The 'Richard Jewell' star and Oscar-winner said 'times were different' before the #MeToo movement took hold in Hollywood.
The judge overseeing the criminal trial of Harvey Weinstein on Monday ruled that an NYPD detective who was removed from the police investigation cannot be called to testify.While Justice James Burke rejected Weinstein’s defense attorneys’ request to have Detective Nicholas DiGaudio take the stand, he said that other witnesses could testify about the cop.DiGaudio was removed from the NYPD investigation into Weinstein in 2018 after he breached protocol by instructing a witness to delete information from her phone and failing to inform prosecutors of evidence that would have been beneficial to the defense — specifically that she had told a friend she had agreed to perform a sex act on Weinstein after he promised her acting jobs.“This is not to say the defense cannot vigorously crossexamine witnesses about their interactions with the detective,” Burke added.Also Read: Harvey Weinstein Trial Judge Tells Defense to 'Leave the Witnesses Alone' in Public StatementsThe unnamed female witness ultimately did not delete anything from her device, according to a letter from Assistant District Attorney Joan Illuzi-Orbon, the lead prosecutor on the case. But DiGaudio’s interactions with Lucia Evans, an actress who accused Weinstein of forcing her to perform oral sex on him, added further scrutiny to his conduct on the investigation.Evans has denied that she consented to the sex act with Weinstein, and DiGaudio denied withholding exculpatory information about the case, but he was ultimately removed from the case and the prosecution dropped one criminal charge based on Evans’ accusations.Weinstein, who has pleaded not guilty, faces five felony counts from predatory sexual assault and rape. If convicted, he could face a life sentence in prison. The trial continues on Tuesday with the prescreening portion of jury selection.Read original story Harvey Weinstein Trial Judge Rules NYPD Detective Cannot Be Called to Testify At TheWrap
Terry Gilliam’s mind is on the MeToo movement, his self-identification as a “melanin-light male”… and says he has had enough of white males “being blamed for everything that is wrong with the world.”“We’re living in a time where there’s always somebody responsible for your failures, and I don’t like this,” Gilliam said of the MeToo movement in a Saturday interview with The Independent. “I want people to take responsibility and not just constantly point a finger at somebody else, saying, ‘You’ve ruined my life.'”The director went on to suggest that Harvey Weinstein’s accusers were to blame for the “choices” they made.Also Read: Terry Gilliam Lets Loose on 'Don Quixote,' Trump, Harvey Weinstein, Marvel and More“There are many victims in Harvey’s life,” Gilliam said, “and I feel sympathy for them, but then, Hollywood is full of very ambitious people who are adults and they make choices. We all make choices, and I could tell you who did make the choice and who didn’t. I hate Harvey. I had to work with him and I know the abuse.”He continued: “I can tell you about a very well-known actress coming up to me and saying, ‘What do I have to do to get in your film, Terry?’ I don’t understand why people behave as if this hasn’t been going on as long as there’ve been powerful people. I understand that men have had more power longer, but I’m tired, as a white male, of being blamed for everything that is wrong with the world. I didn’t do it!”During the 2018 Karlovy Vary International Film Festival, the former Monty Python member said he tells “the world now I’m a black lesbian” in response to calls to diversify the field of comedy.Also Read: Terry Gilliam Trashes 'Black Panther': 'It's Utter Bulls--'“I don’t like the term black or white. I’m now referring to myself as a melanin-light male. I can’t stand the simplistic, tribalistic behaviour that we’re going through at the moment,” he told The Independent, referring to his older comments.“I’m talking about being a man accused of all the wrong in the world because I’m white-skinned. So I better not be a man. I better not be white. OK, since I don’t find men sexually attractive, I’ve got to be a lesbian. What else can I be? I like girls. These are just logical steps.”Gilliam’s latest film, “The Man Who Killed Don Quixote,” will roll out in New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Austin and other top markets starting April 19. The film will also be released on all major VOD platforms on the 19th, as well, and will continue to expand theatrically throughout the spring and beyond.Read original story Terry Gilliam: I’m ‘Tired’ of White Men Being ‘Blamed for Everything That is Wrong’ in the World At TheWrap
This Monday, jury selection will begin in the criminal trial of Harvey Weinstein. Throughout his career, Weinstein abused, manipulated, bullied and sexually assaulted hundreds of women. I am one of the many that he has harmed. His criminal acts reflect an industry that condones toxic and dangerous work environments for females who are expected to keep quiet on the set. But the film industry is not singular in its abusive ways toward women.In this MeToo era, it is still the norm for women not to be believed. As we watch the Weinstein trial in real time — and his lawyers collect hefty sums to dismiss the truth and discredit the brave survivors who will take the witness stand — now, more than ever, we must support these women to see that justice is served. Make no mistake that this landmark case will affect the number of assaults and rapes that are reported and prosecuted. If we see that money and power can buy a get out of jail card, it sends a strong message to women that their truth will be always be challenged.The same is true for the life force responsible for the water we drink and the air we breathe, Mother Nature. Like the countless survivors who are subjected to scrutiny and blame for crimes that take place inside their bodies, our earth is being violently assaulted. Her roots have been torn out of the soil; her sorrow is flooding our land. We see her anger burn like wildfire. We feel her trauma in the sinking earth and we do nothing to help her.Also Read: Harvey Weinstein's Criminal Trial Starts Monday - Here's What to ExpectThe parallels between the climate change crisis and rape are as clear as a blue sky. As a longtime activist for both issues, my hope is that the only time we are looking backward is to learn from our mistakes. When we say times up, we are pointedly speaking to both the abusers and the proactive climate-change denial by the Trump administration. Both are national emergencies that are largely ignored by our representatives.It took a choir of women’s voices, centuries of abuse and bloodshed for the pendulum to swing in the other direction on abusive behavior against women. When women in film like me and many others — the silence breakers — banded together in solidarity against the gross misuse of power in our industry, the time was finally “right” for people to wake up and take notice. We, along with male allies like Ronan Farrow, were able to amplify Tarana Burke’s MeToo battle cry into a movement and demand that predators be held accountable for their actions.The silence breakers who exposed themselves in going public with their experiences were not only hoping to create change for women in Hollywood but in our culture at large. While film is a visual medium, a character is only as good as his or her voice. It is dialogue that tells the story.Also Read: LA District Attorney Is Reviewing 8 Accusations of Sexual Misconduct Against Harvey WeinsteinMother Earth needs our help too. Every human life is dependent on protecting our planet. We breathe her air, drink her water and bask in her sunlight. Yet, we have violated and abused her. We have ignored her cries for help.Women are innately connected to the earth’s ability to grow and give life. Mother Earth is MeToo. We have shared trauma that needs nurturing and healing. It is our responsibility to help her by adopting natural climate solutions and a planetary health diet, leave fossil fuels in the ground and restrict emissions.These two movements are intrinsically intertwined. They both require us, as a society, to find common ground, to respect one another and the earth we dwell upon. To look at what we can do right now to support both causes. To create and speak a language that we all can acknowledge and understand, one of hope, peace and change.As we begin not only a new year but a new decade, women are reclaiming their freedoms by seeking a better, safer and kinder world to live in. I want more for myself, for other women, for my daughter. We deserve to walk this earth without trepidation of being verbally, physically or sexually attacked on a daily basis.Also Read: Melania Trump Downplays Husband's Greta Thunberg Diss: Barron 'Is Not an Activist Who Travels the Globe'If you don’t know where to begin, look no further than the many fearless heroines leading the charge. If 16-year-old Greta Thunberg can see the error of our ways and dedicate her young life to raising awareness and demanding transparency and change, we can too. If Jane Fonda can band together environmentalists and supporters to protest with her FireDrillFridays, we can too. If the simple but profound phrase MeToo answered the cries of millions of people who had been sexually assaulted, we can muster the same kind of advocacy to combat climate change.There will always be people who seek to destroy rather than protect our earth and the people who inhabit it. With all change, there are growing pains but as a collective community, we rise above the discomfort and discrimination with steadfast determination and heart. We dig our heels into the soil to preserve and nurture it and the women who have been harmed. We will be louder and stronger than animosity and ignorance and step into our organic roles as organic warriors, the way Mother Nature intended us to.Read original story Rosanna Arquette: How the MeToo and Climate Change Movements Are ‘Intertwined’ (Guest Blog) At TheWrap
“Welcome to my velvet prison,” Terry Gilliam said as he walked into the restaurant at the Four Seasons hotel in Beverly Hills. Casual in what appeared to be a robe of some sort, the filmmaker, animator and Monty Python member was in Los Angeles for a few days, ostensibly to whip up some awards attention for “The Man Who Killed Don Quixote,” the freewheeling riff on Cervantes that had been almost three decades in the making before he finally made it with Adam Driver and Jonathan Pryce.But at the age of 79, Gilliam isn’t the kind of guy to stick to one subject – not when it’s the 50th anniversary of Python, not when he has a history of misadventures on screen and off with the likes of “Brazil,” “The Adventures of Baron Munchausen,” “The Fisher King,” “The Imaginariuym of Doctor Parnassus” and others, and not when there’s Brexit, Boris Johnson, Donald Trump, Netflix, Harvey Weinstein and the rise of the comedy police to talk about.So what brings you to Los Angeles? I don’t know. It’s a strange moment. My daughter, Amy, was one of the producers of “Quixote,” and she said, “This is crazy. It’s awards season, and we don’t exist.” Everybody’s talking about the 10 million Adam Driver films that have come out, and “Quixote” doesn’t exist because we had probably the worst distribution I’ve ever experienced in my life.So Amy talked to our fairy godmother, the lady who made the film possible — she’d come in at the last moment and given us the money we couldn’t get for years. And she said, “Let’s get Terry out here and do some things and get some press.”I don’t know what it means, because we’re not going to be nominated for anything. But we do actually have the Academy streaming the film, which is good. It’s slightly odd, but I just didn’t want the film to just disappear because it’s a really good film. And I think it’s Adam’s best performance this year, personally.Also Read: 'The Man Who Killed Don Quixote' Film Review: Terry Gilliam Finally Delivers Messy FunIn a way, I suppose it’s only fitting that even after you finished the damn thing, it’s still a struggle. It’s a perfect “Quixote” story. “Quixote” is always about the nightmare of thinking you’ve achieved something, and then bang, you’re down on the floor again.When you got to the end of it, was there a feeling of, “Oh s—, I finished this. What now?” Not really. (Pause) Well, there is the “What now?” question. Because I don’t have a f—ing clue what now. When you finish a film there’s always this postnatal depression that goes on for me [for] six months, but always there was “Quixote” waiting in the wings, saying, “Come on, come back and see if we can make this thing.” And now I don’t have anything.I’m playing with a few things, but I just don’t know. It’s the first time in my life I felt this. Maybe I have burned myself out. I’m reading like mad trying to get something that kicks me into belief again. Maybe the problem is getting old. You get weary. My life and my filmmaking has been about fights, and now there’s nobody attacking me. (Laughs)We’ll see what’s going. I’m working with Richard LaGravenese on an old script that we had years ago, trying to see if we can update it and make it work. We thought, well, maybe we can extend this and make a six-part TV series. Because the money is sitting there at Netflix and all the other streamers. But when you see Marty (Scorsese) doing what he does, the Coen brothers doing it, I’m not sure if Netflix is going to have any money left by the time I get there.Also Read: Terry Gilliam Feels a 'Huge Emptiness' Waiting for Him Now That 'Don Quixote' Is Finally FinishedSo that’s the likely course rather than theatrical? Independent distribution is really f—ed. They don’t have any money anymore. And how do you compete with “Avengers” and things like that? It’s only at this time of year when you get a sense that there are independent films out there, because they’re spending all their money for the awards.There must have been a point in your career when Hollywood would have given you “Avengers”-style movies. When I was younger, I would’ve loved to have done that kind of work. But not now. There’s so many good technical directors out there. I don’t know their names – nobody knows their names – but boy, they can do the job. And even fairly recently, somebody was talking to me about one of the big things. But I just don’t want to work on that kind of movie, because they’re basically factory systems. And why?The one person I admire at the moment is Taika Waititi. A couple of years ago at Christmas, my son put on “Thor: Ragnarok.” I said, “I don’t want to see this stuff,” but it was really funny. And I think “Jojo Rabbit” is wonderful, just fantastic.He’s facing questions like, “Should you really joke about Nazis today?” Exactly. You can’t joke about anything these days. You might cause offense, and offense is a crime against humanity and must be stopped. You might make somebody think, and that’s really dangerous.That’s why “Jojo Rabbit” is such a brilliant film, because he deals with Nazis and his touch is perfect. I never laughed as hard as I did in “Jojo Rabbit,” with the German version of “I Want to Hold Your Hand.” But his balance was so beautiful and the story is wonderful.I don’t know where we are these days. The problem is that our politicians in America and now Britain are so beyond satire. They’re the joke, but it’s not laughable. Boris Johnson and Donald Trump are the clowns, but they’re not funny. They’re the other side of clowning, the dark side.Also Read: Taika Waititi Says He Didn't Even Try to Pitch Studios on His WWII Comedy 'Jojo Rabbit'You left the United States, where you were born and raised, to go to Britain in the 1960s? ’67. I was fed up with America. I was angry because there was a war going on and the civil rights movement was in full flow and friends were getting seriously hurt. When you’re raised here, you begin to believe that America stands for truth, justice and all of those things. And it was a moment of looking around saying, “This is not the place I thought it was. I want out because I am angry, and when I’m angry I’m not much fun to be around.”Did it make you less angry to be over there? Yeah. I suppose that I realized for all the faults in the country, they weren’t my fault, because I wasn’t born there. Getting to England just took the weight off my shoulders, and I loved the culture there.I went there because I believed in what I thought the country stood for — a liberal attitude, an intelligent, liberal, embrace of everybody. And it’s now become bitter, racist, hating immigrants. It’s horrible. They’ve become as ideologically confused as Americans, and the big lie seems to work. We’re out of Europe. It is a f—ing little island that doesn’t make anything anymore, and I don’t know how it’s going to survive.When you’re thinking about what to do next, are you thinking about projects that would reflect what you see in the world? Yeah. But the problem is that it’s so hard to work out how you satirize this stuff, because it is already satirical in the worst possible way. I mean, everything I’ve done to me is relating to the world we live in in some way. And I’m finding it so hard at the moment to find a way of doing it that’s still funny. I’m just not laughing anymore.When they did the 40th anniversary re-release of “Monty Python’s Life of Brian” early this year, it could not have been much timelier. It’s totally prescient, that film. It’s prescient and it’s funny and it’s honest. But a year or so ago, the new head of comedy at the BBC made this big public statement that Monty Python would never be commissioned now, because it was six white guys. ‘Cause they’re into diversity now, not comedy. Well, I was diverse. I was an American, I wasn’t British. Graham Chapman was gay. So we were pretty diverse. Some studied English history, others weren’t into law. What more do you want? (Laughs)When I was promoting “Quixote,” I was asked my feelings about that in a press conference in Germany. And I said, “Well, as a white male, I’m really tired of being blamed for all the wrongs on the planet. From now on, I want you to call me Loretta. I’m a black lesbian in transition.”I got a laugh, of course. But the British liberal press has tried to be so much like the Hollywood press, and Hollywood is just crazed now. It’s like a little village where at any moment there’s only one way to think about things. And so I was pilloried for causing harm to people by what I said. Harm. They don’t even know what the word harm means anymore. I ruffled somebody’s feathers? That’s harm?And “I want you to call me Loretta” is, after all, a quote that Eric Idle’s character says in a scene from “Life of Brian” that’s all about the rise of extreme political correctness. The common good is not important anymore. It’s “me” and “I feel” and “you must never say anything critical of me or my behavior,” because that’s offending.I sound like some old right winger, I know. After I made that statement in Germany, I did an interview with a really good journalist who said, “Many of the things you say sound very similar to what the neo-Nazis say.” I’m 180 degrees the opposite of them. And I said, “Whatever you write, please write this: When we can’t distinguish between humor and hatred, we are f—ed.”Python must have gotten plenty of people saying, “Oh, you shouldn’t joke about that.” No, we didn’t. I did an interview for the 50th anniversary, and Python used to always refer to “fat, ignorant bastards.” And they were worried about the offense we were causing by saying that. I said, “They were fat, ignorant bastards – that wasn’t offensive, it was just a statement of fact.” (Laughs)You can’t be critical. You can’t say anything that’s humorous, critical, questioning, because somebody will be offended. I got an award once for an opera, and I talked about the fact that I didn’t want the lead singer to be just some 50-year-old fat woman. And there was so much shock over me saying fat woman that I had to backtrack and explain what I really meant: There are fat women who sing, and if they’re supposed to be playing a 16-year-old Juliet, give me a break.So basically, you’ve been saying things that get you into trouble for years. Right. I think the problem of being of an advanced age is just you get dismissed as an old fart who doesn’t know the world. I know what’s going on and, but I do a lot of complaining because I can get away with it. I don’t give a s— what you think, which is not particularly helpful.So when you started the TV show in ’69 did you guys have any sense that what you were doing was significant? We were just doing what we want to do and getting away with it. Nothing more. We were just delighted that we had the opportunity to do what we wanted to do, and we had the BBC as an outlet. There were only three channels then, right? So everybody saw what you did. We went on on Sunday night, and on Monday morning everybody at work was around the water cooler talking about it. That doesn’t exist anymore because there’s so many choices.We just thought about each show as the end, to make it as funny as we could. We argued amongst ourselves, but the good thing about the group was there was a mutual respect in the work. Individually, we’d get in huge fights about each other, but we all felt that the work was the key thing. And when I look back, it’s incredibly rare to have your own television show where there’s no producer, no executives saying, “This is what you need to do. This is the audience we want you to go for it.”That’s why I do find it funny that we are 50 years on and we’re legendary now. (Laughs) We’re national treasures, whatever that means. Because I certainly don’t feel like that. I take the tube, Mike Palin takes the tube. And occasionally, maybe a couple of times a week, someone says, “Nice, Terry.”Coming to Hollywood, the pressure is to be a real star. It’s a killer. I’ve got friends, two who committed suicide here, and on every level they were successful here. But there was always more success they hadn’t attained, and that’s the pressure of it. Which I think is terrible.Did you ever feel yourself falling into that? Yeah, yeah. That’s why I don’t like LA. I stay away from it. I know it’s contagious. (Laughs) Coming here for a couple of days, that’s it.It was one of those weird things, having grown up out here, in the Valley, and wanting to be in film somehow. It seemed so distant. Physically it wasn’t distant, but then to go to England and finally come back to Hollywood and make movies in Hollywood was always odd and interesting and quite wonderful.I think that separation is really important. I talk to friends out here, and their limited view bothers me. It’s all about how you get something through this particular system. And now I think it’s really hard if you’re a talented to survive out here and to still continue to do really good work other than just producing products.I also think it’s hard now because you make a film and you want feedback. And feedback is also the number of people that are watching it and how it plays in a cinema. You don’t get that on Netflix. You don’t know who, what, anything.And yet they gave Martin Scorsese the money to make “The Irishman” when no studio would. Exactly. Exactly. But the question is, what is the ultimate effect of the movie now? We don’t know. At least with films, you know how many people went, you can see them so you’re getting feedback so you know if you’re communicating. And maybe at a certain point and a certain age, like me and Marty, we don’t care if we’re communicating any more – we just want to do the things we’ve wanted to do for years. We want to say we’re getting away with it.Do you find it appealing to think about the longer form you could use if you did go with Netflix? Well, that’s one of the things that Richard LeGravenese and I have been doing. We did a breakdown for a six-part series which looked like it could work, but I’m not convinced. What I tend to do with my repetitive nature is dance between reality and imagination. In a two-hour, two-hour-plus film, you’ve got the audience trapped, so you play that game in route. If you’re doing it on TV, I’m not sure it works the same way. When you get to the end of an episode, do you leave it in reality or do you leave it in the imaginative stage? And then you come back and pick it up from there? But it may be the only way that it will ever get done is if we do it for Netflix.But you don’t have a timeline for when you’re liable to do your next thing? No. I don’t know. I’m reading like mad waiting for the muse to come back. I think the problem is that I know how long it takes to get a film set up, and I’m kind of worn out. What I really would like if somebody who’s got a good script and they’ve got the funding and they’re looking for a director. Hi!I mean, in a sense that that’s what happened after “Munchhausen.” That was just a nightmare, and along came the script for “The Fisher King.” I didn’t write it, I didn’t care, it’s a great script. All we need to do is get Robin Williams, and I can get Robin. And we were off. It was the same thing with “The Brothers Grimm,” which was my experience with the Weinstein bothers. That was like, you just wanted to give up. But we did “Tideland,” which was low budget and fast.So I think that’s what I’m feeling. I will work on various things. I’m doing a musical for the theater. I had a period when I did two operas. These are the things that come along — they’re ready to go and I jump in because I’ve got to work. I know all the film ideas I’ve got are not going to be easy to finance, and I’m impatient. My theory is I’m going to die very soon, and I’d like to knock off one or two more.Your problems with the Weinsteins were over their tendency to interfere in the filmmaking? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Wanting to be directors. And they’re not. If you want to be a director, direct a movie. But they can’t. They’ve got to get their fingerprints all over the thing, so they can claim they did. They fired my DP and forced another DP on me. At a certain point the fun and the joy of filmmaking was destroyed.In their earlier stages, they were very good at picking up really good films and then saying to the filmmakers, “Your film is very good. It could be great, if … ” They would then get the filmmakers to compromise and do what they thought would make the film more popular and more successful. And then the films would fail, so they destroyed these young filmmakers. Really destroyed them. Once you’ve been through that experience, you’ve lost all confidence in yourself. And I know several who just gave up.The problem is, they’re smart, Harvey in particular. But in “Brothers Grimm,” Robin Williams was originally going to play the part that Peter Stormare played. They wouldn’t do a deal with Robin because they thought Robin had betrayed them on “Good Will Hunting.” Robin was the reason the film got made, and when the film looked like it might be worked for some awards, they wanted Robin to give up his back end to give them the money to campaign. And Robin said, “Why?” and he didn’t. So they refused to let me have Robin.I wanted Samantha Morton for the part that Lena Headey played. Samantha was perfect for the part, but Harvey would not do it. He said, “She’s brilliant, she’s going to win the Academy Award one day, but she’s not going to be in your film.” I talked to her and said, “What was your crime that they are behaving like this?” And the only thing she could think of was that when they were in Cannes promoting something, there was a lunch, and Harvey said, “Come to lunch. important people. I want you to wear a very short skirt.” And she came down in slacks. That was her crime. I think that was the only thing she could think of. He wanted her to look sexy and she said no.And eventually his karma caught up with him, and he’s in a real karma crash.Well, I think I’ve got plenty to work with… Enough to destroy my career? (Laughs) Thank you.Actually, you asked why I was here. I’m actually here to say things that get me into trouble when you print them.Read original story Terry Gilliam Lets Loose on ‘Don Quixote,’ Trump, Harvey Weinstein, Marvel and More At TheWrap
Ahead of Harvey Weinstein’s January trial in New York City, the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office is reviewing eight accusations of sexual misconduct against the disgraced producer.Details about the accusations are not public at this time, but Variety reported Tuesday that two of the accusations are recent, filed in just the last few months. Under review are four cases from the Los Angeles Police Department, and four other cases from Beverly Hills police. The Los Angeles D.A. has not yet decided if charges will be filed on any of these cases, according to Variety.Most of the accusations have been under review since early 2018 — two of the Beverly Hills cases were submitted in January 2018, followed by a third in June of that year. Three of the LAPD cases were submitted in February 2018.Also Read: Harvey Weinstein Gripes That Sex Crime Charges 'Eviscerated' His Record on Women's IssuesThe accusations are being reviewed as part of a task force investigation established by the Los Angeles District Attorney’s office, USA Today reported.Representatives for Weinstein did not immediately respond to a request for comment from TheWrap. Representatives for the Los Angeles District Attorney’s office also did not immediately respond to a request for comment.The accusations under review in L.A. are among dozens against Weinstein, who has consistently denied any wrongdoing. Earlier this month, Kaja Sokola, a Polish model who has accused Weinstein of sexually assaulting her when she was 16 years old, sued him, his brother Bob, Disney and Miramax under New York’s Child Victims Act.Sokola was originally part of a class-action lawsuit against Weinstein under a pseudonym and would have been a part of the $25 million settlement that has tentatively been reached between Weinstein and his accusers in early December. But by coming forward and filing her own suit, Sokola has indicated that she could not agree with the terms of the settlement and, thus, will not be participating in it.Also Read: Time's Up Denounces Settlement With Harvey Weinstein Survivors: 'A Broken System'Also in early December, the Manhattan District Attorney’s office raised Weinstein’s bail from $1 million to up to $5 million, after accusations surfaced that Weinstein may have tampered with his electronic ankle bracelet tracking monitor, according to a report in the Associated Press. Weinstein was given three options to cover a new bail of up to $5 million and was warned he could face jail time over any other issues. Through a bail bondsman, he agreed to meet the bail obligations by submitting $2 million in cash, and other assets.Weinstein’s New York trial on multiple charges of sexual assault and rape is scheduled to begin Jan. 6. Weinstein has pleaded not guilty to the charges he faces, including that he raped a woman in a Manhattan hotel room in 2013 and that he performed a forcible sex act on a different woman in 2006. He maintains that any sexual activity was consensual.Read original story LA District Attorney Is Reviewing 8 Accusations of Sexual Misconduct Against Harvey Weinstein At TheWrap
"It all got eviscerated because of what happened," the accused rapist and former movie mogul complained in a new interview.
Emily Ratajkowski very publicly shared her thoughts about the disgraced movie producer Harvey Weinstein reaching a reported $25 million (£19 million) settlement with accusers.
Under the alleged settlement terms, Harvey Weinstein won't admit to any wrongdoing or pay anything to his accusers himself.
Harvey Weinstein accuser Rosanna Arquette is criticizing ABC’s late-night news program “Nightline” for airing an interview Friday with the disgraced producer’s lawyer, saying the “one-sided” segment is the defense’s attempt “to distort the facts.”“ABC’s Nightline’s grossly irresponsible, one-sided reporting is shameful and deeply detrimental to the survivors like myself who were assaulted and abused by Harvey Weinstein,” Arquette told TheWrap.In the segment, ABC News reporter Amy Robach sat down with Weinstein’s attorney, Donna Rotunno, who explained her plan to defend Weinstein ahead of his Jan. 6 trial, and dismissed accusations made by the more than 80 women who accuse Weinstein of sexual misconduct, from harassment to rape.“It sends a dangerous message to women that by reporting a crime, we will be subjected to victim-blaming and not be believed,” Arquette continued. “As his trial date approaches, I stand by the brave women who are testifying to ensure that their voices are heard and will fire back at any misrepresentations of the truth. Despite Weinstein’s lawyer’s attempts to distort the facts, I believe his days of destroying lives are over.”Also Read: Rosanna Arquette Says Harvey Weinstein Should Go to Jail: 'Absolutely' (Video)ABC declined to comment on the criticism Saturday. Weinstein has consistently denied all accusations of non-consensual sex.In the interview, Robach asks Rotunno if she’s been accused of being “a traitor to her own gender” by defending a man accused of raping women.“I don’t believe I am. I think in many ways I would hope that I could help women. What happens in these circumstances where women don’t want to take certain responsibilities for their actions, we infantilize ourselves. You have to know that when you make certain choices, there’s a risk,” Rotunno replied.Robach’s response was to point out that “a lot of people would say that what you just said is victim-blaming.”“That’s absolutely not true. If you don’t want to be a victim, don’t go to the hotel room,” Rotunno said. “And if you don’t want to be a victim, don’t sign an NDA. Then go out onto 5th Avenue, take a megaphone and talk about what you want to talk about.”Also Read: Harvey Weinstein's Accusers and Attorneys to Sit Down for Court TV Interview SpecialGloria Allred, who represents Weinstein’s accusers Annabella Sciorra and Mimi Haleyi, responded to Rotunno’s comments in a statement to TheWrap.“I disagree with many of Donna Rotunno’s statements,” Allred said. “Many business meetings with producers of films have been conducted in hotel rooms. This statement by Ms. Rotunno appears to suggest that if a woman is asked to go to a hotel room, that it is her fault if she is raped. That defense did not work in the criminal case against Mike Tyson a number of years ago. He was convicted of raping a woman in a hotel room and I believe that this attempt to blame victims who are raped in hotel rooms will not be successful now in the era of the ‘Me Too Movement.'”In the “Nightline” interview, Rotunno made a point to say that she is “not the moral police on Harvey Weinstein” and emphasized that “Harvey has a right to a defense… If [the jurors] look at the evidence that’s going to be presented to them, I think they’re going to find him not guilty.”Also Read: Bob Weinstein Confronted Harvey Over 'Misbehavior' 2 Years Before Scandal BrokeABC News also quoted its chief legal analyst, Dan Abrams, in response to Rotunno’s claim that “going to a hotel room and having someone ask you if you’ll give them a massage is not rape, it’s not sexual assault, and it’s really not sexual harassment.”“When someone in a position of power over someone else’s career makes the pass with the either explicit or implicit promise of career benefits, that is the definition of sexual harassment,” Abrams said.On Saturday afternoon, Times Up tweeted a response to the “Nightline” segment from 21 women who came forward to report Weinstein’s sexual misconduct, including Arquette, fellow actors Ashley Judd and Rose McGowan, and Weinstein’s former assistant Rowena Chiu.“This segment displayed, to a national audience, the same dismissive, manipulative tactics Harvey implemented to silence the voices of so many women for decades,” the statement read (see it in full below). “We believe the evidence against Harvey presented in the trial next month will be a moment of reckoning and he will be held accountable for his crimes.”Lou Godbold, a Weinstein accuser and trauma specialist who signed the Times Up statement, also weighed in on the segment.“Harvey’s defense is that all men are rapists so that women should not find themselves alone with a man, despite the fact that it was a common practice for powerful men to take business meetings alone and in their hotel suites,” Goldbold said in a tweet.Time’s Up Legal Defense Fund co-founder Hilary Rosen also chimed in.“This lawyer did her client no favors with this interview,” Rosen tweeted Saturday. “Especially when she blamed the women for seeking jobs and when she struggled to suggest that HarveyWeinstein had any remorse. Kudos to [Dan Abrams] for his clarity in explaning [sic] the issues in this case.”https://twitter.com/TIMESUPNOW/status/1203439928144617472/photo/1Read original story Rosanna Arquette Condemns Weinstein’s Lawyer’s ‘Attempt to Distort the Facts’ in ABC ‘Nightline’ Interview At TheWrap
“South Park” took a shot at Harvey Weinstein in its latest episode, a week after the disgraced movie mogul was mocked by a comedian at a New York comedy club, where he made an appearance.In Wednesday’s episode, “Tegridy Farms Halloween Special,” Randy Marsh starts hallucinating after he smokes tainted weed that was laced with chemicals by his daughter, Shelly, who tried to destroy his marijuana crops. The altered pot makes him see scary images, including a zombie Winnie the Pooh (a reference to an earlier episode that was critical of China). He then calls the police to tell them he is being raped by Weinstein.At the end of the episode, Randy wakes up a few days later and realizes that none of it was real until he finds a used condom in the trash.Also Read: HBO Max Lands 'South Park' Reruns in Massive $500 Million Streaming DealLast week, a confrontation between Weinstein and Zoe Stuckless, an actor-playwright, who objected to his presence at an event for actors ended with Stuckless — not Weinstein — being ejected.Stuckless and several women attending the event called out Weinstein for appearing at the speakeasy-style event hosted by Actor’s Hour at the Downtime Bar in Manhattan’s Lower East Side. Stuckless questioned why Weinstein — the disgraced movie mogul who will soon face trial on five criminal counts, including rape and predatory sexual assault — was welcomed.“Nobody’s going to say anything? Nobody’s really going to say anything?” Stuckless said, according to video taken at the event. “I’m going to stand four feet from a f–ing rapist and nobody’s going to say anything?” Another woman who performed at the event, comedian Kelly Bachman, told TheWrap she was booed for calling out Weinstein during her comedy set.Also Read: 'South Park' Already Roasted LeBron James Over His Response to Daryl Morey's China TweetIn her set, video of which was posted on Twitter, Bachman referred to Weinstein as “the elephant in the room” and “Freddy Krueger.” She was met with a few boos and someone in the audience can be heard telling her to “shut up.”Amber Rollo, another comedian who attended the event, said a friend of Weinstein’s called her a c– when she objected to his presence.Actor Michael Torello, who was present last week, and at an Actor’s Hour event a few weeks ago, said he saw Weinstein at both events. He said a comedian also called out Weinstein at the earlier event.Read original story ‘South Park’ Mocks Harvey Weinstein Following Public Reemergence At TheWrap
Brad Pitt talks threatening Harvey Weinstein after learning that the disgraced producer had sexually harassed his then girlfriend Gwyneth Paltrow.
Cara Delevingne has said that Harvey Weinstein advised her to 'get a beard' rather than make her sexuality known to the public.
Actress and sexual abuse activist Rose McGowan has called for civil rights attorney Lisa Bloom to be disbarred after a new book outlined how Bloom worked with Harvey Weinstein to discredit McGowan’s sexual assault accusations against him.McGowan was responding Sunday to a Twitter thread posted by journalist Yashar Ali that summarized Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey’s new book, “She Said.” The book cites a December 2016 memo to Weinstein in which Bloom offered to “help you against the Roses of the world, because I have represented so many of them.”Also Read: Ashley Judd, Rose McGowan: We Are Not Part of Harvey Weinstein's $44 Million Settlement“We can place an article re: her becoming increasingly unglued,” Bloom suggested in the memo, “so that when someone Googles her this is what pops up and she’s discredited.”The book also says that Bloom joined Weinstein on a visit to the New York Times the day before they released their expose on the producer’s sexual assault accusations, adding that the pair was there to present information meant to discredit several of the accusers in the piece, including actress Ashley Judd.1\. It's no secret that Lisa Bloom repped Harvey Weinstein & worked w/ him to discredit accusersBut in @jodikantor @mega2e's new book 'She Said' we learn just how far Bloom was willing to go to destroy women who were the targets of Weinstein's predationhttps://t.co/GjkJjTf6CE pic.twitter.com/PqqgigAC32— Yashar Ali ???? (@yashar) September 8, 2019Also Read: Rose McGowan Calls Out Hollywood 'Douchebags,' 'Faux Liberals' Who Treat MeToo as 'a Band-Aid Lie'“The evil that was perpetrated on me and others was mind bending and illegal,” McGowan tweeted. “Lisa Bloom should be disbarred.”In response to the new book, Bloom released a new statement on Twitter Sunday morning apologizing for her actions as Weinstein’s adviser.“I thank Jodi Kantor, Megan Twohey, and Ronan Farrow for forcing me to confront the colossal mistake I made in working for Weinstein two years ago,” Bloom said. “To those who missed my 2017 apology, and especially to the women, I apologize again.”While painful, I learn so much more from my mistakes than my successes.To those who missed my 2017 apology, and especially to the women: I am sorry. Here are the changes I've made to ensure that I will not make that mistake again. pic.twitter.com/FSSl3qrFjQ— Lisa Bloom (@LisaBloom) September 8, 2019Read original story Rose McGowan: ‘Lisa Bloom Should Be Disbarred’ for Working With Harvey Weinstein At TheWrap
From terrifying horrors and stupendous superhero adventures, plus a couple of terrific re-releases you won’t want to miss, the next 31 days have a lot to offer.
One person in the movie business has been thanked in Oscar speeches more than any other, it’s been revealed. And that includes God. A study published by The Hollywood Reporter (via Vocativ) finds that from the 1,396 acceptance speeches that are archived by the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences, director Steven Spielberg is thanked 42 times. That compares to just 19 mentions of God. In a slightly unfortunate twist, considering recent events, Harvey Weinstein falls in second place, with 34 mentions. Then it’s James Cameron (28), George Lucas (23) and Peter Jackson (22).
The actress spoke out against her 'Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas' director after he criticised the #MeToo movement and victims of Harvey Weinstein.