost the soundtrack.
Atomic Blonde had a meta-action scene, where the point was over the top keeping-at-it girl violence. Also an inexplicable opening tit scene. What was that about.
There's some awful violence-only action flicks that I can't remember to place then, where the absence of non-violent embedding makes it too pointless.
The question of taste is how awful the embedding cliches are. If they're awful cliches, then they don't work to space out the violence and the whole flick goes idiotic.
Dilbert on male/female movie tastes
http://dilbert.com/strip/2010-12-10
We have evolved to like plots. Before you say you don't need a plot, read Infinite Jest to the end and see if you don't feel robbed. Hollywood has certainly focused on formula, though. A great movie on this subject is Adaptation, about a screen writer's futile attempt to rise above it.
BCARM:
Speaking of things that did or did not get enough attention, this admission disappeared without a trace:
John McCain said, the Iraq war “can’t be judged as anything other than a mistake, a very serious one, and I have to accept my share of the blame for it.”
I guess no one wants to pile on to a dying man, but this squeamishness should be balanced by the hundreds of thousands of deaths generated by this 'mistake'.
Oh, lots of people are willing to pile on a dying man in other places I hang out. So nice of you to admit your failure of judgment, Senator. Not that you'd ever learn, which is why I'm glad you won't be around to cheerlead for any more disastrous adventures.
I guess that An Unmarried Woman is the worst movie ever that received high critical praise.
Also an inexplicable opening tit scene. What was that about.
It's not inexplicable to most. They were looking for paying customers.
Maybe Ashley Judd didn’t get any big roles because she’s a nutter.
tim in vermont said...
I guess that An Unmarried Woman is the worst movie ever that received high critical praise.
Did you see Lost in Translation?
All I remember of An Unmarried Woman is Jill Clayburgh's proboscis.
Nobody mention "My Dinner With Andre."
"Oso Negro said...
I agree with Hagar - you are free to write about what interests you and we are all here as it is interesting enough to us."
Exactly.
A female friend wanted to see Steel Magnolias and the theater was empty otherwise. The manager said that we had the only two tickets sold that day. Occasionally, people popped in after their movie ended, but they left after a few minutes.
"The Piano" is the worst movie ever to receive critical praise. Talk about victimizing women...
I remember Jill's toys.
The Piano Teacher, on the other hand, had Isabelle Huppert. Nude.
From Ashley Judd's telling of her encounter with Harvey Weinstein she rejected his advances, for which the subtext was likely the transaction of sex for movie roles.
However, one has to simply Google Judd to see exactly how she presented herself in publicity photos in her younger days.
The results are not unexpected: coyly sexualized and wearing a slip on a bed and looking at the camera, in a short skirt on a couch with knees touching and ankles apart, blonde and nude in bed with a sheet around her chest, sitting naked with legs outstretched wearing only a University of Kentucky jersey -- you get the picture by seeing the pictures.
Yes, we all know: Hollywood sells sex. The producers are complicit, the directors are complicit, the PR people are complicit, and the actresses are complicit. The idea that sex is only being sold on one side of the silver screen is willfully naive.
In the comments of a post yesterday Althouse mentioned "the prostitution scale".
I am not bringing this up to declare Judd a prostitute, although perhaps I may be somewhat insinuating there are commonalities. But, taking Althouse's comment on a slight tangent:
Where is Ashley Judd on the pornography scale?
Many people see pornography as a form of prostitution. Judd's role in "Kiss The Girls" plays visually on the (perceived) eroticism of impending rape: the camera lingers on her body and on her fear, on the sheen of sweat on her naked skin.
If basic filmed hardcore sex is an 8 on the pornography scale (we will leave what constitutes a 10 to the Pornhub connoisseurs) and E.T. is a 2 (I will leave the argument that Spielberg sexualizes Drew Barrymore for another day) where is "Kiss The Girls"? A 5? A 6?
Hollywood is complicit in pornography: I could facilely argue that Ashley Judd's career is closer to that of a XXX porn starlet than to the average woman working in an office. Or perhaps teaching at a college.
Or do we argue that she is not that different? How many kettles of fish are there?
As a slender white Jewish woman it pains me to say this, but even Natalie Portman -- beautiful, smart, slender Natalie Portman -- can be seen as complicit.
And -- after sifting and boiling and stewing all of this -- there now comes the hard part: how do we explain this to men in a way that their simple sex-addled brains can understand?
How do we explain to men that young Ashley Judd with the sheen of sweat on her naked skin is not sexy when we know she is not actually in danger of rape, that it is pretend, that she is just acting, and that she is getting paid well for this acting so that Hollywood can sell sexy Ashley Judd with the sheen of sweat on her naked skin?
At this point I must add a disclaimer: in college I briefly had an affair with a student that looked quite like Ashley Judd, so this whole Ashley Judd thing has a subtext for me.
I also realize that by saying that most men will just fixate on the image of a slender white Jewish girl engaging in sex with a woman who looks a lot like Ashley Judd and find it sexy. But it WAS sexy, I was there. And there WAS the sheen of sweat on our naked skin.
LWL
The most interesting post I saw you write is where you dipped your toe into the fact that a great deal of what Weinstein did was, in fact, transactional. "Do this for me and I will do this for you."
And the fact is is that many women seemed to have taken him up on that bargain. So many that it is only the unsuccessful, those who have no careers anymore, or the most egregiously treated that are making any statements.
What happened to Ashley is not a big deal. He asked, she said no. He asked a whole lot and she continued to say no.
But please note: she never walked out that door... and she was free to do so.
And the other important note: nothing happened to her for saying no except he might not have liked her as much. She wasn't held down by minions so he could have his way with her ala 'Showgirls' (talk about bad movies).
He set up a meeting over 'something' and she felt she had to go and she had to stay because that 'something' was far more important to her than her 'pride'. (Was it money? I'm guessing it was more than $10)
But you dropped that line of inquiry into the transactional nature of what Weinstein was doing because...well...it doesn't make women look very good, does it?
Anne - it’s your blog and your the cook / artist. Weinstein has a huge cultural impact with his movies. And he set up an industrial casting couch that went as far as rape, at the same time being a major democratic supporter- amazing hypocrisy. While being protected in the press, that the press was going after Trump for much less.
I can see why you blogged so much on Weinstein.
And it’s not over yet. Amazing how staged his perp walk was...
Did Ashley Judd call Weinstein's arrest a seminal event?
Looking at her IMDB page, I'm not seeing much of a 'Weinstein Effect on Ashley. She was a 'one part a year' woman except for a brief spurt of popularity during the late 90's when she was around 30.
In 2001, she married Dario Franchitti, a race car driver in 2001, about the same time she dropped out of acting. Dario Franchitti has a net worth of 50 MILLION dollars.
Does it surprise anyone that Ashley might have preferred spending his money than putting in 14 hour days making her own? Does this seem incredible?
But Ashely (who said "it's unconscionable to breed with the number of children who are starving to death in impoverished countries" with a straight face), got divorced in 2013.
Time to go back to work...at 48. Serious work, not 'I'm bored and need to feel relevant and my closet needs refilling' money.
In 2015 she ran out the idea she was sexually harassed and suddenly she has lots of T.V. roles.
She has since decided to steal Weinstein's money for harassment. I think his money should go to victims who couldn't 'just say no' and get away with saying 'no'.
Did you see Lost in Translation?
Yeah. and I loved it. Ever been alone working in a country where you don’t know the language? The silence of the movie is a lot like the experience.
Rh Hardin
Is it all about love and glory from a man's point of view? Most of the books I like best were written by men - say mysteries, then Sherlock Holmes, Dashiell Hammet, Raymond Chandler, Robert Parker, John Grisham. But I've been careful to assemble collections of books by women authors to support my different outlook on the same thing; and it is always interesting to compare them with the men writing at the same time. For instance Charlotte Armstrong and Helen McInnes were challenging the liberal ethos, the one in full blossom right now, challenging it way back in the Fifties, Sixties and Seventies.
My outlook is that the best is not going to be taken from me by any kind of PCness. But at the same time filters and sometimes even censorship are necessary. I have never watched Woody Allen since the truth came out and was suppressed some years ago. No, to anything by Roman Polanski or Harvey Weinstein. They are just the equivalent of brutal late Roman statuary. There are entire books by favorite authors that I'll never read again because the theme is too close to crime porn - voyeurism into abuse of women under the name of righting a wrong.
My individual mind discriminates among these things. The left would either allow it all and say I had to like it all or the reverse - ban it all and say I have to hate it all. They've taken both positions in my lifetime - yes to Henry Miller, then no to Shakespeare.
Other directors--like Peter Jackson--confirmed that Weinstein was spreading rumors about Judd and Mira Sorvino, and that he passed on them both. Because that's the way it is done in Hollywood. You don't want to buck a successful system.
As far as the content, that it the joy and pain of being a writer/blogger: you get to write what you want. That is the singular freedom and you should enjoy it.
By the same token, the comment section is pretty much a good metric of how 'involved' people are in any specific bit of content.
From what I can gather, your interests lie in music from your early years, drag queens, law, RBG, gay men, stupid news articles and laughing at their stupidity/hypocrisy, Trump, fashion, crappy teeny bopper music competitions, and flowering trees.
Some of your photos are very good. In fact, I think you have a knack and I wonder what camera you are using.
I like that while a liberal, you do stand agog at some of what they are doing. I guess age does bring wisdom...though the Academy as a whole seems to defy that adage.
Tell me, do you think that having left Academia, you find yourself rethinking some of their doctrinaire influences?
Maybe it was luck or maybe it was Harvey, but she never had a memorable role.
She was very good in "Delovely" the Cole Porter biopic with Keven Kline. It's the only time I can remember seeing her in a movie but I don't go much.
She is an absolute nut. I read an account of a trip to Africa she made written by the guy who was responsible for keeping her satisfied with the crazy stuff she needs.
It's "Sunset Boulevard" on steroids.
ARM, as usual, had to get the topic over to his hobbyhorse the Iraq War.
He is now lashing out at other commenters.
For instance Charlotte Armstrong and Helen McInnes were challenging the liberal ethos, the one in full blossom right now, challenging it way back in the Fifties, Sixties and Seventies.
Helen MacInnes and Mary Renault are two of my favorite authors. I reread novel by both all the time. Some of my European trips were partly searches for MacInnes' locations. Her novels are great travel books.
I've found her locations in Salzburg, Venice and Mykonos. Plus Paris, of course.
Is it all about love and glory from a man's point of view?
It about guy rules. Make a promise and keep it. If there's victory it's about generosity.
Women are something you want for some reason who do not follow guy rules, but it's very nice if they want to hang around. You're dealing with stuff that makes no sense.
One of the things that makes no sense is the angry girlfriend. That role gets taken up in real life as feminism, and, more and more, the law.
The place of women in movies still, however, is on the edges trying to get into the plot.
Fair discussion of Italy and the euro.
Blind Items Revealed #3
May 3, 2018
A person who has spent time with the disgraced producer says the producer is having the time of his life reading about an upcoming wedding because he had sex with the bride.
Harvey Weinstein/Meghan Markle
The best time travel movies use it as a way to figure out what to say to the girl.
She is an absolute nut. I read an account of a trip to Africa she made written by the guy who was responsible for keeping her satisfied with the crazy stuff she needs.
Other directors--like Peter Jackson--confirmed that Weinstein was spreading rumors about Judd and Mira Sorvino, and that he passed on them both. Because that's the way it is done in Hollywood. You don't want to buck a successful system.
I am putting these two comments to reaffirm the 'and' principle.
Weinstein said Ashley was a pain in the ass to work with. AND she didn't put out.
So the question is one of the juice being worth the squeeze?
Other actors were incredibly difficult to work with and got very little work. Brando, for example. Does that have any relationship with his willingness to put out? Of course not.
Does Ashley Judd have the same acting chops of a Marlon Brando...or was she a 30 hottie who wasn't afraid to show her breasts for a part and could credibly belt out a line?
It is not an 'or' question. It might be an 'and' question.
She is also a strident Feminists (but not, it seems, in the breast department). Does it shock any male that someone might characterize women like that as 'difficult to work with?'
Don't get me wrong: Weinstein seemingly raped some women and was a total boor and bully. Those last two are not crimes, and pointing out that a Feminist nutjob is difficult to work with has very little to do with her willingness to put out.
We hear about the women who successfully negotiated the Weinstein ogre-orgy and became stars. But don't you think that for everyone who was successful there were a hundred who were unsuccessful?- either they said "no" really firmly and never had a career afterward or they said "yes" and never had a career anyhow. That is injustice. It can't be fixed with false accusations or with hatred of men - a backfire of injustice, as it were. The only answer is justice. That seems slow and inadequate. It's definitely slow. And so on the way, we are careful and aware. And, when we are old we support the women who are trying to take another step toward real justice (Get Harvey Weinstein. Make Hollywood Careful Again.); and we oppose the women trying to make the world safe for hysteria. We distinguish. We can, because we can't understand Twitter and are immune from The Birds.
Girls don't know guy rules so can't properly seek justice. They seek justice that they make up.
As we see.
In response to subway groping in DC, they're renaming the metro the meeto.
Where culture and politics intersect there was no more influential person in America than Harvey Weinstein. Most of those who pushed back against the attention you paid his misdeeds were philistines, but there were also a few misogynists.
Clicked on the Althouse link to the person bitching about another Weinstein thread, complaining that she should have been talking about the massacre in Las Vegas, which got me thinking how quickly that story died. That was a lot of people killed. Watching the FBI stonewalling, or simply refusing to turn over any documents about Trump or his campaign, I can't help thinking that the shooter must have been one of them.
How, in all the court and legal records, do you hide that the Las Vegas shooter was a former FBI agent?
To tweak that conspiracy theory, more likely he was a loosely wired mole that the FBI used to keep an eye on Nevada militias or something and he went Cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs...and they knew, just like that Orlando Shooter.
And he was probably a liberal, just because of who he shot up.
I asked "Is it all about love and glory from a man's point of view?"
"rhhardin said...
It about guy rules. Make a promise and keep it. If there's victory it's about generosity."
Is it possible to write a story which is about guys acting by guy rules and women finding the right guy and standing by him? The plot of A Tale of Two Cities. Or what if the woman finds the wrong guy, then the right guy, while they are fighting each other? The plot of Wuthering Heights. Or what if the guy finds the wrong woman and makes a promise and then finds the right woman? The plot of Lady Baltimore by Owen Wister. (Trigger warning - This book embodies all southern attitudes of its era - early 1900's. Can it still be a good book?)
The rare ARM comment I can recommend:
"Speaking of things that did or did not get enough attention, this admission disappeared without a trace:
John McCain said, the Iraq war “can’t be judged as anything other than a mistake, a very serious one, and I have to accept my share of the blame for it.”
I guess no one wants to pile on to a dying man, but this squeamishness should be balanced by the hundreds of thousands of deaths generated by this 'mistake'."
Kiss the Girls was pretty bad, but the "sequel", Along Came a Spider, was decent.
I wouldn't equate Althouse's blog with SNL at all.
Althouse makes an implicit promise through her blogging, and it says: I blog about what I feel like blogging.
SNL makes an implicit promise, too. Although it claims to poke fun at the zeitgeist, we know that it skews left. It protect its own. When it's silent on a certain subject, such as Obama's crimes during his entire run, well, why not castigate it for that? Why not point it out?
What if the guy goes to war and then falls in love while his side is losing the war? A Farewell to Arms. What if the guy is separated by the Cold War and building of The Wall from his fiance? and she reappears (but is she is Russian spy or a true refugee from the Stasi?) while he is trying to track down a double agent.
What if the guy works for the DNC and as a result of his confidential position possesses evidence that the DNC is working against Ernie whom he supports and for Red Queen, the feminist candidate?
"Kiss the Girls was pretty bad, but the "sequel", Along Came a Spider, was decent."
The female lead in that film, Monica Potter, was often referred to as The Poor Man's Julia Roberts.
And, when you look at the two of them from that era, there are similarities.
Which makes me ask: how can a Julia Roberts + blonde not become a bigger star?
Did Julia Roberts pull strings from behind the scenes to crush the interloper's career?
Because Julia Roberts is related to Eric Roberts, and Eric Roberts is crazy, and crazy is often genetic.
And it is not difficult to imagine that a crazy Julia Roberts would try to ruin the career of another actress that looks like her and is blonde.
Can you think of another young actress who strikingly resembles Julia Roberts? No?
Crazy Julia Roberts is THAT good.
-LWL
What if a guy needs his job to support his wife and young children and works for Matt Lauer?
Judd is very beautiful, and not a bad actress either. The two movies I remember her most in, though, were supporting roles- Heat and the cheesily adorable Where the Heart Is in which it was, coincidentally, Natalie Portman in the lead role.
Hagar said...
Chuck Todd and Jake Tapper demand that Bill Clinton apologize to Monica Lewinsky for "ruining her life"?
This is cover to avoid discussing the many women Bill Clinton raped.
B.S. Lewinsky was young, but plenty old enough to know what she was doing.
Exactly. They know this.
They demand he "apologize" for something that wasn't a big deal so they don't have to demand that he apologize for raping women.
Tapper and Todd are tools doing a job.
Leftists who voted and supported Clinton knew this.
They knowingly voted for a rapist.
Is it possible to write a story which is about guys acting by guy rules and women finding the right guy and standing by him?
Yes but it's a chick flick.
Mr Right (2015) with Anna Kendrick might be an exception. I don't think she's scripted to appeal to women.
Anne Hathaway and Julia Roberts both have the same huge smile.
There's no excuse for Eat, Pray, Love though.
Blogger Yancey Ward said...
The rare ARM comment I can recommend:
The Iraq War had a long history behind it. The mistake that cost all the lives was Bush trying to make a nation in a tribal society.
At the time, I thought it was a fair attempt to see if Arabs could rule themselves without tyrants. It failed.
Part of the failure was disbanding the army but we have all gone over this again and again.
My main objection to Democrats since 1965 was their lies about abandoning policies once they are seen to not be working.
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...
Speaking of things that did or did not get enough attention, this admission disappeared without a trace:
John McCain said, the Iraq war “can’t be judged as anything other than a mistake, a very serious one, and I have to accept my share of the blame for it.”
I guess no one wants to pile on to a dying man, but this squeamishness should be balanced by the hundreds of thousands of deaths generated by this 'mistake'.
A mistake supported by all of the democrats. Except the warmonger Obama. And this mistake was further compounded by democrat interventions during the Obama years that turned the middle east into a dumpster fire.
Obama bombed 7 countries. Bush only bombed 4.
Obama was a warmonger and he spied on political opponents. Hmm.
I wont be too squeamish to point out you are a total hypocrite.
I write about what I find bloggable, following my various instincts.
It's true that a blogger should be free to write about whatever they want to. But the past stated emphasis on politics as a field of interest here ("commentary on politics, law... etc.") especially among the commenters, the sheer number of consistent posts per day and the revenue it generates are probably what lead people to question if there's a less personal motivation in avoiding some of the more contentious and serious political issues that get less coverage here as they occur.
Monica vs Julia, Monica wins hands down as a beauty.
How is ANY other aspiring beautiful actress not a threat to another actress though?
If Trump said the moon was made of green cheese Achilles would believe it.
"Not even our pussy grabber in chief got such attention . . ."
Having googled that to see who said it back in October, I just want to state for the record that it was not me.
It was the Other Mark. There are two of us -- opposite to each other -- in case people did not know.
No Democrat would have supported 2003 Iraq if Bush hadn't lied to them in trumping up the selective "evidence" they marketed of WMD.
After Trump, Democrats understand how willing Republicans are to lie about and cover things up. They didn't know how bad they were before then.
In 2000, a Gore staffer reported to the FBI that someone provided him a copy of Bush's debate strategies. He also recused himself from showing up at that debate. In 2018 Republicans want to take down the FBI for not offering Trump personal/political support and daring to investigate foreign influence in the election.
The left and middle have finally woken up to how far the right is willing to go when it comes to lying and cheating to get their way. It's the only way the right can win anything.
Jake Tapper demand that Bill Clinton apologize to Monica Lewinsky
Fun fact -- Tapper dated Monica Lewinsky.
To ARM, every post is a cafe.
Would be great in a committee.
"Nah..let's talk about ___"
There are so many bad movies, picking one is difficult.
"Ishtar" was the worst comedy. Yet, the audience was laughing their heads off when I saw it. I didn't laugh once.
"Natural Born Killers" - worst movie action movie ever.
Not a bad movie but the most overrated serious movie - "Schindler's list" - everyone's sacred cow. If it'd been about Turks killing Armenians during the 1915 genocide - nobody would care about it.
The WORST thing any blogger can do is listen to others about what to blog. The worst are the boring shits who want EVERYONE to blog about the De Jure news item of the day.
DESPITE the fact that 1,000 places on the net are talking about the same thing.
Morgan Freeman always reminds me of Bill Cosby. He's the kind of black entertainment figure that white people like.
I agree with those who claim that Ashley Judd may have been truly difficult to work with. On the other hand, I can't imagine a more difficult business partner than Harvey Weinstein, and people competed to become involved in his projects. The guy was a compulsive rapist and maintained his status as one of the leading figures in his industry. There are very few industries where you can be a compulsive rapist and continue to gather awards and influence.
Ritmo seems to be spreading poison in several threads today.
Do you have any friends, Ritmo ?
I have several admirers but none of them love me so ardently and from so far away as Michael the Monkey Special K.
”It was the Other Mark. There are two of us -- opposite to each other -- in case people did not know.”
It’s in your power to fix that. I had to once.
The concept of Muppets' ejaculate is intriguing. I suppose they'll use confetti, but it does offer a chance to think outside the box (heh,heh). Maybe cornflakes or some kid's breakfast cereal. I don't think the substance can be wet. That would ruin the fluffiness of the puppets which is an important part of their sexual magnetism.
Mr. Right is a chick flick? My husband and son love that movie. Anna Kendrick is the only actress for whom my son has expressed appreciation. That makes me happy because I think she is adorable.
More poo flinging.
I write about what I find bloggable, following my various instincts
Althouse blogs like a woman.
Compare various famous male bloggers, all of whom have a theme abstracted from incidentals.
The Althouse commenters supply correctives where fitting.
Mr Right is an exception in that the women gets in on the plot, but she's not scripted to appeal to women with that involvement.
All the Morgan Freemans act white.
A black actor acting black would present a problem to the left, on the inappropriate behavior front.
Judd is very beautiful
Beauty is only skin deep. Especially in Judd's case.
She's a loathsome individual.
More poo flinging.
Considering how much intellectual sewage you allow into your ears and mind, you shouldn't be surprised.
No Democrat would have supported 2003 Iraq if Bush hadn't lied to them in trumping up the selective "evidence" they marketed of WMD.
Regime change in Iraq was official White House policy in 1998, jackass.
Don't get all pissy because your boy didn't do a damn thing about the countless violations of the 1991 ceasefire.
If you can remember a movie after many years, even if your memory of that movie is hostile, can that movie properly be called a failure. The moving image didn't move and pass on. It added something to your consciousness.
Don't get all pissy because your boy didn't do a damn thing about the countless violations of the 1991 ceasefire.
Ritmo wakes up and history begins again.
Inga is the same but not as nasty and obscene (most of the time).
On the other hand, I can't imagine a more difficult business partner than Harvey Weinstein, and people competed to become involved in his projects. The guy was a compulsive rapist and maintained his status as one of the leading figures in his industry.
Difficult to work with, obviously yes. Creepy lecher, also yes. Borderline rapist who occasionally crossed the border -- very plausible, and I guess we'll find out in court.
But there's no mystery why people were working with him. The guy was seriously good at running a movie studio. Check out Miramax's catalogue:
https://www.miramax.com/catalog/
That second row is crazy. Pulp Fiction, The English Patient, Good Will Hunting, There Will be Blood, No Country for Old Men. And it keeps on going. There are an awful lot of A-list actors in the last three decades who had a major career highlight with a Miramax film.
If your niche is "artistically ambitious movies that make a lot of money and launch major stars," there are a lot of people who will hold their nose and work with you.
Nobody outside of show biz knew who Harvey was until a few months ago. We'd seen his very recognizable name in movie credits, and knew of The Weinstein Company, and related companies, but I doubt the typical movie fan would have recognized him if they met him. It's not like he's Fatty Arbuckle.
The Weinstein company has made many good and great movies over the years, up to and including Wind River, and it's a shame that has to end.
Maybe Harvey is a jerk, maybe he's a boor and a perv, but if he's not guilty of any crime, or is guilty of anything less than "rape rape", it's disgraceful for leftists and feminists to ruin the man, his career, and his companies. I understand he's known as a liberal himself, but we all know the target. He is collateral damage, just like Cosby.
I find it extremely plausible that people would believe Weinstein when he said he could get them roles in the kind of movies they wanted to be in. Or to deny them roles in those exact same movies.
Judd's age at the time of the alleged incident is also interesting. A lot of actresses have trouble finding work after 30. The ones who do tend to transition out of sexy roles into more artistic movies. The area where Miramax had the pick of the litter. So Weinstein had a good eye for people who would have trouble saying no.
Because Julia Roberts is related to Eric Roberts,
I knew Eric when he was 18. Before cocaine, bar fights and car wrecks, he was prettier than Julia.
(and stuttered so bad that when he told me he planned to be an ac-ac-ac-tor, I laughed)
Nobody outside of show biz knew who Harvey was until a few months ago.
Drudge wrote about him all the time.
I would think a lot of people on this blog knew him.
Regime change in Iraq was official White House policy in 1998, jackass.
Don't get all pissy because your boy didn't do a damn thing about the countless violations of the 1991 ceasefire.
Are you calling me names, Neo-Con?
Don't get all pissy just because you are too dumb to know that "regime change" doesn't require full-scale invasion, decades-long occupation and trillions of dollars - and couldn't have happened had it not been for the WMD lie?
So are you guy's sucking Trump's tiny dick or W's? It's so hard to keep track, these days. Trump told me the invasion was a disaster but I guess what was true for him to say on one day to win election is not true for the Republicans who voted for him and know that they'll need to turn it back into a lie when they have to backtrack. Truth, lie - it's all dependent on a Republican toady's political needs of the day. We should get all information from the RNC and Trump's Twitter feeds. Has he appointed a Minister of Information, yet?
The old Roman rules were realistic. Both Judd and Weinstein would have been considered to be in a state of infamy, due to their depraved professions, and would forfeit many civil rights. A politician of the old school would have considered consorting with them beneath his dignity, if not scandalous.
I stopped going to movies years ago. Then I stopped watching them on TV. The result is that what I read and/or hear about movies tells me that they are awful--politically slanted, or full of gratuitous sex, or violent and gratuitously violent, or just plain stupid. Occasionally I am in the room when others are watching movies, and what I read/hear is demonstrated on the screen. Movies are, for the most part, garbage, which tells me something about the people who make them. Weinstein abused women? Not surprising; look what is in movies.
And so also Morgan Freeman, also infamous.
More poo flinging by you-know-who.
The Iraq War was a consequence of many factors including the overthrow of the Shah and, if you want to really go back, to Word War I and the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.
Ashley started going crazy after that series of serial killer films, starting with kiss the girls, eye of the beholder, the one with Andy garcia
My wife and I were talking about Weinstein yesterday and everybody knows about Holly wood and the "casting couch," but he introduced the "jerk off palm tree" and is about the ugliest creature on earth.
Errol Flynn got away with a lot and Bill Cosby did a lot but they were good looking men.
Weinstein is unbelievably ugly and it must have been like kissing a frog for those women. Worse.
Yes I pointed that out that the black legend promulgAted by bani sadr led to the Leninist Khomeini, which caused Saddam to break the 1975 fact, that unsettled Lebanon,
The Shiite militants struck in kiwait
Who were to Kim to ministry who like the top rank of Hezbollah were force 17, (Friedman Wright norton never made that comnection)
Kuwait and kin, the fmr made alliance with Iraq for that reason, as did the French and Germans and Russian (timmermans fanning the flames, and the Sepri report) the us and the UK, did seek alliance with their baathisf foe,
Most of the film's Ashley says she was barred from like lots of the rings seem improbable, others like scarlet johansen were likely advanced in her career.
Weinstein made some good movies?
No. The actors/writers/directors made some good movies.
In any case, so what?
Hitler built some damn good autobans.
Everyone does a little good, somehow.
"coercive bargaining": girl talk.
Anyway, back to what got the post started, the lack of SNL Weinstein jokes: good Weinstein jokes would give ammo to the deplorables, undercut the prog worldview, allude to the complicity of eager women, and confirm that #EveryoneKnew. Can't have that.
Errol Flynn didn't rape anyone. Nor did Clark Gable.
Poor little Wein-pig. Poor little Polanski.
Had to get rapey because they weren't 6-2 with eyes of blue.
Boo hoo.
Who gives a shit. Next it'll be poor little Adolph, no one loved him - so the holocaust.
The Junckers in Prussia used to take delight in designing new uniforms and pinning medals in each other. I see a similarity between their behavior and that of the Hollywood elite with their red carpets and gowns. Also, the Junckers knew quite a lot about waging war but were abysmally ignorant about most other areas of human endeavour. Here again, I see a similarity with the Hollywood elite and their skills in movie making and their utter vacuity in other areas of human accomplishment.
ARR and the other guy at their finest today.
The Iraq War was a consequence of many factors including the overthrow of the Shah and, if you want to really go back, to Word War I and the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.
Oh FFS.
File this one under, "How far back in time will a right-winger go to deny responsibility for what a fellow right-winger did."
Why not blame it on the extinction of the dinosaurs, Michael K.? Maybe they've been getting off a little too easy, too.
People are just oh so mean to right-wing politicians - demanding all this accountability and consistency and whatnot. Remember, this was all to avoid clarifying whether Trump's supposedly anti-invasion stance or W's pro-invasion are the proper right-wing position. He doesn't even know. His answer depends on the political result. But either way, W. didn't have anything to do with his decision to trump up the evidence and lie to Congress to get his daddy avenged. It's everyone else's fault!
BTW, what is Word War I?
Is it Michael's war on the language?
Hey Phil! Here's one just for you, you believin' fool!
Thump, thump, thump that Sun god book!
More poo flinging, I see.
the focus on the us and uk part of the deal seems illconsidered,
http://www.iran.org/tib/krt/fanning_ch8.htm
but as with kurtz, who didn't have a part in this part of the war. yes the peaceful swedes.
I saw that movie too and did not like it. But from that time, my worst movie I'd ever seen prize goes to American Beauty.
I'm growing tired of ahistorical idiots like Ritmo who seems to have no inkling that Iraq was made up of four eyalets on the Ottoman Empire until World War I.
After the war, which cause the breakup of the Ottoman Empire, the French and English drew up borders for these provinces.
The French took Syria and Lebanon and the English installed Husayn's son, Prince Faisal in 1921.
If Ritmo does not read, he could watch "Lawrence of Arabia" to learn some of this history.
Sometime back I read a book called The Peace To End All Peace. It was about how they configured the borders of the Middle East after WWI. One thing I remember was that the Arabs claimed that Damascus was the third most holy city in Islam and should be free of foreign domination. I suspect that if Jerusalem ever falls to the Arabs, we will hear about how Cordoba is the third most holy city in Islam.
yes and prince husayn lost out to ibn saud, who did practically nothing during the war, and the end credit is to the kingdom of Saudi arabia, the problem of course, is the same land was promised three ways, to the arabs re Lawrence, to the jews, (balfour) to the French and british (sykes/picot) that was bound to be trouble,
When you talk about the debacle in Iraq, I feel that some credit must be given to the Iraqis. How is it even possible to overthrow a ruler like Saddam and replace it with something worse?
well the sunni Baathists have been treated as if they were the majority, even though it becomes less true every year, some of the exiles like maliki who were Syrian puppets were undoubtedly substandard, and he was picked to replace another figure, jaafari, who was decidedly even less effective,
The most memorable thing in that movie was the gas line trick...that and the implausibility of Ashley Judd being able to take on someone in a fight.
There was also a scene with a BDSM fanatic. The idea that women might have a kinky (or novel, or even generous) side to them which allowed them to be bound for a man's delight...strange, submissive, sexual.
Way beyond the one strike rule for Ms. Althouse.
I found it...extraordinarily unlikely and if I can't suspend disbelief, it's a 'meh'.
Michael K said...
More poo flinging, I see.
Less thinking, I see.
You so sensitive.
I'm growing tired of ahistorical idiots like Ritmo who seems to have no inkling that Iraq was made up of four eyalets on the Ottoman Empire until World War I.
I'm growing tired of ahistorical idiots like Michael the Monkey Special K. who seems to have no inkling that this has nothing to do with his hero W.'s decision to invade Iraq and occupy it indefinitely at a cost of trillions in 2003.
I hear they're trying Ritalin more often in the geriatric population these days. Do you think something like that would help you to focus and not get distracted?
The worst movie I ever saw part of was Rock of Ages. The part I saw included Tom Cruise's ass (or the ass of his body double). That's when we walked out.
that is derivative of the book, james Patterson was a vp at j walter Thompson, when he wrote some of his first works, a spy thriller black Monday, which was prescient for it's day
first the golden square, which had been trained in Germany, then the Baathist drove the shia and the kurds out of the professions and public life generally, the former formed the core of the communists and the da'wa islamists, the latter went straight to the arms of the soviets,
and later were briefly supported and betrayed by the us, in 1975,
it was the deal after the 1975 accord between the shah and Hussein, that was broken in 1980, interestingly Khomeini was living in najaf and karbala, until 1978, and he was not harassed,
That was a terrible movie. Not the worst I've ever seen, but terrible.
The other day we watched the old 1945 The Picture of Dorian Gray film, which was superb. The next day we turned on a 2009 version to see how a modern person interpreted the story. Obviously we didn't expect it to be as good as the 1945, and we were allowing for that. Not half an hour in, I left and went to bed, announcing, "I'd rather be unconscious than finish that." I was told the next morning that it only got worse from there.
Does Ritmo ever make a comment on the topic ? I skip by his crap.
If anyone knows....
Interesting. I thought it was ok. One that is worse is with her and Morgan defending her Army husband from a massacre in Central American. One thing about Ashely Judd is that she looks perpetually pissed off/irritated/irk.
No you don't, Michael the Monkey Special K. Every time I comment you chime in with the giddiness of a schoolboy with an erection over his first crush on his teacher.
It was a gawd offal movie. But Bonnie and Clyde is the most awful movie ever well made.
Maybe we should view PPPT's repeated gay sex inferences a la Rorschach.
There's help out there.
Ritmo does have a lot of gay visual stuff, doesn't he.
Creepy.
Yes caviezel was in that film, with Morgan Freeman,I forget who was the prosecutor.
Ah the fellow who was Aaron on 24.
The irony was this scenario was based on a real incident, a retaliatory strike against an fmln attack on four us special forces,
If memory serves from info provided by Ana Belen montes.
Michael,
As best as I could tell- you were the only person on this thread responding to Ritmo. The only one. Take my advice- just don't reply at all. You don't have to have Killfile working to skip over comments- the name of the commenter is prominently displayed always
Post a Comment