Weinsteins step down as Miramax CEOs

Chocolat 2: The Squeakque

Good Will Hunting 2: Open Season

would watch a bad santa sequel

Bad Santa 2: The Baddening

still lolling at "Iambic Boogaloo"

What's next? Henry 5?!

Rounders 2: What Goes A Rounders Comes Back A Rounders Again

Seriously, Dude, Where's My Bard?

Shakespeare In Love 2: Rotten In Denmark

Just finished Peter Biskind's Down and Dirty Pictures: Miramax, Sundance, and the Rise of Independent Film. (Awful title.) Was actually published only a couple of months before the event that started this thread--he gives no indication that that's around the corner. Anyway, as someone who's mostly ignorant about the business end of things, I now know more about these people than I ever wanted to know, and I'm amazed a single movie ever gets made.

Hello.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/harvey-weinstein-lawyers-battling-ny-times-new-yorker-potentially-explosive-stories-1045724

boom

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/05/us/harvey-weinstein-harassment-allegations.html?smid=tw-share

This is...something.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/10/05/us/statement-from-harvey-weinstein.html

I want to buy the movie rights

— rose mcgowan (@rosemcgowan) October 4, 2017

that statement really keeps you guessing huh

how the fuck can his lawyer let him make that statement.

He's always been an asshole of the highest order.

the odds of decades worth of actors, actresses, directors, fellow producers, or any number of people not knowing about this stuff seems to me next to nil.

Lisa Bloom, one of Weinstein’s attorneys who specializes in sexual harassment cases, adds that she has been advising him on “gender and power dynamics” for the past year, calling him “an old dinosaur learning new ways.” She adds that she’s “explained to him that due to the power difference between a major studio head like him and most others in the industry, whatever his motives, some of his words and behaviors can be perceived as inappropriate, even intimidating.”

http://catholicap.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/skd229428sdc.jpg

so this guy's got presumably top dollar lawyers and crisis management teams working for him and... that's his statement?

"not used to this new day and age when leveraging your power to coerce young women eager to get a foot in the door into sleeping with you isn't cool. i'm workin' on it. also fuck the NRA and Trump, right guys?!"

oh i forgot about the Jay-Z quote from 4:44

HEY GUYS LETS SHOW HOW CULTURALLY AWARE I AM

Weinstein told NYT he "sincerely apologize[s]" for his behavior, is going on leave.
His lawyer tells Hollywood Reporter he is suing us.

— Nick Confessore (@nickconfessore) October 5, 2017

wow what a total POS

that "apology" reads like a horrendous parody

Harvey the Hutt

surprised it wasn't written in crayon a la tarantino scripts

Speaking of, can't wait for the Tarantino statement. Oh wait I can.

Maybe he can direct the movie.

I posted on this thread 12 years ago jesus christ

lol the I DID IT thread has to do with Harvey's penchant for smoking cigars indoors in CA and not giving a fuck

BREAKING: Weinstein's lawyer gave Manhattan DA 0K after he declined to file sex assault charges against Weinstein https://t.co/LIKNFRWAUv

— David Sirota (@davidsirota) October 5, 2017

bad week for Cyrus Vance, jesus christ

also apparently being a DA in NYC is lucrative as fuck!

People are just tripping over themselves to give him money because they like him so much!

Well, yeah. Straight shooter, that Vance.

btw I thought I posted on this thread like 12 years ago noting what an asshole AND misogynist Harvey was and is, but I couldn't find it via search. Because back then I knew someone at Miramar who complained about this exact shit.

*Miramax

Goddamn this story is insane. Yeah I'm with Josh, there's no way a huge chunk of the film industry didn't know about this. For decades! So gross

so many open secrets just like every other ____________ industrial complex.

Why don't these guys feel shame that these women have no actual interest in them, and/or are actively turned off by them? Do they just not conceive of the women's thoughts at all? Or is that part of the turn on?

Both

Probably. I mean it's such a bizarre fetish, dude looks fucking disgusting & he just wants massages & women to see his whole... situation. Getting off on power and humiliation.

If I thought a dude was disgusted by me, I would feel so embarrassed to try and coerce that dude to sleep with me.

Even more so if the only things in my favor were power/ money/ ability to further their career.

I think you would just have to get to the point where you don't view the other people as actual humans having any sort of agency. They are just your playthings?

Also thinking of DJT lying in bed naked under a sheet because he's ashamed of his body trying to get some woman to come into his hotel bedroom.

It takes all kinds

there's a definite possibility he thinks women are attracted to him

Good follow-up by Rebecca Traister at The Cut: https://www.thecut.com/2017/10/why-the-weinstein-sexual-harassment-allegations-came-out-now.html

Have fun with that, dude.

https://t.co/n0Ty3RiR04

That's an anonymously sourced Daily Mail story though.

Best kind! (I mean, thing is: at this point, sure seems like the thing he'd eventually claim.)

Jeffrey Wells may be the most loathsome blogger in Hollywood, but some of the comments are 'enlightening':

http://hollywood-elsewhere.com/2017/10/pay-play-massages-payoffs-messy-behavior/

Someone please check the lead content in whatever Cilizza drinks at lunch.

They weren't major donors to the GOP like Weinstein is to Dems https://t.co/dIjVRzLRAq

— Chris Cillizza (@CillizzaCNN) October 6, 2017

This sounds like a huge breaking story, what the fuck is "ID"?

― The SoyBoy West Coast (Whiney G. Weingarten), Thursday, March 14, 2024 11:32 AM (four days ago) bookmarkflaglink

Investigation Discovery, a true crime cable network.

― peace, man, Thursday, March 14, 2024 11:35 AM (four days ago) bookmarkflaglink

Included w/MAX subscription, as I just learned.

tbf I think Ratner has multiple accusations of sexual assault and other crimes, beyond anything I’ve seen about Schneider, it just doesn’t seem like charges were filed (and he’s now left the country for good)

Stuff on Mo Troper today:

this is about mo troper https://t.co/4dMaoKrnEk

— floating room (@floating_room) March 17, 2024

In light of recent information, we will no longer be releasing Mo Troper’s album Svengali. Refunds will be available at point of purchase. We are sending healing thoughts to Maya and victims of abuse everywhere.

— Lame-O Records (@LameORecords) March 18, 2024

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-news/dan-schneider-quiet-on-set-video-interview-1235855562/

I guess thank your favorite deity the California conviction still stands:

New York’s highest court on Thursday overturned Harvey Weinstein’s 2020 conviction on felony sex crime charges, a stunning reversal in the foundational case of the #MeToo era.

In a 4-3 decision, the New York Court of Appeals found that the trial judge who presided over Mr. Weinstein’s case had made a crucial mistake, allowing prosecutors to call as witnesses a series of women who said Mr. Weinstein had assaulted them — but whose accusations were not part of the charges against him.

Citing that decision and others it identified as errors, the appeals court determined that Mr. Weinstein, who as a movie producer had been one of the most powerful men in Hollywood, had not received a fair trial. The four judges in the majority wrote that Mr. Weinstein was not tried solely on the crimes he was charged with, but instead for much of his past behavior.

Now it will be up to the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin L. Bragg — already in the midst of a trial against former President Donald J. Trump — to decide whether to seek a retrial of Mr. Weinstein.

It was not immediately clear on Thursday morning how the decision would affect Mr. Weinstein, 71, who is being held in an upstate prison in Rome, N.Y. But he is not a free man. In addition to the possibility that the district attorney’s office may try him again, in 2022, he was sentenced to 16 years in prison in California after he was convicted of raping a woman in a Beverly Hills hotel.

Mr. Weinstein was accused of sexual misconduct by more than 100 women; in New York he was convicted of assaulting two of them. The Court of Appeals decision, which comes more than four years after a New York jury found Mr. Weinstein guilty, complicates the disgraced producer’s story and underscores the legal system’s difficulty in delivering redress to those who say they have been the victims of sex crimes.

I would have expected this guy to be dead by now

Damn.

I don't know how the hell the legal system works and why it would be considered inappropriate to bring in relevant evidence unless the whole thing is just built by and for men like him. how many other incarcerated people have ever had the possibility of getting a "fair trial" by these standards?

putting people through another one would be so fucked up

(prison is bad and my preference for him would be exile to an uninhabited island to eat seabirds and die but if that's not an option then free literally everyone else first)

allowing prosecutors to call as witnesses a series of women who said Mr. Weinstein had assaulted them — but whose accusations were not part of the charges against him.

not a lawyer, but isn't this a character witness? why is this not viable?

Allegations of Prior bad acts aren’t supposed to influence determination of the persons guilt on the actual charges the court is considering.

It’s a principle supposed to protect the defendant, wouldn’t throw the baby out with the bath water.

it's been thrown out

I don't believe for a second that this rule is applied with any consistency

^^^ otm

also like allegations of prior "bad" things that have nothing to do with the case at hand (e.g. queerness, drug use, mental illness) seem to be totally fair game when it comes to discrediting victims so whose game are we playing here

this is like "there is too much evidence that this guy is bad, overturned!"

Rich, powerful (formerly, anyway) and white. Different rules, once again.

on paper I get the need for the different standards for a conviction vs an accusation but the way it works out in practice is always so fucked up and arbitrary and I know lawyers can explain it all rationally like they always do and mask the violence and power through reason and process which just makes the whole thing even more grotesque

this is evidence 101 and you might want to consider how prosecutors might use prior bad acts to railroad defendants.

Weinstein is scum and belongs in prison, but no, it isn't always fucked up and arbitrary.

they literally do that all the time?

it might be against the rules in some abstract sense but so what

lol, abstract

speaking of standards of evidence

Appeals courts overturn the convictions of undoubtable scumbags because of unfair trials pretty frequently

you know how your rapist president and your other rapist president (no not that one, the other one) collaborated in the biggest ever expansion in prison populations and how hundreds of thousands of mostly non white people are still serving time and providing free labour and often being raped because of alleged petty crimes?

but due process and sufficient evidence is obviously very important now when someone more like bill clinton is in trouble and it's worth retraumatising his victims in order to prove a point about american justice or something

I don't have a clue about what legal procedures are necessary for doing this or that but in light of the above that shouldn't be the point the point should be the burn whole thing down, death to patriarchy, death to america, and so on

@ no one in particular except "america"

ok