I fluv that man, seriously.
Don’t jinx it! I don’t want to find out he’s a secret scumbag too…
That would suck if it turned out to be the case; along with Tom Hanks, Denzel Washington, and Fred Rogers.
Some of the males I admire have to remain legit, just statistically speaking…
I don’t think he’d have time. He’s too busy being awesome.
How many blow jobs did Weinstein “toll” out of Gilliam?
You’d have thought that someone who famously had to fight to have his films made and/or released would be sympathetic to people who have been on the wrong side of power imbalances and suffered for it. That’s not even going in to the sheer fuckwittery of shrugging off direct or indirect sexual coercion.
I don’t find it surprising that someone making the quoted statements would also present an argument that is incoherent and self-contradictory.
Proverbs 17:28 Even a fool is thought wise if he keeps silent, and discerning if he holds his tongue.
That’s not enough for me to discount his work. Not nearly enough.
Damn straight, a dreadful choice. And as long both men and women in the industry covered for Weinstein, it kept happening. Could have still been going on today if everyone had still kept their mouths shut.
You can still appreciate his work while acknowledging he apparently has gargantuan flaws as a human being. I recognize Roman Polanski is a gifted director but I still think he should have gone to prison for raping a child.
Damn, to find out “The Man Who Killed Don Quixote” was himself.
Moreover, movies are essentially small corporations. Everyone’s threshold is different, but there’s no inherent contradiction between appreciating the collaborative effort of many talented artists and disliking or even loathing one of them as a human being. It’s only because of the myth that the Great Man (or Woman) is single-handedly the architect of their accomplishments that we associate something as complex as a movie with one highly visible participant.
For my own litmus test, I just ask if I’m giving money to someone I don’t want to support.
I…uh…I have nothing to base this on, but…while I’ve enjoyed most the fiction I’ve read by him, a lot of his nonfiction writing about social issues just screams I’m A Nice Guy to me. I’m scared we’re going to find out he keeps a dungeon for female interns, or something. Louis C.K. seemed like a halfway decent guy, too.
Out of curiosity, has anyone bothered to read the actual AFP interview? Because it provides a little more context for his statements. Yes, he’s a little too dismissive of the sexism in Hollywood (and the world) but his actual point isn’t that sexism doesn’t exist, or that the METOO movement is bullshit. It’s about the mob mentality that takes over any movement, which squashes the ability to have an open dialogue, because any point of view other than the “correct” one is instantly crucified by the angry mob without so much as a second’s worth of consideration. Terry has never been one for subtlety in his interviews, and he’s a total spaz of ideas that just pour out of him without a filter… but the reaction people are giving to his interview is literally proving the point he’s trying to make. The Life of Brian basically made the same point; Gilliam is simply uncomfortable with any rule-by-mob, no matter how righteous or “correct” the motivation behind it might be.
Please enlighten me:
Are people with flaming torches and pitchfolks stationed outside Weinstien’s house or place of business? Or Gilliam’s, for that matter, since he’s the actual topic here?
No?
If not, then can we please stop using needless hyperbole like “mobs” and “lynching” when describing someone falling prey to public ridicule.
Negative criticism is not the same as this:
Or this:
Your nuanced discussion and added context will find no quarter here!!
“have you been here before”
No, that’s not what I’m saying.
What I’m saying is that this campaign is based upon the idea that particular problem can be worked out and corrected without otherwise changing the way our current society fundamentaly works. That’s what I call silly and useless.
Actually, that’s when I tone it down. My real opinion is that the campaign is just another ‘feel good’ one that allows a large number of people to think they’re doing something. That way, all that anger and outrage is funneled down the drain instead of helping thing move along toward some real society upheaval.
But then again, that might mean some unconfortable changes, real ones. It so much easier to take the outraged stance, throw down a few insults through your sparkling new smartphone and keep going through your life in exactly the same way as the day before.
