Official website of Annakarinaland , broadcast on KXSF.fm San Francisco Community Radio Focus on Women and Film. Published reviews and scholarly writing of film critic Moira Jean Sullivan.
Subscribe to Annakarinaland Updates
Women should not be afraid of men like Weinstein. The stories that are about fear are changing into righteous rage. Women must stand up for themselves , stand united, and express 0 tolerance for this behavior. Men are actually afraid of women, which is what is really behind this kind of abuse. Men are afraid of women's intelligence, fortitude, strength, and beauty. Men have made women into monsters in mythology like Medusa with fangs and witches with long noses, and in cinema, Baby Jane, Carrie, Regan (Linda Blair), Ripley. Men in Hollywood abuse young children like Shirley Temple and countless young women as Weinstein has because they are afraid. Abuse is not about power, but fear.
In her autobiography, “Child Star,” Shirley Temple described going with her mother to see her new bosses at Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer after leaving Fox.
Louis B. Mayer spirited away Gertrude Temple. The curly-haired superstar — hailed by F.D.R. for helping America get through the Depression — was taken to the office of Arthur Freed, an associate producer on “The Wizard of Oz.”
After telling her that she would have to get rid of her baby fat, Freed abruptly stood up and pulled out his penis. The 11-year-old had never even seen one before. She gave a nervous laugh, which offended the producer.
“Get out!” he shouted.
When she rejoined her mother, an affronted Gertrude told Shirley that she had had to back out of Mayer’s office when he lunged at her.
“Not for nothing was the M.G.M. lot known as the ‘factory,’ a studio perfumed with sultry, busty creatures with long legs and tight haunches,” Temple wrote, “and more than its quota of lecherous older men.”
Nearly 80 years later, that aroma of perversion and maladroit du seigneur clings to Hollywood. Now we are inundated with grotesque tales of Harvey Weinstein pulling out his penis to show to appalled and frightened young women, enlisting the pimping help of agents and assistants to have actresses delivered to his hotel rooms, where he pestered the women to watch him shower or give him a massage or engage in intimate acts.
“The ill will towards him for getting away with it all for so long has unleashed something so primitive,” a prominent male Hollywood producer told me. “If people could rip him apart, they would. Literally everyone in Hollywood is taking marshmallows to roast at his burning corpse.”
Dana Calvo, the creator of “Good Girls Revolt,” noted: “We have been saying, just get us in the room. But we meant the pitch room or the editing room or the boardroom. Not Harvey Weinstein’s hotel room.
“I do know I will never look at bathrobes the same way. It’s the bathrobes versus the pussyhats.”
While not a victim of Weinstein’s, Calvo worked for Amazon Studios, which was headed by Roy Price until he was suspended on Thursday for sexual harassment allegations. He had already come under scrutiny for being culturally tone deaf, passing on two of the biggest hits of the year, “Big Little Lies” and “The Handmaid’s Tale,” both of which swept the Emmys for their storytelling about women. And he canceled the popular “Good Girls Revolt” after one season, admitting he had never watched it.
Weinstein, 65, was the opposite, one of the rare men in Hollywood who didn’t care about pursuing an audience of 15-year-old boys with comic book movies. He was someone with taste who was trying to make movies with great roles for women of all ages, a top Democratic fund-raiser who was pushing to make Hillary Clinton the first woman president, a man trusted by the Obamas to have their daughter intern at his company.
But he had a diabolical side. He would tantalize actresses with dreams of stardom — in that dewy, fleeting window such hothouse orchids have to take Hollywood by storm. Often the actresses scrambled, trying to figure out how to get out of the room without having their futures shredded by the vindictive satyr, who also threatened to destroy actresses who balked at wearing dresses designed by his wife Georgina Chapman’s fashion label on the red carpet.
He relished the nickname “Harvey Scissorhands,” given to him by filmmakers who did not like his domination in the editing room. But the nickname could work just as well for his octopus ways with women, which resulted in lots of hush money being paid out.
And some of his own assistants say they were assailed. One ran out of the room, crying and distraught, after Weinstein pressed her into giving him a massage.
Some who were importuned or pawed, like Angelina Jolie, stalked away and told studio executives that she would never work with the pestilent mogul. Others whom Weinstein asked to give him a massage in his hotel suite refused but continued to collaborate, like Gwyneth Paltrow, who put aside qualms to become “the first lady of Miramax.”
When David Carr wrote about “The Emperor Miramaximus” in 2001 for New York magazine — several years after the unpleasant experience Paltrow described for the first time this past week to The Times — he quoted her saying: “I think that for every bad story you hear about Harvey, there are three great ones. People are complicated, and nobody’s all good or all bad.”
Other victims, like Rose McGowan, took settlements from the mogul to stay quiet but continued to seethe, until her rage spilled over Thursday when she tweeted — after getting back on Twitter after an absurd banishment by the company — that Weinstein had raped her.
Once more we are in a searing national seminar on sexual misbehavior by men, just like the Hill-Thomas hearings, the Clinton impeachment hearings, the Bill Cosby trial, the downfalls of Roger Ailes, Bill O’Reilly and other harassing big shots at Fox News, and Donald Trump and the fallout from the “Access Hollywood” tape.
How many times do we have to go through this before things really change?
“If you look at The Hollywood Reporter’s powerful women list,” said Janice Min, the former editor of that publication, “every single one of those women still reports to a man.” (By some estimates, there are only six women who have first-look overhead producing deals at the studios.)
Min recalled attending the $400,000 speech Barack Obama made as an ex-president to an A&E Networks advertising upfront at the Pierre hotel in New York in April.
“Afterwards, amid rapturous applause, he walks right over to Harvey Weinstein and gives Harvey a hug,” Min said. “You can see the optics of it all. It makes your head explode if you think of the inability to explode the male network.”
Min said that although The Hollywood Reporter tried to get the goods on “that looming, ominous, bellicose force” named Harvey for many years — “we had white boards full of names of women” — he was a master at protecting himself, just as Hugh Hefner was, by the veneer of power he cultivated, by giving to liberal causes and cultivating friends in the media and politics.
“There probably needs to be some introspection about how certain people who engage in horrendous mistreatment of women can co-opt the media,” she mused. “The fundamental predatory nature of Hollywood is young, attractive people — largely females — putting themselves in front of men to be judged and appraised and chosen.
“It is a dark equation. From the moment the proverbial girl gets off the bus, the odds are stacked against her. In Hollywood, unlike at other Fortune 500 companies, the one-on-one meetings take place in hotel suites and bars. It’s an exploitative and oddly personal process.”
Young actresses (and surely actors, too, with other powerful predators), Min said, knew that “Hollywood is built on nothing but the pursuit of Oscar and Emmy. Harvey had proven time and again he could get you the Oscar that could make your career. It’s the difference between being in the reboot of ‘Saved by the Bell’ or getting 15 million for your next role.”
Hollywood is a culture that runs on fear. And it is not like other professions, one top entertainment executive said, because “no one comes with a résumé. It’s about what you look like and who sent you.”
There was resentment against Weinstein in Hollywood, not only for the stories bubbling around about women, but the way he humiliated men who worked with him. He even berated a 15-year-old girl at a screening because her parents supported a political candidate he opposed.
Like Trump, that other self-professed predator, there were complaints that in business deals he stiffed people on bills (advertising and public relations payments), and he had a reputation for lying, cheating, taking advantage, acting like a thug. Many in the film community felt he besmirched the Oscars by turning it into a marketing race rather than a contest of quality.
I asked Tim Robbins, who had some unpleasant business dealings with Weinstein, what the moral of this foul, revolting story should be.
“It’s not just in show business, it’s every business,” he said. “It’s about men who use power to get an advantage over women. It’s gross, it’s unacceptable, but unfortunately, it’s pretty persistent.”
Women in Hollywood say social media, plus the anger about Trump getting into the Oval Office instead of Hillary, were propelling forces in the fire raining down on Weinstein.
“I hope it’s a witch hunt,” said a top Hollywood woman. “I hope it’s a purge. There are people we have to get rid of in our business. Everyone knows them.”
So many have been looking the other way for Roman Polanski (statutory rape) , Woody Allen (child molestation - his own) and Donald Trump (sexual harassment) - that it's about time that Harvey Weinstein is being nailed -- and so should the other above named predators. It's Allen's son that did the most scorching exposé of Weinstein's sex crimes. Trump doesn't deny it. Allen and Polanski hope it just goes away.
"I have moved so far past it. I never think about it. I work. I said I was never going to comment on it again. I said everything I have to say about it.” Woody Allen
"As far as what I did: It's over. I pleaded guilt. I went to jail. I came back to the United States to do it, people forget about that, or don't even know.” Polanski
"I just start kissing them. It's like a magnet. Just kiss. I don't even wait. And when you're a star they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything." Trump.
"For more than twenty years, Weinstein has also been trailed by rumors of sexual harassment and assault. This has been an open secret to many in Hollywood and beyond, but previous attempts by many publications, including The New Yorker, to investigate and publish the story over the years fell short of the demands of journalistic evidence. Too few people were willing to speak, much less allow a reporter to use their names, and Weinstein and his associates used nondisclosure agreements, monetary payoffs, and legal threats to suppress these myriad stories".
Rowan Farrow, son of Mia Farrow and Woody Allen.
(Rowan on Allen: "He's my father married to my sister. That makes me his son and his brother-in-law. That is such a moral transgression.")
No longer whispered but out - raged.
The myth of the powerful man and the beautiful women behind him, unraveled. How many other movie moguls do the same and have done so historically in the film business?
Harvey Weinstein, movie mogul and predator, revealed.
Using the same excuses as Arnold Schwarzenegger did to rationalize his behavior that his behavior was formed in the 60s (when he was a teenager) and 70s. Bad behavior dies hard.
Ashley Judd spoke out and began the repercussions that brought down Weinstein this week.
“Women have been talking about Harvey amongst ourselves for a long time, and it’s simply beyond time to have the conversation publicly.” - Ashley Judd
I am a 28 year old woman trying to make a living and a career. Harvey Weinstein is a 64 year old, world famous man and this is his company. The balance of power is me: 0, Harvey Weinstein: 10. — From Lauren O’Connor‘s memo
Meryl Streep and Jennifer Lawrence have spoken out and dozens of women. Saturday Night Live SNL kept quiet cutting material about Weinstein in their show with Gal Gadot hosting September 30. Women stick up for each other— SNL and other male written shows (Colbert, Fallon) tried to ignore or bury it.
Ovarian Psycos, directed by Joanna Sokolowski et Kate Trumbull-LaValle (USA| 2016) at Films de Femmes in Créteil on March 18. The Youth Jury came on stage to award the prize at final ceremony. This film that was also shown to 100 high school students in the Créteil area with a lively debate afterwards. https://www.facebook.com/FestivaldeFilmsdeFemmes/ Members of the Ovarian Psycos will be in San Francisco on April 11 at City College of San Francisco for workshops and screening of the film.
"Ovarian Psycos - Documentary" is about a biking brigade composed on young women who ride to protest violence against the women in their community in East Los Angeles. The collective reveals personal testimony of growing up in East LA and the pressure put on them by families to conform. Biking is their way of showing solidarity with other women. https://www.facebook.com/TheOvarianPsycosDocumentary/
The Grand Jury Prize at Festival International de Films de Femmes in Créteil went to "Lipstick under my Burkha", directed by Alankrita Shrivastava (India| 2016). The film was censored in her country Special Mention (Mention spéciale) went to "People That Are Not Me", directed by Hadas Ben Aroya (Israel | 2016). Ben Aroya is the producer of the film and the main character named Joy, which is about and herself and her friends in Tel Aviv that don’t fit into the usual categories – which she calls “non- Unicorns” leading “unauthentic lives”.
Festival International de Films de Femmes. https://www.facebook.com/FestivaldeFilmsdeFemmes/
The Public Prize for best feature film (PRIX DU PUBLIC MEILLEUR LONG MÉTRAGE FICTION) at Créteil Films de Femmes went to "Sami Blood" (Sami Blood, Amanda Kernell , Suède, Danemark, Norvège | 2016) directed by Amanda Kernel. Kernel attended Danish Film School and is set in the 1930’s in Sweden. The Sami people, the indigenous people that live in Northern Scandinavian countries and coast of Russia, and their colonial appropriation to conform to the dominant culture. The Sami were not allowed to speak Sami in school and were often shamed. Shot in seven weeks it was usual for Kernel to have 13 takes for each of the scenes, primarily to make the film authentic for the Sami people. https://www.facebook.com/FestivaldeFilmsdeFemmes/
Dorothy Arzner’s
films were marginalized by male film historians until the advent of women’s
film festivals in the mid 1970’s. The first major and largely anecdotal accounts
of American cinema by male film historians omitted or glossed over her career:
Andrew Sarris: “The American Cinema: Directors and Directions, 1929-1968”
(1968- Arzner completely omitted); Kevin Brownlow’s “The Parades Gone By”
(1968); Lewis Jacobs, “The Rise of the American Film” (1939, reprinted 1967).
Her films have been the subject of scholarship and film retrospectives, richly
documented in essays and books by feminist film theorists and historians since
the 1970’s.
When Arzner was
rediscovered in women’s film festivals in the 70’s, in part promoted by British
feminist film theorist Claire Johnston, her historical place in film history was
well motivated by the body of work she had done between 1929-1943 above all how
her characters challenge the fixed gender roles of women in film and open these
films up to contradictions. They show women transgressing their roles and seeking
fulfillment. Feminist film theory was taught at universities and colleges since the 80's and her work is currently discussed, especially with a slew of new retrospectives.
Maureen O'Hara and Lucille Ball in 'Dance Girl Dance'
Dorothy Arzner is
relatively unknown in France and feminist film theory nearly non existent. So
it is with some alarm that she was introduced rather poorly by the Cinématèque Française for an upcoming retrospectivewith problematic - and protested -program notes on a revised ahistorical account of Arzner.
Libération journalist Philippe Garnier reviewed six
of her films in 2003 while in Los Angeles and was called on to write the
program notes for a retrospective of her films at the Cinématèque Française from March 22 to April 1, a bastion of male
film history with only six retrospectives dedicated to women since 2005 out of
around 300. Fortunately, Garnier does not speak for “Créteil Films de Femmes” whose
parallel Arzner retrospective (March 10-19) precedes the program af Cinématèque Française. A round table with
myself representing the Cinema and Women’s Studies Department at City College
of San Francisco and Cahiers du Cinema
film critic Ariel Schweitzerwas held for the audience who would later continue on at Cinématèque
Française. This discussion was crucial in bringing this work to
its proper light. Créteil has previously showcased Arzner’s work on two
occasions in the 80s since the inaugural festival of 1979 in Sceaux, which later moved
to Créteil.
Katherine Hepburn in 'Christopher Strong' 1933
Garnier’s
overview of Arzner’s work supplies superficial character analyses from her
films, which generally fragment in meaningless rhetoric. There are
problematic comments about Arzner’s appeal to “militant lesbians”, and swipes
at Arzner and Zoë Akins (Akins wrote scripts
for Arzner)for their “closeted” careers in the male
dominated studio system of the1920’s and 1930’s Hollywood. (Lesbian) feminists that emulate Arzner or “recent attempts to make her a secret
heroine of the feminist struggle” are problematic for Garnier. Arnzer is characterized as a
“butch” director who spent her time advancing
the careers of actresses. He criticizes Arzner’s male characters who are either
“pathetic or alcoholic” and elevates erotic pre-code scenes with Pansy Gray (Ruth
Chatterton) in “Anybody’s Woman” (1930) who straddles a ukulele in an erotic
pose (1930) , which he considered her best film, or Bubble’s (Lucille
Ball) in “Dance Girl Dance” (1940) who performs a hula dance for a lecherous nightclub
owner. Garnier's introduction of Dorothy Arzner for the Cinémateque Française
retrospective to spectators who do not know about her work is annoying, as are snide
attacks on lesbian feminists who identify with her public image, or the
screening of her films in academia and educational institutions and festivals.
Clara Bow in 'The Wild Party'
Why elevate an
historical figure while vulgarizing the work? Why commodify a retrospective
with revisionist history? Phillipe
Garnier claims that Arzner was successful because of two reasons: she had“f---k
you money” to play with , i.e. was so wealthy she really didn’t need to work, like
Zoe Akins and it infers they bought their way into the business. Secondly, she became a director as a result of a network of women artisans in
the film industry in the 1920’s. However, it was Arzner’s competent efforts and
the contacts she made at Paramount that made her director before the union jobs
that came with the big studios after this period. That Arzner remains after
this time and for 20 years in the emerging Hollywood studio system is extraordinarily
remarkable.
