There’s a lot more going on with his suicide than just him being exposed as a rapist. I say this because there is going to be an avalanche of blame (and harassment and worse) directed at his victim. Before he blessedly relieved the Earth of his presence, a local public radio station was publishing an ongoing…

In her op-ed, she mentions that “the films that I was obliged to do under my original deal with Miramax were all minor supporting roles” and I immediately thought of “Dogma” as a movie she probably resigned herself to do as part of the deal.

And he did, by proxy. That scene was literally forced on them because as Hayek put it, he was going to get his fantasy one way or another.

Frida came out in 2002. meaning whenever this went on was well before that. if you look at her IMDB. what does she have before 2002? several Miramax films. which would have been part of the deal she made. only 2 credits being wild wild west... and possibly something like fools rush in. a utterly forgettable rom com,…

He greenlit a movie cause he thought it would give him excellent opportunity to sexually harass and try to rape Salma Hayek and Ashley Judd.

I know. Weinstein was a troll to even suggest these changes.He greenlit a movie about a person he knows nothing about? Even if you never read anything about Frida, just glancing at a few of her paintings would clue you in.

How would it have been Frida without the uni brow and disability? Those two things are a running thread in all her art. She probably wouldn’t have been an artist if she didn’t break her back. SMH

If you read her whole op-ed you will see she mentions how perhaps her friendships with other powerful men like George Clooney prevented Harvey from actually raping her— acknowledging the (little bit) power she did have in the situation. She’s not lumping herself in with the women who had no power with Harvey.

You should. That sex scene was truly minor and didn’t take away from the movie. Hayek did keep the unibrow and limp, Weinstein be damned.

I agree. Even when she left Mexico she was in demand and super recognizable.

I’m thinking that I should watch it with a less critical eye now. Imagining how much better it could have been sans the pig’s directions.

“...Hayek, as a then-struggling Mexican actress” Right. Hayek has never struggled. She came from a wealthy family and by the time she made Frida, already had double digit films under her belt. Saying she was a “struggling actress” lumps her into the group of all the other women who have zero power in this situation.…

The unibrow and limp stayed.

I am Mexican and remember being excited when I heard about this project but was disappointed when I heard about the naked scene and decided to skip it.

I’m fully convinced that:

Yeah I can’t hate on Dunham for this, I think it’s actually kinda awesome she did that, it kinda takes balls to email Hillary freakin Clinton’s people and say “yeah one of the people you’re hob knobbing with is a fucking rapist” (not her exact words but ya get the jist).

I had to think really hard before I figured out why the hell she was on there, and when I remembered the lawsuit I was still confused because while I absolutely agree with how valuable her standing up for herselfis and the good example that sets, that’s really all she did...the #metoo movement stood for EVERYONE,…

I am no Dunham defender, but unless she herself was one of Weinstein’s victims, she had no place going public. Legally, it would be hearsay. Socially, holding a press conference to say, “I’ve heard from people that this jagoff is a super creep,” isn’t very compelling. It is frustrating that so many people KNEW this…

Am I the only one who thinks Lena Dunham is a thirsty B and that no one should listen to her? Her coming out and saying “I told you so” does no one any good, and it only makes her look petty. If she had the balls to tell Hilary Clinton’s people about Harvey’s rapes, then why didn’t she just go and tell the public…

something is not right with your brain part.