#'everyone on cast and crew wanted it and the mean network shut them down'

[letmetellyouaboutmyfeels]

For $5 USD stop making everything about that goddamn show for five minutes.

[popculturebuffet]

Jake Reviews Stuff: Steven Universe: The Answer

Happy pride everyone and naturally, it just wouldn’t feel like a celebration of pride in animation without one of the frontrunners of LBGTQ represintation in Children’s television, as well as quality in storytelling in general: Steven Universe.  Since your seeing this you probably know the gist but as my idol peter parker would say let’s do this one last time:  The story of Steven, a 14 year old, though he dosen’t look it, boy with a boundless amount of love, compassion and empathy,  lives in beach city with his borderline homeless dad , surrogate moms and surrogate until we find out they actually are kinda related sister: Garnet, a fusion of two gems in love and thus the sum total of both them and their feelings, Peal, an emotional but loving gem who grew from a servant to Rose’s right hand, sometimes lover, and confidant, and Amythest, a gem born long after the war that brought everyone else here who acts like a 20 something or teenager half the time. Steven soon finds himself fighting alongside themt o protect earth both from the monsters caused by the final battle of the war his mother fought to save earth from distruction and let her army live life how they choose, and the gem homeworld as it starts to take an intrest in earth again. And as the fight goes on Steven also starts to see just how flawed his family is and how much they haven’t moved on from his moms death and finds himself forced to help them past it while grappling with his mom’s terrible and complicated legacy, everyone expecitng him to basically be her, and what it means to be a  being that’s truly one of a kind.  I absolutley love the show: it’s not without flaws; Characters tend to be ingnored for seasons or episodes at a time,some arcs are really weirdly paced and the slice of life episodes can be jammed in the weirdest places. But the show’s strength: a devotion to having emotional resolution be even more important, and sometimes just as powerful animated and framed, than fighting, though the show’s fight scene’s are incredible, incredibly deep characters with fully fleshed out arcs and growth, and a love for tackling deep, heavy subjects through metaphor or even directly, taking on things such as gender identity, societal conformity, ptsd, grief, gender identity and many many more with grace and weight and helping kids with them in the process.  The show is also the frontrunner for LBGTQ+ representation in cartoons in the 2010′s. While other shows had bits nad pieces, series creator Rebecca Sugar was the one responsible for making Marcline and Princess Bubblegum ex-lovers and making it obvious as possible without saying it because standards were bullshit, Steven Unvierse decided to say fuck subtley and thus had PLENTY OF gay content: Garnet is a fusion of two women and the embodiment of their love and relationship, and when the two show up their very affectionate with one another to the point of bullcrap censorship in less tolerant countries such as india and russia, while Pearl out and out had a CENTURIES LONG romantic relationship with Steven’s mother who was explictly pansexual, and that’s just the main cast!  But I genuinely believe that it’s thanks to Steven Universe that children’s animation is as LBGTQ+ positive as it is now. SU wasn’t the first to have gay leads but it was one of the few kids shows with the balls and, at least in the us, network support to explictily have gay characters as some of the main cast, and I feel the show’s success softend execs at CN and other companies to let more representation too. Since SU”s airing, most CN shows have had gay content great and small, Nick has had gay parents and a bisexual lead, not to mention the korra ending kicking it all off, and Netflix has said hold my beer, having not only multiple gay main characters, but having the finale of she ra be built on a decleration of love between two women saving the universe and being the climax of the entire series.  Not that those crews likely still didn’t have to FIGHT for most of that, i’m not bilind and NOelle Stevenson has outright admitted she had to be sneaky about catradora for season 1 as to not get it shut down, but I feel SU”s sucess and Rebecca and crew’s own likely fights put the various studio goon’s reflector shields down and got more representation into children’s media. And that’s a wonderful thing.  So naturally the show was a lock for this month and for coverage here.. i’ts just given the show’s heavily seralized nature and the fact it dosen’t really have any long romantic story arcs. Sure ther’es plenty of romance, but it’s mostly either in the past or between an already married couple that’s also a person. The show’s arcs were more focused on worldbuilding and character building, which I do prefer and will be doing one in July.  But it did make it tricky to find an episode to spotlight the character I wanted to spotlight: Garnet Garnet is easily my faviorite character, with pearl a very close second: she has a great dynamic, is a decent if flawed mother and leader, and is also damn funny with her deadpanned reactions to things being utterly divine. As well as whatever the hell this is. 

The problem is I also wanted to spotlight the parts making up her: Ruby and Sapphire, their relationship etc as they themselves are fantastic and i’m 100% convinced were the inspriation for one mr mc skat kat and one paula abdul’s magnum opus in steven’s unvierse

The problem is most rupphire episodes are tangled in bigger arcs. They debuted at the end of the invasion arc, they had the baseball episdoe together shortly after another arc, and their wedding is tied up in the reveal rose was pink diamond and the reception is crashed by the climactic battle with Yellow and Blue that sets up the final arc of the whole series. But thankfully season two gave us The Answer to my problem.. ironically named the Answer, basically Garnet Year One as Garnet tells steven how she came to be, a story so beauitful they made a storybook out of it.. and it’s my honor to present it here after the cut. 

We open at the Barn... as a refresher at this point the Gems and Steven have been staying at Greg’s old family farm in order to have the  space and suplies to build a drill to stop the cluster from hatching and destroying earth, with Peridot reluctantly working with them. So as such Steven’s sleeping there when Garnet wakes her.. and in a notable departure for her it’s san’s shade, which shows her adorable excitment as she wakes Steven. Turns out it’s his birthday! And.. I don’t really begrudge the show for takin ga break for two episodes to celebrate it: besides being the only time steven went up a year, on screen, it was a nice break from the peridot/cluster storyline for a second, and this and the following episode are pretty great and both add a lot to the world as a whole. It’s why i don’t MIND when SU takes a break from the plot, as long as they do it for good reason. 

IN a great callback steven asks if garent’s going to tell him she’s a fusion, as Jailbreak revealed the reason she hadn’t yet is she was saving it for his birthday, which is a good joke and a great callback. Garnet cheerfully tells him know but has clearly found a backup: While steven knows she’s a fusion now.. she never told him how she came to be and how ruby and sapphire met after all.  So we journey back about 5000 years to, as we’d learn much later with the pink diamond reveal, the start of the gem war. Earth was to be the next great colony, as we’d learn next season for pink diamond, but something was in the way: The rebel rose quartz and her brutal right hand pearl were causing tons of distruption, so the rest of the diamonds had come to snuff out the rebellion personally.  So that’s where Ruby and Sapphire came in. Sapphire is a higher class gem, and befiting her caste is a precog, with Sapphires brought in to tell the diamonds the future so they can either make sure it happens or change it’s course. Garnet neaturally has this ablility too but vastly improved to see multiple timelines. She’s proper and distant.  Ruby meanwhile is a shy, if more intellgent then her peers grunt soldier. Rubies as we learned here are basically made in groups to fuse. To homeworld, Fusion is simply a tactic to create a slightly stronger gem out of three other gems, and basically creates one giant person. In Contrast up to this point the series has shown fusion as something important to the crystal gems and requriing more work: It requires all parties to be in sync to even happen much less stay together, and requires an emotional connection; Freindship, romance, kinship... whatever it is it’s needed to hold the fusion together. It’s part of what MAKES garnet so impressive: Garnet is a permafusion, only unfusing either when her two halves are needed. or when thier personal conflict is so great they CAN’T stay fused. It also means due to said emotional resonance and combining the best traits of two gems rather than creating just one big gem, that the crystal fusions we’ve seen are vastly more powerful and versitale.. evne if they dont’ speak much because Rebecca made the mistake of getting big artist to do the role and apparently refused to just you know.. recast? It’s something that always baffled me. There’s no shortage of talented poc performers who can sing out there.  Anyways, that’s part of what makes this intresting: up till now, we’d only seen one form of fusion.. we hadn’t seen what homeworld thought of it and used it for, and to the show’s credit it was hinted back during the return arc when Jasper called fusion a “tactic for making weak gems stronger”, since as far as homeworld used it, that’s what it was and it’s a stark contrast to the crystal gems harder to maintain but much more intresting and unique fusions. 

We’ll get more into this later. The two front rubies argue about whose going to punch people whie our ruby just points out the obvious: Their just going to fuse into a really big ruby and punch together. This gets her shoved into sapphire, which despite not being her fault gets gasps and monocle pops from the gems around them. And it’s about time I dug into the episodes unique animation style: instead of the usual, only a handful of characters, the rubies, sapphire, and later rose and pearl, are animated normally and even then, at least for the first half, are brightly lit in their primary colors, while the rest of the gems present are just barely animated sytlistic shadows. It’s a really intresting choice and a clever way to save on budget, while still looking gorgeous. 

Sapphire, while refusing Ruby’s help getting up, is understanding if monotone, but as w’eve seen in the present, tha’ts mostly just a side effect from seeing where everything’s going, and likely the reason garnet’s own emotional process is much like that; Stoic but willing to emote when necessary. Sapphire however has a reason for brushing her ruby off: the reason she was called here.. Blue Diamond.  This is intresting as it’s not only the first time we HEARD of blue, as before this we only heard of Yellow, who’d make her proper debut at the end of this season, but the first time we saw a diamond in any way shape of form. Sure we had murals and such, but given the lack of info about the diamonds this early on it was impossible to tell whow as who and the only giveway there was more than was diamond was the symbols: the era 1 symbols in temples and at the arena showing all 4, hinting at pink, and the modern one shown in jailbreak that was a triforce. We do only see Blue in a hood, covered by her palquin and her voice done by Garnet, but it’s still the first tiem we’d see any of the diamonds in any onscreen form. The Garnet voice is also notcable as every other voice in the flashabck, including characters who aren’t either part of garnet or the same gem type as part of her, is normal.. it’s only blue Garnet does a voice for.. and a clever way of covering for the fact they likely hadn’t cast her voice actress yet. It’s also notable for the introduction of Blue Pearl, who silently stands by her Diamond teh whole time.. it’s weird thinking back to the fact that this was the first time we’d really SEEN other versions of our main cast: other rubies and another pearl. Sure we knew they were all part of one type or another with the obvious exception of garnet.. but this episode is notable, and weird to think about giiven how many variants we see as the series goes on, for being the FIRST time we see this on screen. 

Sapphire reveals that while she, and two of her rubies, will poof the rebllion will end here, and Blue is releaved to here this, thanks sapphire and dismisses her. As Garnet explains, Sapphire had no issue with this as she simply saw her life as one straight line: No choice no, option: Fate would just come as it may. Sapphire also muses to Our Ruby on the fact that she finds this planet a wonderful place for a colony.. and that she wishes she could’ve seen more of it. While Our Ruby says theirs more time, Sapphire, while appricating the sentiment gently shoots it down.  This little moment is interuptted however as Rose shouts out, signaling her and Pearl’s arrival. The battle has begun. And I do like the clever use of storytelling here.. not in presetnation but in what we’d learn muchhhh later with the big reveal: To a first time watcher, we just thought that it was only rose and pearl for story purposes or it was a small attack. After all the rest of the characters we’d seen were just shadows, so I, and I presume many others just assumed the rest were off screen or failing that this was just a small strike. As we’d learn once we got the full story of Pink Diamond becoming rose.. it was indeed JUST them, and only them at the time. it’s probably why in the future sapphire saw the rebellion ended her: Pink while powerful had to reign it in as not to be found out and pearl, while as we see her is already utterly badass and an ace with a sword as she mows down Quartz soldiers, is still one gem going up against a literal army.  Another noticable thing, that hints at when this takes place is the fact that when Rose takes down the fused rubies, poofing two of them and leaving ours to flump to the ground.. she uses her fists. At this point her iconic sword is well established and it’s assumed it was just left out for artistic purpose.. but since we meet who made it next season with Bismuth, it’s another clever hint this is before there was a proper army. Bismuth wasn’t a gem yet so Rose/Pink just had her natural strength and shield to protect her, which wasn’t nothing, but the sword probably made it far easier to hold back. 

And thus we come to the moment of truth: Pearl has come back and is about to mow down sapphire.. when Ruby realizes just waht Sapphire meant and waht she’s about to do and thus.. the future changed. Ruby tackles her out of the way. And Garnet is born. 

I absolutley love Garnet’s cotton candy design, both as a sensible evolution, as this is a garnet formed in a moment of passion and accidently versus the one we see in the present or even in flashbacks: a person formed by choice and love and thus having a more stable form. Naturally, Rose and Pearl are baffled by this.. and it’s even more understandable.. as the above mentioned pink diamond origin episode explained.. they had never SEEN this kind of fusion before. While i’m sure this isn’t the first time this happend in gem history, any others were likely killed as soon as it were over or went into hiding as we saw with the off colors. And Pink being sheltered and Pearl being created for her, probalby simply never thought of something like this existing. But they also realize this never before seen to them miracle is their cue to skidoo and book it out of there.  Naturally Blue is pissed and the court are disgusted as the two defuse and both have about the same reacation. 

Before Blue can murder Ruby for you know, doing her fucking job, Sapphire ttakes her by the hand and books it off the sky arena and the two plummet to earth  while ruby screams no a lot. The foundation of any good relationship. 

They float down to earth.. because she’s Mary Poppins Ya’ll. Ruby reveals why she’s upset: Because as she sees it, there’s dozens of her. She’s not WORTH this. Sapphire has no reaction because for the first time, she has no idea what the future brings, what it means and the future she saw was just shattered. She’s frozen. 

Jokes aside I really love that pun. Ruby worries and quickly scoops her up bridal carry style and quickly finds the two a cave. In the cave the two light that flame get that and Ruby continues to freak out over what happened,  upset with her self that she’s supposed to save sapphire.. with Sapphire gently reassuring her “you already did.”  It’s also intresting as it shows even garnet, or at least half of her, had to go through what peridot did.. it went down a bit easier since exile happened right away, but Ruby still had to shake off the homeworld conceived notion that she was WRONG for saving sapphire simply because it lost them the fight and got them fused and all that. It’s also a nice metaphor for someone whose been told, for a nightmarish rainbow assortment of bullshit resaons, that being gay is wrong only to discover they are and having to realize there’s nothing wrong with who they are. 

After a breif flash the two finally talk about their fusion, with Sapphire being suprised considering she figured fusion wasn’t anything like they experinced.. only for Ruby to chime in that sh’es RIGHT: Their fusion wasn’t anything like Ruby’s normal “me but bigger’ fusion.. they lost htemselves.. and both clearly enjoyed it, expressing it through having a third eye for ruby and more than one for sapphi 

We then get the utterly adorable musical number: “Something Entirely New”Which takes the so far mildly subtle “This is like two people who had sex with the oppsite gender for the first time “ metaphor.. and just makes it texual as the song basically screams of two people talking over an unfamiliar sexual experince, but in a cute, well done, and intentionally awkward way that’s still approraite for the kids. it’s a real beautiful song and also shows the burgoning couple bond on earth. This is important as a previous episode had garent and out and out say that love takes time and work, accurate and that love at first sight simply dosen’t exist.. and we also see she practices waht she preaches as the montage does show some time past and even before that the two genuiely bonded. Sure they FUSED on the spur of the moment.. but actually loving each other took time and bonding. 

As the song ends, the two dance romantically,deciding to be Garnet for good as we get some nice callbacks to jailbreak: the two hum the tune to stronger than you, now revealed to be their song and spin similarilty to the way they have when they’ve fused, a nice callback that also add’s weight to those previous moments.. and thus two become one and Garnet is reborn. 

Garnet narrates as her past self gets used to her strange new form.. and just as she does she falls down a ditch. Eh could’ve been worse. 

Garnet finds herself face to sword with Pearl. Pearl backs off a bit once she realizes who their dealing with, and Garnet panickedly offers to unfuse.. only for Rose to enter. Garnet narrates them as Rose Quartz and her terrifying renegade pearl. 

Truly a force to be reckoned with. Rose dosen’t care about her own feelings though “What you feel is bound to be more intresting” It’s a good moment both because Garnet , up to this point hasn’t had to think about what they are or how they feel.. but more notably... no one but the two gems makingthem up ever cared, not before they were garnet and after all the homeworld gems wanted was to kill her. We also get a great line from garnet: “Why am I sure that i’d rather be this than anything else and that i’d rather do this than anything else i’m supposed to do? “  Rose’s response.. to give a giant grin while saying welcome to earth. As Garnet continues to question things, Rose tells her to never question this, never question what you are... which is a damn good message for a kids show to give out. The metaphor is crystal clear: no matter where you are on that beautiful lbgtq+ rainbow: NEVER be ashamed of who you are, never question it.. just enjoy it. Be who your meant to be and love that person. It’s a damn good message and one badly needed in a medium that for way too fucking long was SCARED to tell messages like this: Of sponsors, of foreign markets, and of idiots like one million moms. it took people like rebecca and her crew to say “fuck that”, to say that queer kids NEED these kinds of stories to know they aren’t alone, they are beautiful how they are. They shoudln’t have to wait to find out what they are.. is okay. And that’s beautiful. 

As Rose Tells Garnet that she is the answer, and as we cut back to the present, Steven asks what the answer is. Garnet simply answers: Love. And we close on one great exchange Steven: I knew it Garnet; (wistfully) So did I. 

Final Thoughts: While I remembered the episode being good, hence part of the reason I choose it I forgot just HOW great this episode was, especially post reveal. The art direction is goregous, shot like a fairy tail and rightfully so since this episode is told as one, the story is heartwarming and erica and charlene really act their hearts out as ruby and sapphire while Estelle kills it as both present garnet narrating and past garnet, a garnet ENTIRELY diffrent from what we’ve seen but acted beautifully. It’s espcially noticable since unlike the other two lead gems, we obviously wouldn’t see more garnets like we would amythests and pearls, so unlike her contepraries estelle really didn’t get to flex her vocal range as much playing alternate versions as the seasons went on, with this being the closest she got.  The episode is beautiful, has a wonderful message, and is just utterly charming and is agian why I DON’T mind that every su episode dosen’t advance the plot: Sometimes it dosen’t need to. And even so this one ended up being WAY more important than I remembered, introducing blue diamond and turning out to be MASSIVELY important once the reveal kicked it: For it was Garnet, and the love dthat forged her that changed Pink’s direction. Before the rebellion was simply a way to stop the occupation of earth and would’ve been snuffed out if not for ruby’s actions.. but seeing garnet, seeing how earth and being free from homeworld’s restraints could positvely impact someone.. it changed rose. Besides bringing her and Pearl together, it also made her realize just what her rebellion could bring to people and what a gem could be and even more how precious her future home was. By forming in an act of Love, garnet changed the entire future of gemkind. By staying that way she did so once more. And that’s beautifully. overall an underated, even by me, little masterwork with once again a damn fine message.  We’ll get back to SU soon enough, as I plan to cover the series first full arc as we meet peridot, and see into the souls of our heroines. But first Pride isn’t over yet, and I have one last card on the table as we todd it up a bit with my first look at bojack horseman. Like this if you enjoyed it, comments subscirbe etc etc and don’t be afraid to comission a review for 3 bucks, and until we meet agian, later days. 

[cheddar-the-dog]

b99 the podcast episode 6:

from flatline you back nine

@jake-and-ames and I have summarized what we think are the highlights of the sixth episode of the brooklyn nine-nine podcast. maybe those of you who can’t listen to the podcast for whatever reason can profit from it a bit

under the cut as per usual

[[MORE]]

Part 1 with Paul Welsh and Madeline Walter, Dan Goor, Joe Lo Truglio

Madeline and Paul are the first writing duo in the 99 writers room

there’s always changes after the table reads

table reads are on the spot performances and not everyone is great at it

sometimes one of the actors isn’t there so a writer has to fill in and there’s always a debate if they should do an impression or just a suggestion of an impression

06x18 Suicide Squad: the idea to bring back the 99’s worst enemies and they have to side with the 99

there was an idea to bring back Pimento and The Pontiac Bandit but they’re not actual enemies

Kyra Sedgwick, the actress playing Madeline Wunch, directed an episode of B99

Ken Marino and Joe went together to NYU

every show has his unique difficult thing, in 99 it’s writing police plots and make them satisfying in a way/ building the believable police element into it/ it’s limiting that they only have a certain physical perimeter to work within

there’s times when the writers first figure out an emotional story and then the other circumstances

in “The Bimbo” there was a woman choreographing the handshakes and Madeline and Paul ended up calling her “the handshake lady” and Andy called them out and said that she’s an award winning choreographer

the crew is like 180 people on average

cut conversation between Holt and Peralta was a set up to Holt on the street and it’s a tease for S7

Part 2 with Stephanie Beatriz, Rick Page, Beatriz “Bea” Chahin

Bea is the production coordinator and “If you need something call Bea!” is a common mantra among the cast and crew

Steph shot one pilot before b99 and it didn’t go and she fell into a “huge” depression

“Back Nine” means when a show starts with 13 episodes and you typically hope for 22 so if the ratings are doing good the network gives you the “Back Nine”

Melissa was very emotional about the back nine and crying a lot so Steph held back because she didn’t want to turn everything into an even bigger emotional mess

the Super Bowl episode: the episode that airs after the super bowl which means high ratings and promos during the game and then additionally to that there was a Golden Globe nomination and win

the Globes was Steph’s first award show and she didn’t have a stylist and her dress was too big but they won!

everyone was more than thrilled that Andy won a Globe

and they couldn’t believe that the show won as well, it gave everyone a boost, and Steph said that it must be especially validating to the crew because they put the most work into it

during S2 a bunch of people (Melissa and her husband, Joe and his wife, Chelsea and her husband and Steph and her then partner) went on a trip to Paris

the people on the trip were recognized a lot but Steph wasn’t because, as discussed, her behavior and voice are so different

that changed though when she wore a leather jacket outside

there was a Make-A-Wish person that broke down in tears seeing Mel and Steph and Rick says it made him realize that the core ensemble are mainstream icons

they talk about the diversity and complexity of the show

Steph says that working on b99 made her views change drastically and makes her think about work environments and attitudes a lot more

Steph met the Japanese voice-over actors for her and other characters (they also gave her a picture of the whole cast) when she was on her honeymoon in Japan

The show has a very international appeal because of the family that is the 99 so it transcends the US police procedural aspect

MEJ says that the show is very meme-able

they discuss the comedy and the intelligence of the jokes

also that the show creates its own language/ slang terms (noice, toit)

the shouting of the “nine-nine!” is very iconic, it was an internal thing first that was started by Terry and now it’s a mainstream thing

what they remember of the cancellation: it came out of nowhere for everyone and they felt terrible because they couldn’t properly wrap up the show and they didn’t have a chance to work with the 99 crew anymore

after 2 days everyone gave up hopes because Hulu and Netflix passed

Rick was so disappointed and furious he shut down all devices and the next morning someone called to tell him that the show had been picked up and it turned out he shut everything off about 20 minutes before the news broke that they got picked up

Dan Goor sent an e-mail to tell everyone that the show got cancelled and it got cancelled the day before the upfronts

Steph has a mindset of “this is the last season” every year around April and didn’t react emotionally when the news broke that the show actually got cancelled

she was very level headed and talked to her agents about next steps to take and then Brad and her got spicy chicken and beer and got drunk

Steph gets very emotional talking about the outpouring of emotions of the fans because it reminded her of her time in theatre when people would come up to her immediatelyafter the show to tell her how she made them feel during the play and though she was seeing all the of love the internet gave b99 Brad described her as a “little dead behind the eyes”

she really lost it when she realized she wouldn’t see her friends anymore

how do they want the show to be remembered? fondly/happy/a palette cleanser says Steph, as something groundbreaking and it to have a positive impact says Rick

lastly they talk about the impact of the show and Bea says that as a Latina herself she appreciates the fact that the show has two very different Latina characters she hasn’t seen before

“I wanna see more of it for all people. I want everyone to feel like they’re represented on TV. I think that’s really important. And I think it’s important, not only for the people who are seeing themselves, but it’s also important for maybe the people that have always seen themselves and never thought about it. Because, I think, that’s the real issue. It’s like if you have decided one kind of person is the hero then there’s no room for anybody else to be the hero. And then everyone else becomes disposable. And that’s, that’s the worst version that humanity can be is when others that are human beings are disposable. And I think, you know, in a small way this show does a really good job at reminding us that nobody is disposable.”

[g0dblessthefandom]

Live! From New York: A Brittana Fanfiction Ch. 2

Listen... I know it’s been a minute, but I promise there won’t be as long a gap until the next update. I swear. Catch up on FF.net and AO3.

Santana had been to 30 Rockefeller Plaza three times in her life. The first was when she first got to New York, and she and some of her friend’s had stumbled across the crazy idea that they wanted to go ice skating during Christmas. Santana hadn’t really known how to ice skate, but she’d given it a try, and broken her wrist. The second time was three years later when her parents visited from California, and insisted on going for the tour of NBC studios. They were obsessed with Kathie Lee and Hoda on the morning show, and it didn’t matter how much Santana protested, they were going, so she tagged along. She’d resisted the siren song of network TV for as long as she could, but once the NBC page pointed out the wall of signed photos from former hosts of SNL, they had her. She spent nearly $300 in the gift shop on swag, and yes, Mercedes had laughed at her for her lack of willpower, but it’d had been well worth it. She’d considered for a moment wearing her SNL t-shirt, but after about thirty seconds of wandering around her apartment, she figured that maybe that was coming on too strong.

The host dinner on Tuesday night was a tradition. Santana didn’t need to be told that. It was her first chance to make a big impression on the cast, writers and some of the crew, many she’d only seen on TV, and it was pretty important. Rachel had given her a long list of places that would impress even the snobbiest of connoisseurs, and for once, Santana was glad to have a friend who’s insane dietary demands kept her on the cutting edge of the trendy eateries in New York. Rachel and Mercedes sat in her dressing room, Michelin Eating Guides open and surrounding them, both shouting out suggestions as best they could, but Santana had yet to hear one that just sounded right.

“Oooh, how about Le Papillion?”

“Rachel, I’m trying to blow them away, not put them to sleep. That restaurant looks like the kind of place you’d take your mistress so you could avoid running into your side chick.”

Rachel took the comment in stride, thumbing through a few more pages. “The Grange? It’s got this lovely hunter’s lodge motif. I don’t  find it personally enjoyable, but the cast might.”

Santana grunted noncommittally and hit a few mindless notes on the piano she kept in the corner.

“Okay, how about the new Japanese restaurant by that celebrity chef? I heard that they flip the sushi to your table from across the room!” Mercedes said excitedly waving a glossy magazine high above her head.

Santana hit a few more notes, and suddenly closed the piano with a sharp snap.

She pointed to Rachel and Mercedes in turn. “I don’t want gimmicks. I don’t want tricks. I just want a place that will dazzle and inspire them!”

She stomped over to the couch and sat down in a huff, crossing her arms.

“Um, so…” Mercedes said, setting her magazine down and sitting forward to pat Santana on the leg. “I’m going to ignore that little outburst because you’re my girl, and I love you, but if you snap at me like that again, I’m gonna yank out your weave, and sell it on Ebay.”

There was a lightness in her voice, but Santana knew that she wasn’t far from the truth, so she grimaced and nodded, rolling her eyes for effect.

“Fine, ‘Cedes, but something has got to be perfect. If I can’t find it, I will never make this right.”

There was a whine in her own voice that Santana didn’t like, but she couldn’t help it. This was a big deal. This was a first impression, and in a lot of ways, it could be the first step on her path of Saturday Night Live fame. She didn’t want to want it as much as she did, but she did. She cleared her throat in an attempt to wipe the desperation away.

“I don’t know why you’re all worked up about this anyway, Santana.” Rachel said behind the latest copy of Fine Eats magazine. “It’s just a performance. You do it every night of the week and twice on Sundays. This is old hat stuff.”

“Yeah, but if she screws up it’s not just to the crowd of one theater.” Mercedes broke in  from behind her own dining magazine. “It’s in front of hundreds of thousands. Or at least whatever is normal for a Saturday night, I dunno. Could be millions.”

Santana laid across the couched, nearly knocking the magazine out of Rachel’s hands.

Rachel raised it above her head with a sigh. “Even then, it’s not even prime time! I sang backup for Sia last year at New Year’s and there were probably more people in Times Square alone than-”

“What’s this?” Santana exclaimed, rolling off the couch, and grabbing a magazine from the stack on the floor near the couch.

“What’s what?” Mercedes and Rachel said, nearly in unison.

Santana pointed at photo in the magazine, tapping the magazine emphatically. “Blaine Anderson!”

Mercedes was by her side in an instant, and nearly grabbed the article from her hands. “No fricking way. Are you serious? Blaine Anderson? The guy from Newberry Park?!”

“It’s gotta be. I remember that dumbass cowlick from anywhere.”

“Perhaps you’d like to clue me in, ladies.” Rachel sighed, folding her magazine primly in her lap.

“Oh yeah, Berry, I forgot that it was only recently that you started stalking us.” Santana quipped.

“I know that you’re joking, Santana, but I think everyone in the company agreed that you’re ‘joke restraining order’ was beyond the pale.”

“He ran this food cart in Newberry park, in our old neighborhood in Queens. He had a bunch of Filipino food, and it was pretty much the most delicious thing we’d ever eaten in our whole lives. We basically went there every day for three years, and then one day he said he was shutting down, and was going to open a brick and mortar place. We told him we’d be first in line, and gave him our contact info, but we hadn’t heard anything since.”

“Maybe that was your favorite place to eat, Mercedes, but I like to think that I had a bit more class than some fly by night operation.”

“Oh, well, I guess all the times that you texted  me desperately at midnight asking me to bring you some adobo chicken on my way home from work were hallucinations.” Mercedes shot back.

Santana buried her nose behind the glossy print, and wouldn’t meet Mercedes’ eye. “Yeah, well, whatever. It turns out he made it big, and now his place is one of the up and comers in Manhattan.”

“Well, good for him! I’m so proud. We should definitely make a reservation.”

Rachel stooped behind Santana and took a look at the magazine herself. “Filipino-American chef Blaine Anderson opens up Hapa an American/Filipino fusion restaurant that mixes both of Anderson’s heritages into one amazing dining experience. Good luck with that reservation, ladies, it says here that they’re booked out for the next six months.”

“Maybe for a peon such as yourself.” Santana snatched the paper away, and tugged on the page, tearing it out. “But we were there at the beginning, and I’m sure there’s no way he can refuse one of his original supporters a seat.”

Mercedes did some quick math. “It’s not just one seat, San, you’re taking the whole cast of SNL, probably plus some of the writers. That’s like 20 people.”

“Sure, I’m not saying that it’s going to be easy, but you’re talking to Santana Lopez. Writer and star of the most sought after ticket on Broadway. I’ll offer him a few balcony seats to Billie! and he’ll be sold.”

“I’m not sure if it’s going to be that easy, Santana.”

“Well, luckily Rachel, no one asked you.”

“Santana, she’s right.” Mercedes said. “And, if you remember correctly, it’s not like you and Blaine Anderson had the most cozy relationship.”

Santana smiled slyly. “And that’s why I’m not going to ask him. I’m going to ask the co-star of the most sought after ticket on Broadway. The woman behind the throne. One of the most talented, kind, and not to mention beautiful women that I know.”

Mercedes opened her mouth to reply, but Rachel interrupted her.

“Why Santana, that was the nicest thing you’ve ever said to me!” She swooned.

Both Santana and Mercedes gave her a glare, but moved on with the conversation.

“Flattery will get you nowhere, Lopez.”

“Aw, c’mon, ‘Cedes. You know how much this means to me. Having it at this place, this great, cosmopolitan establishment, on the rise, with amazing food… It’s a can’t miss! It would mean the world to me.”

“I don’t know, Santana…”

“And I would owe you one.”

A devious smile crept over Mercedes’ features, and Santana’s eyes grew wide. She was beginning to regret her decision, but Mercedes was already accepting, her hand out to accept Santana’s.

“Deal. I’ll get you and the cast into Blaine Anderson’s restaurant in a couple weeks, and you’ll officially owe me one.”

There was something about her tone that Santana didn’t like, but she was desperate. What she had said to Mercedes and Rachel was real. There was something in her that needed to make a good impression, and she wasn’t sure why, but she’d do anything to achieve her goal.

She swallowed audibly, but took Mercedes’ hand regardless. “Fine. Deal.”

Mercedes held her hand a bit tighter. “But you have to convince Emma to give up the tickets.”

Santana looked like she wanted to resist, but a thousand scenarios ran through her head and there wasn’t a single one where she figured she could refuse this request.

“Deal.” She said, defeated

Mercedes nodded with a satisfied smile, and finally released Santana’s hand. She stooped down and started gathering the magazines off the floor.

“Ooh, I can’t wait. I’m already thinking of what you can do.”

Santana bent over to help. “Yeah, whatever. You just focus on getting me in that restaurant and the rest will fall into place.”

Rachel had placed herself delicately back on the couch, and was fanning through a Vanity Fair.

“You do realize she’s probably just going to get you to watch the kids so she and the Mrs. can have a date night, right?”

Santana scoffed and watched Mercedes carefully. “Yeah, she knows that I would do that for free. I can already see that she’s got something more devious in mind. Deny it, Mercedes. I dare you.”

Mercedes laughed lightly, and placed her stack of magazines on the coffee table. The laugh took on an edge of the maniacal as she didn’t say a word, but just walked out of the room.

\

Leslie Jones and Artie Abrams both watched Brittany with a strange fascination. They talked, but didn’t bother directing any of their comments toward Brittany, who had been muttering to herself for the better part of an hour, and had been standing in the middle of her dressing room with a signed copy of the Billie! playbill for the better part of fifteen.

They watched her mutter for a few moments more and suddenly Leslie stood up from the couch.

“Girl, just leave it! Damn. I swear you’ve spent more time doing this than writing any sketch I have ever seen you in.”

Artie waved his hands in solidarity. “Les, she can’t hear you, girl. She’s in La La Land.”

“Well, she better get her ass out of La La Land, because we’re supposed to be writing something to take to pitch tomorrow, and I can’t even think with her running around like this!”

The weeks before Santana Lopez’s arrival had slowly whittled down to days, and now they were only a mere 72 hours away from her arrival at Studio 8H. While not everyone in the cast knew (or cared too much) about Brittany’s fascination with Santana Lopez, they had all found a bit of humor in her worsening condition. It was like watching someone very, very slowly sink into quicksand that they only notice after the fourth or fifth day.

“What do you think she’s going to do with it in the end?” Artie asked, with a kind of quiet wonder.

“I dunno. She’ll probably try and eat it or something.” Leslie cupped her hands around her mouth. “She’s not going to care if you have a totally normal thing in your dressing room, Britt. Honestly, she’s probably not even going to come in here.”

That last sentence was directed towards Artie, but Brittany’s eyes snapped to Leslie. “You don’t think so? I mean, I wasn’t thinking that it would be a part of a tour or anything, but I’d really hoped that she’d stop by. I could show her my table, and my computer and stuff.”

“Britt. Girl.” Leslie deadpanned. “Santana Lopez, is like on a whole other level right now. She’s won like a million awards, and was friends with President Obama. She’s on a whole other level of cool, my dude.”

Brittany tried not to let her face fall too much, but she couldn’t help but be disappointed. “Yeah, no, you’re right. What was I thinking?”

She placed the framed Playbill on her desk with a soft slap. Artie pushed his wheelchair closer, putting a comforting hand on her shoulder.

“Nah, Britt, it’s not like that. I’m sure she’ll come by.”

“Yeah, Brittany, she’s a star, but she seems like a really down to Earth person, I’m sure it’ll be fine.” Leslie chimed in, quick to reassure her.

Brittany took a deep sigh, and dramatically slithered to the floor, her body in fluid motion, floating to the ground. Artie had to admit that he was always impressed with her control and grace. Even falling to the floor, she looked like a dancer.

One thing he did know from being her friend for just under a decade was how resilient she was. He leaned over and patted Brittany on the leg.

“It’s cool, Britt, don’t worry. How about we head over to Jane’s office, and see if we can’t make some comedy magic?”

Leslie and Brittany both looked up at him quizzickly.

“What?” He continued, puzzled. “I thought it would better than just saying, ‘Write some sketches.’”

“Yeah.” said Leslie, taking a large step over Brittany, and reaching out a hand. “You should probably stick to jokes, funny man. C’mon, Britt, let’s get out of here before we catch any of his bad jokes.”

Brittany took Leslie’s hand, but lingered a moment as she and Artie argued a bit as they moved down the hall. She would be the first to admit that she sometimes got caught up in her emotions, and maybe tended to exaggerate more often than not.

Maybe.

But, she was a performer, and she was a bit of a cut up, and it seemed sometimes that the only way that she could express herself was in a funny character, or voice or bit. She was like the world’s most outgoing introvert. But, at the end of the day, she really did want Santana Lopez to notice her. What came after that, she really had no idea. She stifled a heavy sigh that was escaping from her lips and took a right instead of the left, turning off into a less populated corner of 30 Rock.

It was nearly midnight, and the building was quiet, but that was par for the course. Most of the “late night” shows filmed at six in the afternoon, so around this time, it was usually only SNL writers left. They were still early in the week, so the crunch wasn’t on, but it wouldn’t hurt to hammer out a few sketch ideas before heading in for the night. Still, it was pretty early for the SNL folks, most didn’t get their motors really running until 10:30, and it seemed like a waste to stop working then.

Brittany snapped back into focus and looked around. Her feet had taken her almost all the way to her after-show-secret-hideout, but she frowned to herself. She hadn’t meant to come this way at all. How out of order did her brain have to be to bring her this way? She rocked quickly back and forth on the balls of her feet and thought for a moment. It was just a show, right? Just a show like any other? Then why was she so nervous? Why was she so worried? Why was she acting so weird? She frowned again to herself.

“A lot on your mind?”

The voice behind her nearly made her yelp, but she contained herself, and spun quickly to face it.

Sam Evans had been on the show for less than a year, but he was currently the resident heartthrob, and his abs brought a certain quality to the shirtless scenes, so Lorne was sure to make good use of them. Brittany wasn’t quite sure how she felt about him yet. He had to tendency to make sketches all about him, and was hired after his successful YouTube channel had several viral videos. He wasn’t a stand up comic, and hadn’t been to Second City, so he was a new beast entirely.

Brittany eyed him up and down. “Nothing to concern yourself with, Sam. Shouldn’t you be out vlogging or something?”

She kept her voice light, but there was a bite. She didn’t have anything against the guy, but it didn’t hurt to remind him who had seniority.

“Nah, I’m just working on some killer stuff for this week. Lorne couldn’t get enough of my stoner surfer guy on Update a few weeks ago, so I’m thinking of bringing that back.”

“Yeah, might want to watch out for that, don’t want it getting stale.”

A look of uncertainty crossed over Sam’s face before he spoke up again. “You don’t think it’s weird you’re wandering around on this side of the studio late at night? Not worried about ghosts?”

The last part of his statement came with the hint of a sneer, and Brittany had to keep herself from smiling. She and Artie had spent the better part of a month convincing Sam and Ego Nwadim (the two first years) that the studio was haunted. Ego had been humoring them (nothing wrong with a little hazing to promote team building), but it seemed to Brittany that Sam had actually believed her, and still refused to go in the third floor men’s bathroom alone.

“Whatever, Britt.” Sam said. The uncertainty had slipped away, and the cocky grin returned. “Hey, did you hear? Santana Lopez has sent out invitations for the Host Dinner. I just got mine a few minutes ago.”

He reached into his jacket, pulling out a gorgeous egg shell envelope. He waved it in front of Brittany and with a flash, she had snatched it out of his hands, and was pulling it open.

“Hey! That’s mine.”

She batted his hand away, and pulled the envelope open, removing a document that Brittany could only describe as ‘wedding Invitation fancy’.

“Holy hell. This is amazing.” She breathed, gazing down at the paper.

You Are Cordially Invited To Join Santana Lopez for the Inaugural Host’s Dinner

For Episode 848 of Saturday Night Live

Reservation at 6PM at Hapa

72nd and Columbus Ave.

Be there or be square!

Brittany clasped the note to her chest. “Oh my god.”

Sam’s eyes widened a little. “What’s wrong?”

Brittany sighed a little and smiled tightly. “She’s such a freaking dork!”

With that she raced down the hall, back towards the writer’s offices, doing a joyful leap every so often.

Sam watched her leave curiously. “But that was my invitation.”

[j2madhatters]

You know, I kind of get the PR need to tell/show everyone that the Ja are NOT A COUPLE. After all, one presumes that this is with their okay, and hopefully for something good for them in the long run. But what I DON'T get is the crazy need to make sure everyone knows that they're not near each other AT ALL, even when with a group of friends or doing something buddy-like etc. All het fans agree they're great friends. Friends hang out, no? What, suddenly they don't like each other? Blah

Anon 2: Hello dear admins. I had a request to make, but posse ignore if I’m being presumptuous. I wanted to ask you to please write something, anything, positive about J2. The PR circus is making me crazy, and even raising doubts about them. I just don’t understand what’s going on. Is it at all possible that we’re the ones that are wrong, and that the Js are actually happily married, hetro men? And are now taking the opportunity to prove it, and set us straight? Doesn’t make sense though. Argh.

Anon 3: Anyone know why D is posting so much on IG/Twitter with M*sha? Are they really that close of friends? I’d assume she’d know jared much better than M*sha, but I guess I’m wrong?

Anon 4: Omg this circus is relentless, so in-our-face and seemingly never-ending. I just want to cry by now. Please can anyone tell me some positive J2 stuff? Usually I’m able to ignore it to a point, I tell myself how this is just a farce they’re (PR etc) shoving down our throats for reasons unknown to us, but hopefully leading to better things for our guys. But the sheer persistence and thoroughness of the shut- down is depressing me so much. Please, can you help?

Anon 5: I don’t want to be whiny and stuff but….Do you think we’re ever going to be blessed with J2 stuff like before? I know we got some lovely J2 moments at the cons and all but when I compare with the glorious Austin era, my heart breaks just a little more. Not just every single major holiday Luke Easter, Xmas, Thanksgiving, but every few days, we’d get a J2 selfie or a sighting or a post. I hope that things work for the best for them, they don’t owe us anything. I so want them to be happy always.

I’m going to address these collectively since they’re mostly related. SPN is in it’s 13th season, that’s unheard of for a primetime network show. It makes it a novelty, in a way, but it makes getting press harder because it’s been around for so long that there isn’t much new to write/talk about from a mainstream media perspective. That’s why D was cast: stunt casting to garner attention and it worked, the first piece written about it was in Variety (Hollywood’s #1 newspaper). The purpose behind getting media attention is to grow your audience and to attract advertisers, which is how networks make money and what determines a shows budget. This is one of the reasons for the step up in bearding this year, greater media attention means they have to play the game more, and also more consistently than usual.

J2 can’t just hang out openly like regular co-stars during this time because most co-stars haven’t been hanging out 98% of their time for 13 years, and most haven’t had gay rumors the entirety of their friendship. Plus, social media is a toy for J2′s generation, not a lifestyle and, right now, it’s a tool for putting out a certain image without having to put forth any real effort or time. For example, that fan sighting of Jared and Gen at a restaurant in Austin where it turned out that Jared and Jensen were the ones who had dinner together and, when they noticed the fan watching them, Jensen left and G arrived to meet the fan. And, another example, the recent FBBC dinner table pics were all taken on the same day (same clothes), some time on/before the 7th (when the first one was posted). So, just bear in mind, that every pic they post is literally only a moment in time and may not even be recent.

There’s also the impending brewery opening to consider (now set for January), Jensen and D have to raise the profile of it, and Jared can’t be seen to be a part of it in any way because he owns a bar.

As for D and M, she probably is friends with him to an extent. D and G both work with RA and they, like most of the guest cast, probably banded together with M to raise their own profiles and because J2 are a mostly disinterested island unto themselves. Despite appearances, I seriously doubt J2 hang out much with D or G when they’re around. Like we’ve seen many times, J2 are usually in a bubble together no matter who else is there. Those 3 (?) pics of Jensen and D and M in Van were all taken at work: one on set, one walking away from set (where Jensen was walking ahead of D and several feet from M), and one in a trailer that was a posed ad for charity. Three moments out of two weeks? Really nothing to care about. 

As for not getting any J2, we just had two excellent J2 cons (where J2 were on fire and touchy-feely with each otherand having #datenights), and we had J2 out shopping together for their annual Christmas cast/crew gifts. Even though D was there in Van, those gifts were still from J2 and J2 only. -Admin D

[topoffyourhat]

Thoughts On SDCC Supergirl Interview:

Okay so take my thoughts, feelings, and opinions on this matter as you see fit. I know everyone is entitled to their own ideals here and may not take mine seriously since I’m a white, heterosexual woman but I just wanna get mine out there based off what I’ve read, seen, and heard regarding this topic. Here are the things I gathered and taken from this:

1. The interview wasn’t taken seriously from the get go (except for Katie, David, and Odette) which is what pissed me off the most. Your show represents and stands for so much or at least it’s supposed to and if you really give a crap about it, your character, career, and how people see you: answer the damn question seriously and not sing around it. People have questions and have to wait for so long to be able to share them and want answers that matter just like if you asked a question and someone continious tip toed around you avoiding to answer, wouldn’t you be annoyed or upset too? I fucking would so at least answer the best to your ability to proudly represent your show, your characters, and your capabilities as actors/actresses. This is the biggest and largest convention in the country where everything happens (promo, trailer, concept art, future plans, and etc releases) so at least have the heart to understand your purpose here and what it means to people. Yes obviously we don’t expect you to ruin the whole upcoming season for us, but for fucks sake actually act like you give a shit about your jobs and not treat them like a fucking joke because this show has helped and brought many people together more than I think you realize. 2. To all the people calling out Melissa, Chris, Mechad, and Jeremy for being gigantor homophobes. That song they sang about the Supercorp ship vs. the Karamel ship sounds far more condescending, mocking, belittling, and honestly it feels more like an attack than anything. You can hear it their tone and see it through their body language and presence and even Katie, David, and Odette found it awkward and because of that the whole thing was extremely uncomfortable from start to finish. They obviously weren’t expecting to be bombarded by such a fan base for that ship in particular and were more prepared to discuss the ships that were canon confirmed in their show but I don’t think this necessarily makes them homophobics. I know Melissa, Jeremy, Chris, and Mechad all proactively support gay rights and marriage and just because they support these ideals doesn’t necessarily mean they fully understand lgbtq and all that it entails. I know plenty people that they say they support gay rights and marriage and all of lgbtq but are still uncomfortable or can’t handle witnessing any kinds of displays whether public or private which is very naive and hypocritical thinking but I don’t think that’s what caused this to spark and get them in trouble. I think what got them in trouble is when: A. Jeremy tried validating himself by saying he’s a “theater kid” and because of it knows how to properly represent the lgbtq community and insinuated that all “theater kids” are or are not lgbtq. Yea no not how it works. 1st of all, you can’t say stereotypes what kinds and types of people are involved in theater, they all come from mixed backgrounds. Secondly, you can’t validate yourself or your character consentually acting like their experiences are better or worse than others, especially those in the lgbtq community. B. Melissa wasn’t helpful either telling Jeremy he was “so brave” when he told people in regards to the Supercorp ship that he “debunked it.” Being lgbtq, coming out as lgbtq, living as lgbtq, and so on are very brave, strong, and inspring things to do so what’s there to debunk? I obviously don’t know and can’t act like I do, being heterosexual, but I have witnessed some of my friend’s journeys with it and while people are becoming a little more accepting and aware, we’ve still got a LONG fucking way to go to help and better lgbtq equality, representation, and value and this little conversion definitely made me realize how much progress we have to make in educating people what lgbtq means in how we discuss and regard the subject amongst others. 3. While I may not like certain pairings or ships it doesn’t mean I act oblivious to them or exile them like they don’t exist. Everyone has their own preferred otp’s that they couple off but it’s based on each person viewing the show. Without these kinds of responses (these responses can come through several forms like video reactions, fanfictions, fan art, and etc), shows don’t get this mass attention and overwhelming popularity and also without these, your show can’t build a strong, healthy fanbase and yes all shows, movies, books, and so on aren’t always perfect. They all experience good and bad moments from time to time it’s all a part of being in fandoms which are almost always divided unfortunately (you can choose how you want to be and represent yourself) but it’s how you acknowledge and handle these types of situations that keep your fandom united and content and because of these guys lack of seriousness that makes it more difficult. There’s ways you can properly respond to this and the perfect example being Katie handling Chris’s comment regarding sexuality by simply stating, “It matters who you are, not who others think you are. You are your own person despite other people’s perceptions.” That’s how you handle and shut that shit down. It wasn’t rude or overbearing. It was very mature and while it was directly proving her point, it was also indirectly addressing a wide audience of people that may or may not understand the situation and quickly ended the discussion which is what I loved more than anything. Acknowledge the fans and who they are, what they want, their views and opinions. Be open minded to new possibilities which doesn’t mean you always have to agree or disagree but at least recognize it because if you can’t guess who doesn’t have a fucking show? 4. Also based off what I’ve seen just recently since I posted this, I get that what happened has really hurt and offended many people including myself but you attacking and harassing the cast and crew with death threats and planning on boycotting the show doesn’t make you any better. You’re literally stooping at the same, possibly worse level and instead of trashing and directing your hate and anger at them, direct your love and compassion to help people better understand and educate why this is such a huge deal and maybe just maybe they will learn from this. Nobody is perfect and everyone makes mistakes and we have to remember that even with celebrities but they’re not going to if we continue to make them feel less. Yes we all go through this pain and hate and it makes us stronger but it doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be the better person. Instead channel this energy into something more meaningful and use this experience to raise your voice in a more uplifting and influential way. Share your stories, your thoughts and feelings, your emotions, and what not. Let it all out in the open but just think of how you’d present this information amongst yourself and how you’d want others to present it to you. In this day of society, we should be treating others the way you want to be treated and despite our convictions should continue being kind to 1 another and striving for 1 common goal, coming together. We all want to feel loved and like we belong somewhere but it’s not going to happen if we keep going this same path time and time again. Finally all in all, I’m not going to let this crap stop me from watching the show. I love supergirl and all that she stands in comic and film universe. I love this cast more than anything and the whole thing was blown up for a reason because people care about them and this show and while I’m skeptical about this upcoming season I just hope the cast and crew and even the network learn and grow from this incident and use the experiences surrounding it to better and educate themselves and make this show what it’s meant to be: super.

[cromulentbookreview]

TumblTURN

Thank God for Tumblr. Seriously, Tumblr is the best. used to think I was alone in my love for AMC’s Turn: Washington’s Spies. Then I discovered Tumblr. Thank you, Tumblr.

I wish I had known about the Tumblr Turn fandom when I first started watching the show - definitely would’ve felt less alone. Since we are now in the final season of Turn, I wanted to give something back to the Tumblr fandom that has sustained me. As I am a cromulent book reviewer / future librarian / future reader’s adviser, I figured I’d gather up a list of books, TV shows and other media for my fellow Turncoats to read/watch/enjoy during the long wait between episodes. And what will be the even longer period after this season ends, when we will have no more Turn at all.

Also: Fourth of July, so it’s a great day to binge on Turn.

Before I start with a list of recommendations, though, I gotta have a Turn gif party to show off all the things I love about Turn. Because screw historical accuracy, Anna and Major Hewlett belong together (damn it, Burn Gorman, you’d better come back this season! Even if it’s just for one episode! Even if it’s just for one scene. Just one scene, that’s all I need!), 

But let me just introduce you to some of the people of Turn: there’s Abe. He is a terrible spy,

Mary is a spy grand-master,

 Robert Townsend spies for ten minutes, is best spy ever,

 and Caleb shaved off his beard for Abe, that ungrateful shite! 

Look at that beautiful beard.

Ben Tallmadge’s pants could stand to be a little tighter...

And would it be so hard for them to bring Major Andre back from the dead? Come on, he was pretty...

Simcoe is evil for the sake of evil,

(and we love him for it),

Meanwhile, Abigail is done with all this BS,

And Benedict Arnold is a whiny little bitch, nothing new there. Good job, guy-whose-name-is-now-synonymous-with-treason. 

Peggy is seriously questioning her life choices.

And, of course:

Annalett forever, goddamn it!

Sorry, but I ship them so hard. Probably one of my favorite ships of all time. I will go down with this ship. Suck it, history, I’ve got my ship.

OK! On to the books and things Turn fans can...uh...turn to when they run out of Turn. 

To everything, turn, turn turn...

Uhm, I mean..

I didn’t want to just stop at readalikes, though. I watch a lot of television, so I included some watchalikes as well. But, since I deal primarily with books, there will be some bias toward books. Also a bias towards fiction, because...well, I like fiction. I’ve lumped all the fiction together, adult, romance, children’s, middle-grade, YA, genre, etc. etc. 

FICTION

For full disclosure I will say I have not read all of these. I’ve read only a few (slow reader), but using my librarian skills, I’ve rustled up some titles that may appeal to Turn fans. If they end up not appealing to you...uhm...sorry?

Anyway:

Any of the Revolutionary War Books by Ann Rinaldi. This includes:

Time Enough for Drums

The Secret of Sarah Revere

Or Give Me Death

Hang A Thousand Trees with Ribbons

Finishing Becca

Cast Two Shadows

A Ride Into Morning

The Fifth of March

Wolf By The Ears

I swear I’ve read at least one of these at some point, but I really can’t remember. Based on the descriptions, though, they sound like they’d be a great fix for the pining Turn fan.

Johnny Tremain by Esther Forbes 

Or, the first thing my brain thinks of when I see the name Johnny Tremain:

Hee.

Redcoat and The Fort by Bernard Cornwell

I’ve read Redcoat during a prior Turn-related-book-binge, and it was OK, but not really my thing. It might be your thing, though, so give it a chance.

Nathan Hale’s Hazardous Tales: One Dead Spy by Nathan Hale

(Not the real Nathan Hale)

A graphic novel version of the story of Nathan Hale. I highly recommend all of the Nathan Hale’s Hazardous Tales books, as they manage to cover some pretty heavy topics in US history with a mixture of absolute seriousness, historical accuracy, and humor. You’ll find them shelved in middle grade, but hey, I’m an adult and I think they’re great.

Seeds of America series by Laurie Halse Anderson

The Astonishing Life of Octavian Nothing, Traitor to the Nation series by M.T. Anderson

The Spy , The Pilot and Lionel Lincoln by James Fenimore Cooper

Renegades of the American Revolution by Donna Thorland

In Gallant Company, book 5 of the Richard Bilotho novels by Alexander Kent.  Set during the Revolution if you’re in the mood for some nautical fiction told from the Tory perspective. I’m really big into nautical fiction for some reason.

Just Jane: A Daughter of England Caught in the Struggle of the American Revolution by William Lavender

I’m currently reading this one right now. It’s OK, not stellar - the writing style seems more geared toward middle grade than YA.

Soldier's Secret: The Story of Deborah Sampson by Sheila Solomon Klass

Sophia’s War and The Fighting Ground by Avi

Woods Runner by Gary Paulsen

The Scent of Death by Andrew Taylor

Revolutionary War + Murder Mystery! Long, though.

The Traitor's Wife: The Woman Behind Benedict Arnold and the Plan to Betray America  by Alison Pataki

The Winter of Red Snow: The Revolutionary War Diary of Abigail Jane Stewart, Valley Forge, Pennsylvania, 1777 by Kristiana Gregory

Yeah I have a soft spot in my heart for the Dear America books. Read them a lot when I was in middle school. So...recommended for middle grade readers as an intro to history via fiction

Alex & Eliza by Melissa De La Cruz

Or: Damn you, Lin-Manuel Miranda.

WEBCOMICS

The Dreamer, by Laura Innes

Highly, highly highly recommend for Turn fans pining for more Turn.

NONFICTION:

Washington's Spies: The Story of America's First Spy Ring by Alexander Rose

Or: the book the series is based on. “What do you mean you haven’t read the book the show is based on?” *Shove*

George Washington doesn’t have time for nonsense.

George Washington's Secret Six: The Spy Ring That Saved the American Revolution by Brian Kilmeade and Don Yaeger

Common Sense by Thomas Paine

Wait, didn’t they make you read this in school??

1776 and John Adams, by David McCollough

Lafayette in the Somewhat United States by Sarah Vowell

Bunker Hill: A City, a Siege, a Revolution and Valiant Ambition: George Washington, Benedict Arnold, and the Fate of the American Revolution  by Nathaniel Philbrick

Liar, Temptress, Soldier, Spy: Four Women Undercover in the Civil War by Karen Abbott

If you’re interested in early-American spycraft and badass lady spies during the Civil War...

Alexander Hamilton by Ron Chernow

Don’t worry, Hamilton fans, I wasn’t going to leave this out.

Hamilton: The Revolution by Lin-Manuel Miranda

There, I hawked your book, can I please have Hamilton tickets?

Ok, so there’s a ton of great nonfiction about the Revolutionary War that I’m not mentioning here, but it’s getting late and this post is really long already...if you think something should be included, add it in a note or something.

TV

John Adams (HBO)

How have you not seen this?

Frontier (Netflix)

Khal Drogo is an 18th century Canadian fur trapper. Far too short at only six episodes, but a fun show all the same. Set earlier than Turn and in Canada, but...but...Khal Drogo.

Poldark (PBS Masterpiece Theatre)

Set during the same time period as Turn - begins when Ross Poldark is sent home after being wounded in America during the Revolution. Starring the most attractive dwarf from the Hobbit movies.

*broods broodingly*

Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell (BBC / BBC America)

Because I will hawk this series to whoever will listen. It’s Regency England...with magic! It’s fantastic. The book is 9,000,000,000 pages but it’s worth the time to read. Or, if you don’t have time, watch the series. It’s excellent. How will it help Turn fans? Uh...well, you can watch it, and find out.

The AMC Period Dramas, including: Hell on Wheels, The Son, Mad Men, Halt and Catch Fire and The Terror, which is coming soon, but not soon enough because I need it now, goddamn it. Anyway: AMC is like America’s BBC when it comes to period dramas. No other network can beat them. I highly highly recommend Hell on Wheels (it’s on Netflix!), it’s criminally underrated. Also: Anson Mount. Drool.

MOVIES

Honestly, my attention span is too shot for movies. If it’s longer than an hour my brain shuts down. Apart from the obvious Revolutionary War movie starring that racist Australian guy, if you guys have any recommendations, please let me know about them.

THEATRE

Hamilton

Come on, did you really think I’d leave that off this list? I wish I could see Hamilton someday...but I’m poor. I hear they might be doing Hamilton here in the Pacific Northwest and...oh, wait, as I typed that sentence, the tickets sold out. Even though they haven’t actually been officially announced or gone on sale, they’ve sold out. Dear Lin-Manuel Miranda: please just have a camera crew record a production of Hamilton and show it in theaters. That way everyone can see it. Like me. If anyone out there has Hamilton tickets they’d like to give to me...

Damn you, Lin-Manuel Miranda, you gorgeous genius. I bet you lived in a closet before Hamilton but now you live in a mansion...

...I think your great, please give me Hamilton tickets.

1776

There’s a movie version of this, but it’s the original Founding Father’s musical.

Also, apparently being a good violin player means you’re good at sex stuff? I honestly don’t know and I’ve been questioning that song ever since I first heard it.

The Devil’s Disciple by George Bernard Shaw

I hadn’t heard of this play until I started mining for Turn-related media. Sounds pretty good, though and the full text is available via wikisource (see link).

So that’s my massive list of Turn materials which might soothe us once the show is off the air. I am open to more suggestions. Seriously, give me more suggestions, I’m going to need a lot when the show’s over. Also, I need more Annalett fic, please.

Whiskey? Yes.

[lindyhunt]

Does Bryan Singer’s Film Bohemian Rhapsody Deserve to Get Awards Love?

The ranks here at FASHION are not filled with men. Shocking, right? But there are one or two (there are actually, literally, two). Naturally, when a question about male/female dynamics arises it’s only fair that one of them stand in for the members of his gender and provide some insight. Our last topic of conversation was about controversial Christmas song “Baby, It’s Cold Outside” and today we’re discussing whether Bryan Singer-directed Bohemian Rhapsody should be snapping up any prizes this awards season. Two of our staffers—from the men’s corner, Greg Hudson, and from the women’s, Pahull Bains—talk it out.

PB: When Bohemian Rhapsody won the Best Picture (Drama) award at the Golden Globes last weekend, in addition to perplexity from critics who had largely panned the film, there was a fair bit of outrage on the internet. Evan Rachel Wood tweeted, “So we just..we are all still supposed to be pretending we don’t know about Bryan Singer? Cause it worked out really well with #Spacey and #Weinstein.” Now, I’m all for men finally getting their comeuppance but I also think it’s unfair that the entire cast and crew of a film be punished for the misdeeds of one person, whose shadiness wasn’t known until the #MeToo Flood of 2017. Or so I thought.

Yes, in 2017 Singer was fired as director of the film partway through shooting for causing “on-set chaos”: showing up late, being unavailable for days at a time, disappearing without the studio’s permission. Just a few days later, it emerged that Singer had been accused of rape by Cesar Sanchez-Guzman, who had been 17 at the time of the assault in 2003. So, I thought to myself, production on this film began before this news came out, so we can’t blame the team for working with him. I’m no fan of the movie, but let them have their moment of glory, thought I, wee innocent one.

As it turns out, allegations against Singer—who has directed films like The Usual Suspects and X-Men: First Class—go way, way back. In December 2017, IndieWire published “The Bryan Singer Timeline: a History of Allegations and Defenses, from Troubled Films to Sexual Assault Claims,” and lets just say it’s not a short list, going as far back as 1994 and ranging from allegations of sexual assault and rape to accusations of filming minor boys naked without their permission.

So, now that we’re caught up on Singer’s problematic history, what does it mean for Bohemian Rhapsody as an awards contender? No one was expecting it to win two big awards at the Globes, which has led understandably to increased scrutiny as we make our way through awards season, with the Critics’ Choice Awards, the SAGs, the BAFTAs, and of course the Oscars ahead of us. Do you think the film’s shot at these shiny statuettes should be diminished because of Singer’s involvement?

FIRST REFORMED, but about Ethan Hawke struggling to find hope in a world where Bohemian Rhapsody is probably gonna be nominated for Best Picture. pic.twitter.com/dI4D7kxfJ7

— david ehrlich (@davidehrlich) January 4, 2019

GH: Before I single-handedly bring down Bryan Singer with my rhetoric and rage, I just want to point a couple of things out that are probably not all that relevant. Why do this? Because I’m a man, and we enjoy talking like experts on subjects we just did some half-assed internet research about.

Point 1: The Golden Globes matter to the Oscar race about as much as the Iowa Caucuses do to the Presidential election. You’ll recall, being the astute political observer that you are, that the Iowa Caucuses happen early in the American election cycle. That’s really the only reason they are covered so closely every four years. Sometimes they are a predictor of who the eventual nominee (and president) will be, but often not. Just ask Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum, and Ted Cruz. And, similarly, the only reason the Golden Globes seem important is that they happen early in award season. But they are judged by such a niche group that their picks can seem downright baffling at times. Remember the 2010 flop The Tourist starring Johnny Depp? That was nominated for best picture at the Golden Globes. Have you ever seen Mozart in the Jungle? No! No one has! And yet, it’s a Golden Globe-winning television show.

So, do I think Bryan Singer’s creepiness will effect Bohemian Rhapsody’s Oscar chances? No. I think the fact that it’s a paint-by-numbers musical biopic will hurt its chances. (Seriously, the movie could have been called Walk Hard 2: This Time the Rockstar is Gay). I mean, Rami Malek and his mouthguard might still get a nod, but if you want a good Oscar predictor, the TIFF People’s Choice selection has a better track record. (So, get ready for a lot of Green Book hot takes!)

Point 2: Though she has already addressed and expressed regret about it—and she did so even before #MeToo made it a thing—Evan Rachel Wood starred in a Woody Allen movie in 2009. As with Singer, the allegations against Allen were pretty well-known even back then, but she still worked with him.

I’m not saying Wood is a hypocrite, or that her outrage is disingenuous. Not at all. I bring it up only to say that Wood clearly understands that sometimes actors work with gross directors, even if they should—or at least realistically could—know better. So maybe cut the cast a break when they celebrate what was clearly a huge surprise.

But 2009 was a very different time. And that’s good! If Bryan Singer never works again, that’s awesome. (Even if he happens to be innocent of all the many, many, many allegations–no one should be able to make the garbage Superman Returns and escape with their career). The real problem that’s complicating how we view Bohemian Rhapsody is that Singer is trying to get attention from it. If he didn’t rear his Botoxed head to claim credit for the Golden Globe, we might all be cool with forgetting he was a part of the film at all. Even if he kept the directing credit.

My question that rises from all of this is: why haven’t there been the public apologies and disavowals from actors who have worked with him in the past, the way there were for Woody Allen? So many of Allen’s former collaborators spoke out about how much they regret working with him, and how they’d never do it again. Actors who didn’t, or who expressed ambivalence toward Allen earned their own blowback. But no one is reaching out to Oscar Isaac or Jennifer Lawrence or, I don’t know, Stephen Baldwin, and asking them how they feel about having worked with an accused sex offender.

My theory: it’s because he, and his alleged victims, are gay. After all, it’s easier to ignore crimes in marginalized communities. Maybe there’s some discomfort because straight folks think they don’t understand gay sexuality in the first place—isn’t that normal for the gays—which, yes, is totally a homophobic holdover from when homosexuality was unfairly associated with pedophilia. And while I tend to think the retroactive shaming of actors is mostly performative, it’s still fucked up that we let Singer be Singer for so long.

PB: Hmm, I don’t know. Kevin Spacey’s accused of similar crimes and he’s been getting plenty of heat. I mean, he’s basically radioactive to anyone in the industry now. (Just for the record, though, Singer is married to a woman with whom he has a child, and has said publicly in interviews that he’s bisexual.)

I think maybe the reason Hollywood was slow to cool on Singer is because some of the allegations against him were dropped. As TIME notes, “he has faced two civil suits alleging sexual assault, one of which was dropped and one of which was dismissed.” In the wake of those lawsuits though, a bunch of stories began coming out about sordid “sex parties” Singer either threw or was present at but nothing was ever conclusively substantiated. A Buzzfeed story from 2014 details how Singer was brought “into regular orbit with 18- to 20-year-olds at parties sustained by large amounts of alcohol and drugs — edging precariously close to the line between legality and illegality,” but most of the sources quoted in the piece are unnamed and Singer wasn’t directly accused of misconduct. I think that sort of gave people the license to pull the whole “but nothing was ever proven” card.

Thanks to this latest lawsuit from 2017, though, which is ongoing, people are being denied an easy out. There is now a young man on the record claiming that he was raped by Singer, so there isn’t really any room for equivocating. Also, like you said, the climate has changed a lot in the past couple of years and stories that have been circulating on the whisper network for decades aren’t quite as easy to ignore anymore.

I know you brought up how Globe results aren’t a good indication of what’s coming down the pike—mainly because there’s no overlap between HFPA voters and Academy voters—but the film is still getting a lot of recognition from prestigious awards bodies. BAFTA noms came out yesterday and Bohemian Rhapsody features prominently on the list. So I’m just wondering—what’s an organization to do? I don’t think the film’s going to snag any more big prizes going forward; the backlash from the Globes has been substantial and other awards bodies probably don’t want to be tainted by a similar response on their big night. (By the way, did you see how poor 15-year-old Elsie Fisher, star of Eighth Grade, was dragged on Twitter for congratulating the team on their win?)

Why is everyone being so mean about this? I’m genuinely sorry if I did something wrong :(

— Elsie Fisher (@ElsieKFisher) January 7, 2019

Anyhow, I think what’s going to end up happening is: Malek’s going to continue getting recognition and maybe even some awards for his work, and the rest of the film is going to be shut out from any major wins. It’s the easiest way for them to award the film without really awarding the film, you know? And I don’t think anyone’s going to begrudge Malek a win. He’s got a ton of goodwill in the industry as well as critical praise for his portrayal of Freddie Mercury.

What I do hope for though—especially because we still have many, many awards shows and appearances ahead of us—is for everyone involved to get together and figure out how they want to address the elephant in the room. At the press conference after their Globes wins, the team flat-out refused to answer journalists’ questions about Singer. “That’s not something we should talk about tonight,” said producer Graham King, while Queen member Brian May quipped, “Good question though.” Malek then stepped up, saying, “I will take this one. There’s only one thing we needed to do, and that was to celebrate Freddie Mercury. Nothing was going to compromise us and giving him the love and celebration he deserves.”

They’re going to have to do a bit better than that. Don’t you think?

GH: It always baffles me when public figures don’t have thoughtful, satisfying answers to obvious questions. What are their publicists doing? Actors might not be the best at answering thorny ethical question on the spot (who is?), but they are pretty great at memorizing a script. Someone write that cast some talking points!

Having said that, I don’t really know what the satisfying answer would be. Because I realized, too, after you challenged my interpretation of the case, another reason why there hasn’t been the same retroactive hand-wringing from actors about having worked with Bryan Singer as there was about Woody Allen: It’s because it’s Bryan Singer. Woody Allen is an auteur—being in one of his films was an honour, a sign that you had arrived, or were at least arriving. Bryan Singer made some crowd-pleasing pictures, but no one is calling him an auteur.

I can’t decide whether that makes crafting an appropriate response easier or more difficult. On the one hand, because “working with Woody Allen” was such a cliche Hollywood status symbol, it was easy to understand when actors worked with him, despite credible allegations. Singer doesn’t have the same reputation. No actress has gushed about being granted the opportunity to be in an X-Men reboot. In that light, working with Singer seems less understandable.

But, that also could make it easier. And this seems to be where the cast is headed: you lean in on the Freddie Mercury Tribute and imply that, in the shadow of such an amazing performer, the director is practically immaterial. Bryan Singer? Who’s Bryan Singer? This was basically directed by the spirit of Freddie Mercury!

Also, lingering in the back of my mind, there’s that nagging concern that being fired or denied work because of an unproven allegation is a little dangerous as a precedent. After all, some of the rumours around Singer aren’t about illegal activity so much as being gross in a decadent, predatory, Hollywood way. Of course, the “nothing has been proven in court” defence is the least satisfying argument.

So maybe honesty would be best. Something that says they understand why people might feel ambivalent about the film, because of the director. That that is something, as a cast, they are dealing with, too. But, while we don’t want to shut down the conversation about how we should feel about problematic artists, the opportunity to celebrate Freddie Mercury is an unalloyed good. Then go on to talk about all the things Mercury did for human rights and the LGBTQ community.

And then just ignore the fact that the movie changes so much of Mercury’s story that it’s questionable whether it celebrates the real Freddie Mercury, or some postmodern, nostalgic construct we call Freddie Mercury.

But hating on Elsie Fisher? Let’s get some perspective people. The Oscars have a way of bringing out the darkness in people. That can be good (holding Casey Affleck to account for bad behaviour) and some can be not so good (rage-tweeting a teenager you don’t know). What should award bodies do to mitigate this? Should they vet nominees? And if so, what behaviour is disqualifying? What’s the statute of limitations? Or do problematic award winners just need to give better answers?

PB: Award bodies haven’t had to deal with a lot of scrutiny until fairly recently, so they’ve been able to skirt some of these issues without really shouldering any blame. Now though, their feet are being held to the fire and it’s not going to be as easy to just sit by and say nothing. It’s tricky; there’s certainly no one-size-fits-all solution but in my opinion, nor should there be. We’re dealing with complex issues here and I think everything needs to be addressed on a case by case basis. I really appreciate the diversity requirements the BAFTAs put in place last year: for the two awards categories specifically for British films (Outstanding British Film and Outstanding Debut by a British Writer, Director or Producer), they’re only accepting films that meet two of the British Film Institute’s quartet of core diversity standards.

But of course, different award bodies have different nomination processes. The Academy, for instance, has over 8000 people who submit their nominees for various categories, which then cycle through some complicated process before the final nominees are selected. Because there are so many people involved, it’s easy to play the avoidance game. Who do you hold accountable? But if the final list of five or ten nominees includes some problematic faves that have been in the news for x or y reason, I think it’s the award body’s duty to call for a meeting of their board to figure out the steps forward. Interestingly, I just Googled “Who is BAFTA president” and it turns out it’s Prince William, since 2010! Obviously he can’t weigh in on this stuff but there are other people who can, namely the VPs for film, television and games (?). The Academy, meanwhile, has a Board of Governors that includes Whoopi Goldberg, Laura Dern and Steven Spielberg.

Whatever these governing bodies decide, it’s something they should be able to defend when asked about it. Because they will be asked about it. Sorry guys, changing the subject isn’t an option anymore.

[jessicakehoe]

Does Bryan Singer’s Film Bohemian Rhapsody Deserve to Get Awards Love?

The ranks here at FASHION are not filled with men. Shocking, right? But there are one or two (there are actually, literally, two). Naturally, when a question about male/female dynamics arises it’s only fair that one of them stand in for the members of his gender and provide some insight. Our last topic of conversation was about controversial Christmas song “Baby, It’s Cold Outside” and today we’re discussing whether Bryan Singer-directed Bohemian Rhapsody should be snapping up any prizes this awards season. Two of our staffers—from the men’s corner, Greg Hudson, and from the women’s, Pahull Bains—talk it out.

PB: When Bohemian Rhapsody won the Best Picture (Drama) award at the Golden Globes last weekend, in addition to perplexity from critics who had largely panned the film, there was a fair bit of outrage on the internet. Evan Rachel Wood tweeted, “So we just..we are all still supposed to be pretending we don’t know about Bryan Singer? Cause it worked out really well with #Spacey and #Weinstein.” Now, I’m all for men finally getting their comeuppance but I also think it’s unfair that the entire cast and crew of a film be punished for the misdeeds of one person, whose shadiness wasn’t known until the #MeToo Flood of 2017. Or so I thought.

Yes, in 2017 Singer was fired as director of the film partway through shooting for causing “on-set chaos”: showing up late, being unavailable for days at a time, disappearing without the studio’s permission. Just a few days later, it emerged that Singer had been accused of rape by Cesar Sanchez-Guzman, who had been 17 at the time of the assault in 2003. So, I thought to myself, production on this film began before this news came out, so we can’t blame the team for working with him. I’m no fan of the movie, but let them have their moment of glory, thought I, wee innocent one.

As it turns out, allegations against Singer—who has directed films like The Usual Suspects and X-Men: First Class—go way, way back. In December 2017, IndieWire published “The Bryan Singer Timeline: a History of Allegations and Defenses, from Troubled Films to Sexual Assault Claims,” and lets just say it’s not a short list, going as far back as 1994 and ranging from allegations of sexual assault and rape to accusations of filming minor boys naked without their permission.

So, now that we’re caught up on Singer’s problematic history, what does it mean for Bohemian Rhapsody as an awards contender? No one was expecting it to win two big awards at the Globes, which has led understandably to increased scrutiny as we make our way through awards season, with the Critics’ Choice Awards, the SAGs, the BAFTAs, and of course the Oscars ahead of us. Do you think the film’s shot at these shiny statuettes should be diminished because of Singer’s involvement?

FIRST REFORMED, but about Ethan Hawke struggling to find hope in a world where Bohemian Rhapsody is probably gonna be nominated for Best Picture. pic.twitter.com/dI4D7kxfJ7

— david ehrlich (@davidehrlich) January 4, 2019

GH: Before I single-handedly bring down Bryan Singer with my rhetoric and rage, I just want to point a couple of things out that are probably not all that relevant. Why do this? Because I’m a man, and we enjoy talking like experts on subjects we just did some half-assed internet research about.

Point 1: The Golden Globes matter to the Oscar race about as much as the Iowa Caucuses do to the Presidential election. You’ll recall, being the astute political observer that you are, that the Iowa Caucuses happen early in the American election cycle. That’s really the only reason they are covered so closely every four years. Sometimes they are a predictor of who the eventual nominee (and president) will be, but often not. Just ask Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum, and Ted Cruz. And, similarly, the only reason the Golden Globes seem important is that they happen early in award season. But they are judged by such a niche group that their picks can seem downright baffling at times. Remember the 2010 flop The Tourist starring Johnny Depp? That was nominated for best picture at the Golden Globes. Have you ever seen Mozart in the Jungle? No! No one has! And yet, it’s a Golden Globe-winning television show.

So, do I think Bryan Singer’s creepiness will effect Bohemian Rhapsody’s Oscar chances? No. I think the fact that it’s a paint-by-numbers musical biopic will hurt its chances. (Seriously, the movie could have been called Walk Hard 2: This Time the Rockstar is Gay). I mean, Rami Malek and his mouthguard might still get a nod, but if you want a good Oscar predictor, the TIFF People’s Choice selection has a better track record. (So, get ready for a lot of Green Book hot takes!)

Point 2: Though she has already addressed and expressed regret about it—and she did so even before #MeToo made it a thing—Evan Rachel Wood starred in a Woody Allen movie in 2009. As with Singer, the allegations against Allen were pretty well-known even back then, but she still worked with him.

I’m not saying Wood is a hypocrite, or that her outrage is disingenuous. Not at all. I bring it up only to say that Wood clearly understands that sometimes actors work with gross directors, even if they should—or at least realistically could—know better. So maybe cut the cast a break when they celebrate what was clearly a huge surprise.

But 2009 was a very different time. And that’s good! If Bryan Singer never works again, that’s awesome. (Even if he happens to be innocent of all the many, many, many allegations–no one should be able to make the garbage Superman Returns and escape with their career). The real problem that’s complicating how we view Bohemian Rhapsody is that Singer is trying to get attention from it. If he didn’t rear his Botoxed head to claim credit for the Golden Globe, we might all be cool with forgetting he was a part of the film at all. Even if he kept the directing credit.

My question that rises from all of this is: why haven’t there been the public apologies and disavowals from actors who have worked with him in the past, the way there were for Woody Allen? So many of Allen’s former collaborators spoke out about how much they regret working with him, and how they’d never do it again. Actors who didn’t, or who expressed ambivalence toward Allen earned their own blowback. But no one is reaching out to Oscar Isaac or Jennifer Lawrence or, I don’t know, Stephen Baldwin, and asking them how they feel about having worked with an accused sex offender.

My theory: it’s because he, and his alleged victims, are gay. After all, it’s easier to ignore crimes in marginalized communities. Maybe there’s some discomfort because straight folks think they don’t understand gay sexuality in the first place—isn’t that normal for the gays—which, yes, is totally a homophobic holdover from when homosexuality was unfairly associated with pedophilia. And while I tend to think the retroactive shaming of actors is mostly performative, it’s still fucked up that we let Singer be Singer for so long.

PB: Hmm, I don’t know. Kevin Spacey’s accused of similar crimes and he’s been getting plenty of heat. I mean, he’s basically radioactive to anyone in the industry now. (Just for the record, though, Singer is married to a woman with whom he has a child, and has said publicly in interviews that he’s bisexual.)

I think maybe the reason Hollywood was slow to cool on Singer is because some of the allegations against him were dropped. As TIME notes, “he has faced two civil suits alleging sexual assault, one of which was dropped and one of which was dismissed.” In the wake of those lawsuits though, a bunch of stories began coming out about sordid “sex parties” Singer either threw or was present at but nothing was ever conclusively substantiated. A Buzzfeed story from 2014 details how Singer was brought “into regular orbit with 18- to 20-year-olds at parties sustained by large amounts of alcohol and drugs — edging precariously close to the line between legality and illegality,” but most of the sources quoted in the piece are unnamed and Singer wasn’t directly accused of misconduct. I think that sort of gave people the license to pull the whole “but nothing was ever proven” card.

Thanks to this latest lawsuit from 2017, though, which is ongoing, people are being denied an easy out. There is now a young man on the record claiming that he was raped by Singer, so there isn’t really any room for equivocating. Also, like you said, the climate has changed a lot in the past couple of years and stories that have been circulating on the whisper network for decades aren’t quite as easy to ignore anymore.

I know you brought up how Globe results aren’t a good indication of what’s coming down the pike—mainly because there’s no overlap between HFPA voters and Academy voters—but the film is still getting a lot of recognition from prestigious awards bodies. BAFTA noms came out yesterday and Bohemian Rhapsody features prominently on the list. So I’m just wondering—what’s an organization to do? I don’t think the film’s going to snag any more big prizes going forward; the backlash from the Globes has been substantial and other awards bodies probably don’t want to be tainted by a similar response on their big night. (By the way, did you see how poor 15-year-old Elsie Fisher, star of Eighth Grade, was dragged on Twitter for congratulating the team on their win?)

Why is everyone being so mean about this? I’m genuinely sorry if I did something wrong :(

— Elsie Fisher (@ElsieKFisher) January 7, 2019

Anyhow, I think what’s going to end up happening is: Malek’s going to continue getting recognition and maybe even some awards for his work, and the rest of the film is going to be shut out from any major wins. It’s the easiest way for them to award the film without really awarding the film, you know? And I don’t think anyone’s going to begrudge Malek a win. He’s got a ton of goodwill in the industry as well as critical praise for his portrayal of Freddie Mercury.

What I do hope for though—especially because we still have many, many awards shows and appearances ahead of us—is for everyone involved to get together and figure out how they want to address the elephant in the room. At the press conference after their Globes wins, the team flat-out refused to answer journalists’ questions about Singer. “That’s not something we should talk about tonight,” said producer Graham King, while Queen member Brian May quipped, “Good question though.” Malek then stepped up, saying, “I will take this one. There’s only one thing we needed to do, and that was to celebrate Freddie Mercury. Nothing was going to compromise us and giving him the love and celebration he deserves.”

They’re going to have to do a bit better than that. Don’t you think?

GH: It always baffles me when public figures don’t have thoughtful, satisfying answers to obvious questions. What are their publicists doing? Actors might not be the best at answering thorny ethical question on the spot (who is?), but they are pretty great at memorizing a script. Someone write that cast some talking points!

Having said that, I don’t really know what the satisfying answer would be. Because I realized, too, after you challenged my interpretation of the case, another reason why there hasn’t been the same retroactive hand-wringing from actors about having worked with Bryan Singer as there was about Woody Allen: It’s because it’s Bryan Singer. Woody Allen is an auteur—being in one of his films was an honour, a sign that you had arrived, or were at least arriving. Bryan Singer made some crowd-pleasing pictures, but no one is calling him an auteur.

I can’t decide whether that makes crafting an appropriate response easier or more difficult. On the one hand, because “working with Woody Allen” was such a cliche Hollywood status symbol, it was easy to understand when actors worked with him, despite credible allegations. Singer doesn’t have the same reputation. No actress has gushed about being granted the opportunity to be in an X-Men reboot. In that light, working with Singer seems less understandable.

But, that also could make it easier. And this seems to be where the cast is headed: you lean in on the Freddie Mercury Tribute and imply that, in the shadow of such an amazing performer, the director is practically immaterial. Bryan Singer? Who’s Bryan Singer? This was basically directed by the spirit of Freddie Mercury!

Also, lingering in the back of my mind, there’s that nagging concern that being fired or denied work because of an unproven allegation is a little dangerous as a precedent. After all, some of the rumours around Singer aren’t about illegal activity so much as being gross in a decadent, predatory, Hollywood way. Of course, the “nothing has been proven in court” defence is the least satisfying argument.

So maybe honesty would be best. Something that says they understand why people might feel ambivalent about the film, because of the director. That that is something, as a cast, they are dealing with, too. But, while we don’t want to shut down the conversation about how we should feel about problematic artists, the opportunity to celebrate Freddie Mercury is an unalloyed good. Then go on to talk about all the things Mercury did for human rights and the LGBTQ community.

And then just ignore the fact that the movie changes so much of Mercury’s story that it’s questionable whether it celebrates the real Freddie Mercury, or some postmodern, nostalgic construct we call Freddie Mercury.

But hating on Elsie Fisher? Let’s get some perspective people. The Oscars have a way of bringing out the darkness in people. That can be good (holding Casey Affleck to account for bad behaviour) and some can be not so good (rage-tweeting a teenager you don’t know). What should award bodies do to mitigate this? Should they vet nominees? And if so, what behaviour is disqualifying? What’s the statute of limitations? Or do problematic award winners just need to give better answers?

PB: Award bodies haven’t had to deal with a lot of scrutiny until fairly recently, so they’ve been able to skirt some of these issues without really shouldering any blame. Now though, their feet are being held to the fire and it’s not going to be as easy to just sit by and say nothing. It’s tricky; there’s certainly no one-size-fits-all solution but in my opinion, nor should there be. We’re dealing with complex issues here and I think everything needs to be addressed on a case by case basis. I really appreciate the diversity requirements the BAFTAs put in place last year: for the two awards categories specifically for British films (Outstanding British Film and Outstanding Debut by a British Writer, Director or Producer), they’re only accepting films that meet two of the British Film Institute’s quartet of core diversity standards.

But of course, different award bodies have different nomination processes. The Academy, for instance, has over 8000 people who submit their nominees for various categories, which then cycle through some complicated process before the final nominees are selected. Because there are so many people involved, it’s easy to play the avoidance game. Who do you hold accountable? But if the final list of five or ten nominees includes some problematic faves that have been in the news for x or y reason, I think it’s the award body’s duty to call for a meeting of their board to figure out the steps forward. Interestingly, I just Googled “Who is BAFTA president” and it turns out it’s Prince William, since 2010! Obviously he can’t weigh in on this stuff but there are other people who can, namely the VPs for film, television and games (?). The Academy, meanwhile, has a Board of Governors that includes Whoopi Goldberg, Laura Dern and Steven Spielberg.

Whatever these governing bodies decide, it’s something they should be able to defend when asked about it. Because they will be asked about it. Sorry guys, changing the subject isn’t an option anymore.

The post Does Bryan Singer’s Film <em> Bohemian Rhapsody</em> Deserve to Get Awards Love? appeared first on FASHION Magazine.

Does Bryan Singer’s Film Bohemian Rhapsody Deserve to Get Awards Love? published first on https://borboletabags.tumblr.com/

[recentnews18-blog]

New Post has been published on https://shovelnews.com/fans-of-canceled-teen-show-shadowhunters-are-shamelessly-spamming-jimmy-fallon/

Fans Of Canceled Teen Show 'Shadowhunters' Are Shamelessly Spamming Jimmy Fallon

What are the odds of winning the $1.6 billion Mega Millions jackpot? About 1 in 303 million. What are the odds that the eventual winner of said jackpot would use the winnings to rescue the Freeform show “Shadowhunters” from cancellation? Surprisingly, pretty high.

Every week, Jimmy Fallon’s Twitter account sends out a prompt for the “Tonight Show” hashtag game, and his team collects the best in-theme responses to be read on the show. For example, one week he asked for the best #momtexts, and he received the following response: “I once got a text from my mom where ‘You’re amazing’ autocorrected to ‘You’re adopted’ #momtexts.” 

Usually, tweeters stay on message. (Moms do text hilarious things after all.) This week, however, they did not.

Fallon’s Tuesday hashtag, #IfIWonTheLottery, was simple: It asked people to divulge what they’d do with their billions if they were to win. But instead of fun hypothetical lottery-winning scenarios, Fallon’s prompt sparked a deluge of spam from an unlikely source: the overzealous “Shadowhunters” fandom community, desperate to save a show that was canceled back in June.

It’s Hashtags time! Tweet out a funny or weird thing that you would do if you won the lottery, and tag it with #IfIWonTheLottery. Could be on the show!

— jimmy fallon (@jimmyfallon) October 23, 2018

#IfIWonTheLottery I would buy the rights to #Shadowhunters and save it from its unnecessary demise. Or use the money to make a continuation with the same cast and characters.

— Tasha Adamski (@TashaAdamski) October 23, 2018

Absolutely 💪👍 #SaveShadowhunters

— Linda (@Linda_Grace74) October 23, 2018

#IfIWonTheLottery I would buy @FreeformTV and SHUT THEM DOWN! Then resurrect @ShadowhuntersTV which they cancelled despite it being their best show. #SaveShadowhunters

— Tasha Adamski (@TashaAdamski) October 23, 2018

#SaveShadowhunters 👍

— nicolevanderheide (@Nicoleeh___) October 23, 2018

#IfIWonTheLottery I would buy the rights to #Shadowhunters this show means the world, to so many people. The fans are literally being ignored, no matter what we do so, I would set up my own network and treat fans how they deserve to be treated #SaveShadowhunters

— Goth Spice of #TeamEdom ➰🇬🇧➰ (@LexioftheDSC) October 23, 2018

Definitely. Its horrid the way we have been treated. #SaveShadowhunters #Free3B pic.twitter.com/DiVgpebw2Q

— Tasha Adamski (@TashaAdamski) October 23, 2018

At this point, you might be asking, “What the hell is #Shadowhunters?”

Based on the book series “The Mortal Instruments” by Cassandra Clare, “Shadowhunters” told the story of Clary Fray, a young woman who finds out on her 18th birthday that she’s a Shadowhunter ― a human-angel hybrid who feels compelled to suddenly hunt demons, as one does.

Freeform canceled the show after three seasons in June 2018, but the network is set to air a two-hour wrap-up event in early 2019. Nonetheless, fans are clearly unsatisfied. If they won $1 billion, they would use it to bring the show back in full, and they want to make sure Jimmy Fallon knows.

#IfIWonTheLottery I’d renew Shadowhunters for more seasons, Sue @FreeformTV for mental damages and take the entire fandom on a much deserved holiday #SaveShadowhunters

— Emma 💘 #SAVESHADOWHUNTERS (@emmeboo79) October 23, 2018

#IfIWonTheLottery I would buy the rights to #Shadowhunters and continue it with the same cast & crew for more sesons! #SaveShadowhunters

— Vicky ➰ (@vickychrissy) October 23, 2018

#IfIWonTheLottery of course I’d #SaveShadowhunters! I’d also rent a huge Stadium, bring all my Shadow Family there and hire the entire cast so that everyone could meet them and tell them how much we love them ❤

— Elodie 🇫🇷 #SaveShadowhunters (@malecistruelove) October 23, 2018

Buy out Freeform close it down and tell the staff they’re now unemployed via social media then #SaveShadowhunters for as many seasons as I can afford

— janbo baggins (@jkbelisle) October 23, 2018

#IfIWonTheLottery I would buy 3B from @FreeformTV so we can watch the Halloween episode of @ShadowhuntersTV #SaveShadowhunters

— Lillian loves Dom #SAVESHADOWHUNTERS (@Lilybane24) October 23, 2018

#IfIWonTheLottery I would buy the rights to @ShadowhuntersTV and give our cast their jobs back because they deserve to have a season 4! #SaveShadowhunters pic.twitter.com/mRf0HI2K8M

— Lillian loves Dom #SAVESHADOWHUNTERS (@Lilybane24) October 23, 2018

#IfIWonTheLottery I would buy @FreeformTV and the rights to #Shadowhunters !!! And #SaveShadowhunters

— amvar27🇦🇷❤️➰ (@amvar27) October 23, 2018

#IfIWonTheLottery I would save our show first obviously @ShadowhuntersTV hire Morgan Freeman to read me bedtime stories and quit my job after telling my boss he’s a nobhead and that he has a tiny dick #SaveShadowhunters

— Emma 💘 #SAVESHADOWHUNTERS (@emmeboo79) October 23, 2018

#IfIWonTheLottery I would make fans all over the world happy and #SaveShadowhunters 🤗❤️ pic.twitter.com/vyE4gyCQ4Y

— Simona 💐 (@SimonaViola7) October 23, 2018

#IfIWonTheLottery I would #SaveShadowhunters, a show that never should have been cancelled.

— C.B. Wentworth (@cbwentworth) October 23, 2018

#IfIWonTheLottery I’d definitely #saveshadowhunters

— Mel- Leo(notDicaprio)’s mom (@mellyb6) October 23, 2018

Also #SaveShadowhunters because the epic series with an awesome cast and crew make so many people around the world happy. #Shadowhunters #MalecForever pic.twitter.com/nvQ4ylt84f

— shadowhunters_austria🇦🇹 🇪🇺 (@ShadowhuntersOE) October 23, 2018

#IfIWonTheLottery I would probably use it to #SaveShadowHunters

— Hollie ❥ HBD Emma Swan (@xhollie_sealeyx) October 23, 2018

#IfIWonTheLottery I would #SaveShadowhunters & would make a #ShadowhuntersCon on every continent costs for hotel / flight / pass (inkl. photo & autograph) would be payed by me so that everybody of the ShadowFam get the chance to join a con & meet the cast & vice versa pic.twitter.com/pUdBiNu0lB

— Simona Seidler (@NiKaTaru) October 23, 2018

#IfIWonTheLottery I would definitely buy the rights to Shadowhunters#SaveShadowhunters

— 🎃Kiki #SaveShadowhunters🎃 (@shadowsxmalec) October 23, 2018

well #IfIWonTheLottery I would hire someone to free season 3B of #Shadowhunters from abc family because they seem to be unable to air them themselves #SaveShadowhunters

— lui 🍁 | #SaveShadowhunters (@glitter_magnus) October 23, 2018

#IfIWonTheLottery i would do everything to #SaveShadowhunters

— Trisha ➰ 🇲🇺 (@Trisha950) October 23, 2018

I’d buy Shadowhunters to #saveshadowhunters for ten more seasons

— Jess🍃#SaveSH!🍂LY Tour Berlin🖤💛 (@sfjessii) October 23, 2018

#IfIWonTheLottery I would buy the rights for #Shadowhunters so I can #SaveShadowhunters ❤️ ❤️ ❤️

— Lyra 🐿️ (@LyRa86337997) October 23, 2018

���Shadowhunters” fans have actually tweeted at Jimmy Fallon before, but their efforts have never been quite as coordinated as the #IfIWonTheLottery bunch. They’ve also made other, more extreme, efforts to save their beloved show ― including starting a Change.org petition, renting billboards in Times Square and even reportedly hiring a plane to circle Netflix’s LA headquarters with a pro-“Shadowhunters” banner.

Hey, if fans of “Brooklyn Nine-Nine” and “Nashville” could help their chosen shows find a new home, some light hashtag trolling is the least this fandom can do. So hang tight, “Tonight Show.” Though you walk through the valley of the “Shadowhunters” of death, you fear no retweets.

Source: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/fans-of-canceled-teen-show-shadowhunters-tweeting-jimmy-fallon_us_5bcf73cbe4b0d38b587d33d3

[movietvtechgeeks]

Latest story from https://movietvtechgeeks.com/aisha-tyler-future-tyler-henry-reads-kylie-jenner/

Aisha Tyler future and Tyler Henry reads Kylie Jenner

After 6 seasons, actress and TV personality Aisha Tyler announced that she would not be returning as a co-host on CBS’ The Talk. Aisha has been part of the show since 2011, when she joined on the second season of the daytime talk show. However, on Thursday’s (June 15th) episode, the Criminal Minds actress told fans and viewers that she would be moving on to the next stage of her career. While making the announcement, the beauty explained, “At the end of this season I’m going to be leaving the show…I have had an amazing six years with you guys. We’ve had babies and weddings, and you know good things have happened, and you know I went through the biggest breakup of my life with you. I could not have done with this without you. I’ll never be able to thank you guys enough.” Inevitably, Aisha got emotional when she made her unexpected announcement, as did her fellow co-hosts, Sheryl Underwood, Sharon Osbourne, Julie Chen and Sara Gilbert. CBS Angelina McDaniel later released a statement addressing Aisha’s decision to leave the talk show, which read, “Saying goodbye to Aisha is a bittersweet moment for all of us at CBS Daytime and The Talk…throughout her six seasons, she has made incredible contributions and shared personal moments, making our viewers, cast and crew all laugh cry and think, as a result of her signature wit, intelligence, and openness. It’s no secret Aisha is one of the busiest women in entertainment, and we support her as she decides to focus more time on her passion for directing, her expanded role on CBS’ Criminal Minds, hosting The CW’s Whose Line is it Anyway? and her other endeavors…and maybe finally find some time to sleep! We love Aisha, and she will always be a part of our family, with a seat waiting for her at The Talk anytime she wants to visit.” About a year and a half ago, E! Network debuted the show Hollywood Medium with Tyler Henry. On it, “clairvoyant medium” Tyler Henry talks with various celebrities and tries to help them connect to their past and inner selves. On the most recent installment of the show, Tyler sat down with reality starlets Khloe Kardashian and Kylie Jenner, where he brought up some pretty touchy subjects with the two beauties. During the sit-down, Tyler warned Khloe about her “susceptibility” to skin cancer. The “psychic” explained, “Okay this just came through really strongly – skin. I’m seeing skin, I’m referencing to what looks like melanoma. I’m getting a reference to three separate situations that I view as being problem areas. You have susceptibility on your back and there’s susceptibility on your leg and I need you to keep both in mind. This is huge.” In response, Khloe revealed, “I’ve had melanoma on my back, but never on my leg…” Shortly after, Tyler went on to implicitly talk to Khloe about her ex-husband Lamar Odom, who continues to work on recovering from his serious substance abuse issues. Tyler told the Good American entrepreneur, “It’s important that [Lamar] doesn’t isolate himself, as I think he may have a tendency to do. And that’s something that we can only control so much of, you can’t control someone else’s actions, it is not your responsibility. I just hope he stays in the state…. He needs to stay in California.” When talking with Kylie, Tyler said he sensed an unhealthy relationship in the young star’s life. Kylie asked him to look into her love life, which prompted Tyler to note that he was sensing a situation where “someone tries to get with one sister” and then “tries to get with the other.” He then went on to say that he felt that Kylie had a certain, very unhealthy relationship in her life and that she needed to set boundaries in order to protect herself. The latest episodes of Hollywood Medium with Tyler Henry air on Sundays on E! "Shark Week" has a new star attraction: Michael Phelps. Discovery Channel's list of "Shark Week" programming next month includes a July 23 show titled "Phelps vs. Shark: Great Gold vs. Great White." Discovery Channel billed it as "an event so monumental that no one has ever attempted it before" and added that "the world's most decorated athlete takes on the ocean's most efficient predator: Phelps V Shark - the race is on!" Whether that means the winner of 23 Olympic gold medals is actually racing a shark remains uncertain. The release announcing this event didn't offer many details or specifics aside from saying that Phelps "has one competition left to win." Discovery Channel officials didn't immediately respond to a message seeking additional information. Jada Pinkett Smith is calling the Tupac Shakur biopic "All Eyez on Me," 'deeply hurtful" for its portrayal of her relationship with the rap legend. In a series of tweets Friday, just as the film is opening in theaters, Pinkett Smith contradicted several scenes. She said she never had an argument with Shakur backstage, that their parting was fictionalized and that he never read her a poem, as seen in the film. Pinkett Smith said her relationship to Shakur was "too precious" for her not take issue. Pinkett Smith was close friends from childhood with Shakur. She's portrayed in the film by Kat Graham, whose performance Pinkett Smith complimented, along with Demetrius Shipp Jr., who plays Shakur. Carrie Fisher died from sleep apnea and a combination of other factors, but investigators were not able to pinpoint an exact cause, coroner's officials said Friday. Among the factors that contributed to Fisher's death was a buildup of fatty tissue in the walls of her arteries, the Los Angeles County coroner's office said in a news release late Friday. The release states that the "Star Wars" actress showed signs of having taken multiple drugs, but investigators could not determine whether they contributed to her death in December. Her manner of death would be listed as undetermined, the agency said. The agency did not immediately respond to a request for additional details about whether a full autopsy report and toxicology results were available. Sleep apnea is a condition in which a person's breathing pauses during sleep. The pauses may be brief or last several minutes, according to information from the National Institutes of Health. Fisher, 60, suffered a medical emergency on an international flight on Dec. 23 and died four days later. Her mother, longtime movie star Debbie Reynolds, died the following day. The actresses were laid to rest together at Forest Lawn-Hollywood Hills, a cemetery where numerous celebrities are buried. Fisher's brother, Todd Fisher, said he was not surprised by the results. He added that his family did not want a coroner's investigation of his sister's death. "We're not enlightened. There's nothing about this that is enlightening," he said. "I would tell you, from my perspective that there's certainly no news that Carrie did drugs," Todd Fisher said. He noted that his sister wrote extensively about her drug use, and that many of the drugs she took were prescribed by doctors to try to treat her mental health conditions. Fisher long battled drug addiction and mental illness. She said she smoked pot at 13, used LSD by 21 and was diagnosed as bipolar at 24. She was treated with electroshock therapy and medication. "I am not shocked that part of her health was affected by drugs," Todd Fisher said. He said his sister's heart condition was probably worsened by her smoking habit, as well as the medications she took. "If you want to know what killed her, it's all of it," he said. Todd Fisher said it was difficult to blame doctors who treated his sister because they were trying to help her. "They were doing their best to cure a mental disorder. Can you really blame them?" Todd Fisher said. "Without her drugs, maybe she would have left long ago." Carrie Fisher made her feature film debut opposite Warren Beatty in the 1975 hit "Shampoo." She also appeared in "Austin Powers," ''The Blues Brothers," ''Charlie's Angels," ''Hannah and Her Sisters," ''Scream 3" and "When Harry Met Sally ..." She will reprise her role as Leia Organa in the eighth installment of the core "Star Wars" franchise, "The Last Jedi," which will be released in December. Bill Cosby's lawyer repeatedly demanded a mistrial in his sex assault trial as five days of deliberations on the fate of the man once known as America's Dad pushed into Father's Day weekend, but the judge said there was no precedent to shut down the jury's talks. "I have no authority to do this," Judge Steven O'Neill said in the 52nd hour of deliberations on Friday night. "I'm sorry it's causing everyone frustration." Cosby lawyer Brian McMonagle fired back that jurors might be under the assumption they have to deliberate until "the cows come home." They will resume deliberations Saturday morning. O'Neill grew testy on the bench as he questioned McMonagle's requests to end the trial without a verdict. The jury might be working toward an acquittal, the judge said. "You don't know why they were deadlocked. Everyone is assuming one way or another," said O'Neill. As jurors left for the night, O'Neill praised their "hard work, dedication and fidelity to your oath." The jury, from the Pittsburgh area, has been sequestered for two weeks about 300 miles from home. The 79-year-old Cosby is accused of drugging and molesting a Temple University employee in 2004 at his home near Philadelphia. As deliberations wore on, Cosby thanked his fans and supporters - first in a tweet, then in brief comments as he left the courthouse Friday night. "I just want to wish all of the fathers a happy Father's Day," Cosby said. "And I want to thank the jury for their long days. Their honest work, individually. I also want to thank the supporters who have been here. And, please, to the supporters, stay calm. Do not argue with people. Just keep up the great support. Thank you." A conviction could send Cosby to prison for the rest of his life, but the case has already helped demolish Cosby's nice-guy image, cultivated during his eight-year run as Dr. Cliff Huxtable on "The Cosby Show," the top-rated 1980s and '90s sitcom. Dozens of women have come forward to say he drugged and assaulted them, but this was the only case to result in criminal charges. On Friday, the jury asked to review multiple pieces of evidence, including Cosby's decade-old deposition testimony about quaaludes. Cosby, who gave the deposition as part of Constand's lawsuit against him, said he got seven prescriptions for the powerful sedative in the 1970s for the purpose of giving them to women with whom he wanted to have sex. The testimony is relevant because Cosby is charged with giving pills to Constand, former director of operations for the Temple women's basketball team, to incapacitate her before their sexual encounter. He has said it was Benadryl, a cold and allergy medicine. Prosecutors have suggested he gave her something stronger, possibly quaaludes. Jurors also asked for, and received, a definition of reasonable doubt, the threshold that prosecutors must cross to win a conviction, and reviewed testimony from Constand and her mother about phone conversations they had with Cosby after the encounter. According to the testimony, Cosby called himself a "sick man" but refused to identify the pills he gave to Constand. Cosby's lawyers have said he and Constand were lovers and that the encounter was consensual. McMonagle objected in court to the panel's repeated requests to review testimony, saying it suggested some jurors were trying to coerce other jurors in an attempt to bring an end to the deadlock. The judge said he saw no evidence of coercion or trouble in the deliberating room after the jurors reported their impasse on Thursday and he instructed them to keep trying for a verdict. "There's a misperception that there's a time limit," he said. Jurors got the case on Monday. They must come to a unanimous decision to convict or acquit. If they can't break the deadlock, O'Neill could declare a hung jury and a mistrial. Then, prosecutors would get four months to decide whether they want to retry Cosby or drop the charges.  

Movie TV Tech Geeks News

[jessicakehoe]

Does Bryan Singer’s Film Bohemian Rhapsody Deserve to Get Awards Love?

The ranks here at FASHION are not filled with men. Shocking, right? But there are one or two (there are actually, literally, two). Naturally, when a question about male/female dynamics arises it’s only fair that one of them stand in for the members of his gender and provide some insight. Our last topic of conversation was about controversial Christmas song “Baby, It’s Cold Outside” and today we’re discussing whether Bryan Singer-directed Bohemian Rhapsody should be snapping up any prizes this awards season. Two of our staffers—from the men’s corner, Greg Hudson, and from the women’s, Pahull Bains—talk it out.

PB: When Bohemian Rhapsody won the Best Picture (Drama) award at the Golden Globes last weekend, in addition to perplexity from critics who had largely panned the film, there was a fair bit of outrage on the internet. Evan Rachel Wood tweeted, “So we just..we are all still supposed to be pretending we don’t know about Bryan Singer? Cause it worked out really well with #Spacey and #Weinstein.” Now, I’m all for men finally getting their comeuppance but I also think it’s unfair that the entire cast and crew of a film be punished for the misdeeds of one person, whose shadiness wasn’t known until the #MeToo Flood of 2017. Or so I thought.

Yes, in 2017 Singer was fired as director of the film partway through shooting for causing “on-set chaos”: showing up late, being unavailable for days at a time, disappearing without the studio’s permission. Just a few days later, it emerged that Singer had been accused of rape by Cesar Sanchez-Guzman, who had been 17 at the time of the assault in 2003. So, I thought to myself, production on this film began before this news came out, so we can’t blame the team for working with him. I’m no fan of the movie, but let them have their moment of glory, thought I, wee innocent one.

As it turns out, allegations against Singer—who has directed films like The Usual Suspects and X-Men: First Class—go way, way back. In December 2017, IndieWire published “The Bryan Singer Timeline: a History of Allegations and Defenses, from Troubled Films to Sexual Assault Claims,” and lets just say it’s not a short list, going as far back as 1994 and ranging from allegations of sexual assault and rape to accusations of filming minor boys naked without their permission.

So, now that we’re caught up on Singer’s problematic history, what does it mean for Bohemian Rhapsody as an awards contender? No one was expecting it to win two big awards at the Globes, which has led understandably to increased scrutiny as we make our way through awards season, with the Critics’ Choice Awards, the SAGs, the BAFTAs, and of course the Oscars ahead of us. Do you think the film’s shot at these shiny statuettes should be diminished because of Singer’s involvement?

FIRST REFORMED, but about Ethan Hawke struggling to find hope in a world where Bohemian Rhapsody is probably gonna be nominated for Best Picture. pic.twitter.com/dI4D7kxfJ7

— david ehrlich (@davidehrlich) January 4, 2019

GH: Before I single-handedly bring down Bryan Singer with my rhetoric and rage, I just want to point a couple of things out that are probably not all that relevant. Why do this? Because I’m a man, and we enjoy talking like experts on subjects we just did some half-assed internet research about.

Point 1: The Golden Globes matter to the Oscar race about as much as the Iowa Caucuses do to the Presidential election. You’ll recall, being the astute political observer that you are, that the Iowa Caucuses happen early in the American election cycle. That’s really the only reason they are covered so closely every four years. Sometimes they are a predictor of who the eventual nominee (and president) will be, but often not. Just ask Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum, and Ted Cruz. And, similarly, the only reason the Golden Globes seem important is that they happen early in award season. But they are judged by such a niche group that their picks can seem downright baffling at times. Remember the 2010 flop The Tourist starring Johnny Depp? That was nominated for best picture at the Golden Globes. Have you ever seen Mozart in the Jungle? No! No one has! And yet, it’s a Golden Globe-winning television show.

So, do I think Bryan Singer’s creepiness will effect Bohemian Rhapsody’s Oscar chances? No. I think the fact that it’s a paint-by-numbers musical biopic will hurt its chances. (Seriously, the movie could have been called Walk Hard 2: This Time the Rockstar is Gay). I mean, Rami Malek and his mouthguard might still get a nod, but if you want a good Oscar predictor, the TIFF People’s Choice selection has a better track record. (So, get ready for a lot of Green Book hot takes!)

Point 2: Though she has already addressed and expressed regret about it—and she did so even before #MeToo made it a thing—Evan Rachel Wood starred in a Woody Allen movie in 2009. As with Singer, the allegations against Allen were pretty well-known even back then, but she still worked with him.

I’m not saying Wood is a hypocrite, or that her outrage is disingenuous. Not at all. I bring it up only to say that Wood clearly understands that sometimes actors work with gross directors, even if they should—or at least realistically could—know better. So maybe cut the cast a break when they celebrate what was clearly a huge surprise.

But 2009 was a very different time. And that’s good! If Bryan Singer never works again, that’s awesome. (Even if he happens to be innocent of all the many, many, many allegations–no one should be able to make the garbage Superman Returns and escape with their career). The real problem that’s complicating how we view Bohemian Rhapsody is that Singer is trying to get attention from it. If he didn’t rear his Botoxed head to claim credit for the Golden Globe, we might all be cool with forgetting he was a part of the film at all. Even if he kept the directing credit.

My question that rises from all of this is: why haven’t there been the public apologies and disavowals from actors who have worked with him in the past, the way there were for Woody Allen? So many of Allen’s former collaborators spoke out about how much they regret working with him, and how they’d never do it again. Actors who didn’t, or who expressed ambivalence toward Allen earned their own blowback. But no one is reaching out to Oscar Isaac or Jennifer Lawrence or, I don’t know, Stephen Baldwin, and asking them how they feel about having worked with an accused sex offender.

My theory: it’s because he, and his alleged victims, are gay. After all, it’s easier to ignore crimes in marginalized communities. Maybe there’s some discomfort because straight folks think they don’t understand gay sexuality in the first place—isn’t that normal for the gays—which, yes, is totally a homophobic holdover from when homosexuality was unfairly associated with pedophilia. And while I tend to think the retroactive shaming of actors is mostly performative, it’s still fucked up that we let Singer be Singer for so long.

PB: Hmm, I don’t know. Kevin Spacey’s accused of similar crimes and he’s been getting plenty of heat. I mean, he’s basically radioactive to anyone in the industry now. (Just for the record, though, Singer is married to a woman with whom he has a child, and has said publicly in interviews that he’s bisexual.)

I think maybe the reason Hollywood was slow to cool on Singer is because some of the allegations against him were dropped. As TIME notes, “he has faced two civil suits alleging sexual assault, one of which was dropped and one of which was dismissed.” In the wake of those lawsuits though, a bunch of stories began coming out about sordid “sex parties” Singer either threw or was present at but nothing was ever conclusively substantiated. A Buzzfeed story from 2014 details how Singer was brought “into regular orbit with 18- to 20-year-olds at parties sustained by large amounts of alcohol and drugs — edging precariously close to the line between legality and illegality,” but most of the sources quoted in the piece are unnamed and Singer wasn’t directly accused of misconduct. I think that sort of gave people the license to pull the whole “but nothing was ever proven” card.

Thanks to this latest lawsuit from 2017, though, which is ongoing, people are being denied an easy out. There is now a young man on the record claiming that he was raped by Singer, so there isn’t really any room for equivocating. Also, like you said, the climate has changed a lot in the past couple of years and stories that have been circulating on the whisper network for decades aren’t quite as easy to ignore anymore.

I know you brought up how Globe results aren’t a good indication of what’s coming down the pike—mainly because there’s no overlap between HFPA voters and Academy voters—but the film is still getting a lot of recognition from prestigious awards bodies. BAFTA noms came out yesterday and Bohemian Rhapsody features prominently on the list. So I’m just wondering—what’s an organization to do? I don’t think the film’s going to snag any more big prizes going forward; the backlash from the Globes has been substantial and other awards bodies probably don’t want to be tainted by a similar response on their big night. (By the way, did you see how poor 15-year-old Elsie Fisher, star of Eighth Grade, was dragged on Twitter for congratulating the team on their win?)

Why is everyone being so mean about this? I’m genuinely sorry if I did something wrong :(

— Elsie Fisher (@ElsieKFisher) January 7, 2019

Anyhow, I think what’s going to end up happening is: Malek’s going to continue getting recognition and maybe even some awards for his work, and the rest of the film is going to be shut out from any major wins. It’s the easiest way for them to award the film without really awarding the film, you know? And I don’t think anyone’s going to begrudge Malek a win. He’s got a ton of goodwill in the industry as well as critical praise for his portrayal of Freddie Mercury.

What I do hope for though—especially because we still have many, many awards shows and appearances ahead of us—is for everyone involved to get together and figure out how they want to address the elephant in the room. At the press conference after their Globes wins, the team flat-out refused to answer journalists’ questions about Singer. “That’s not something we should talk about tonight,” said producer Graham King, while Queen member Brian May quipped, “Good question though.” Malek then stepped up, saying, “I will take this one. There’s only one thing we needed to do, and that was to celebrate Freddie Mercury. Nothing was going to compromise us and giving him the love and celebration he deserves.”

They’re going to have to do a bit better than that. Don’t you think?

GH: It always baffles me when public figures don’t have thoughtful, satisfying answers to obvious questions. What are their publicists doing? Actors might not be the best at answering thorny ethical question on the spot (who is?), but they are pretty great at memorizing a script. Someone write that cast some talking points!

Having said that, I don’t really know what the satisfying answer would be. Because I realized, too, after you challenged my interpretation of the case, another reason why there hasn’t been the same retroactive hand-wringing from actors about having worked with Bryan Singer as there was about Woody Allen: It’s because it’s Bryan Singer. Woody Allen is an auteur—being in one of his films was an honour, a sign that you had arrived, or were at least arriving. Bryan Singer made some crowd-pleasing pictures, but no one is calling him an auteur.

I can’t decide whether that makes crafting an appropriate response easier or more difficult. On the one hand, because “working with Woody Allen” was such a cliche Hollywood status symbol, it was easy to understand when actors worked with him, despite credible allegations. Singer doesn’t have the same reputation. No actress has gushed about being granted the opportunity to be in an X-Men reboot. In that light, working with Singer seems less understandable.

But, that also could make it easier. And this seems to be where the cast is headed: you lean in on the Freddie Mercury Tribute and imply that, in the shadow of such an amazing performer, the director is practically immaterial. Bryan Singer? Who’s Bryan Singer? This was basically directed by the spirit of Freddie Mercury!

Also, lingering in the back of my mind, there’s that nagging concern that being fired or denied work because of an unproven allegation is a little dangerous as a precedent. After all, some of the rumours around Singer aren’t about illegal activity so much as being gross in a decadent, predatory, Hollywood way. Of course, the “nothing has been proven in court” defence is the least satisfying argument.

So maybe honesty would be best. Something that says they understand why people might feel ambivalent about the film, because of the director. That that is something, as a cast, they are dealing with, too. But, while we don’t want to shut down the conversation about how we should feel about problematic artists, the opportunity to celebrate Freddie Mercury is an unalloyed good. Then go on to talk about all the things Mercury did for human rights and the LGBTQ community.

And then just ignore the fact that the movie changes so much of Mercury’s story that it’s questionable whether it celebrates the real Freddie Mercury, or some postmodern, nostalgic construct we call Freddie Mercury.

But hating on Elsie Fisher? Let’s get some perspective people. The Oscars have a way of bringing out the darkness in people. That can be good (holding Casey Affleck to account for bad behaviour) and some can be not so good (rage-tweeting a teenager you don’t know). What should award bodies do to mitigate this? Should they vet nominees? And if so, what behaviour is disqualifying? What’s the statute of limitations? Or do problematic award winners just need to give better answers?

PB: Award bodies haven’t had to deal with a lot of scrutiny until fairly recently, so they’ve been able to skirt some of these issues without really shouldering any blame. Now though, their feet are being held to the fire and it’s not going to be as easy to just sit by and say nothing. It’s tricky; there’s certainly no one-size-fits-all solution but in my opinion, nor should there be. We’re dealing with complex issues here and I think everything needs to be addressed on a case by case basis. I really appreciate the diversity requirements the BAFTAs put in place last year: for the two awards categories specifically for British films (Outstanding British Film and Outstanding Debut by a British Writer, Director or Producer), they’re only accepting films that meet two of the British Film Institute’s quartet of core diversity standards.

But of course, different award bodies have different nomination processes. The Academy, for instance, has over 8000 people who submit their nominees for various categories, which then cycle through some complicated process before the final nominees are selected. Because there are so many people involved, it’s easy to play the avoidance game. Who do you hold accountable? But if the final list of five or ten nominees includes some problematic faves that have been in the news for x or y reason, I think it’s the award body’s duty to call for a meeting of their board to figure out the steps forward. Interestingly, I just Googled “Who is BAFTA president” and it turns out it’s Prince William, since 2010! Obviously he can’t weigh in on this stuff but there are other people who can, namely the VPs for film, television and games (?). The Academy, meanwhile, has a Board of Governors that includes Whoopi Goldberg, Laura Dern and Steven Spielberg.

Whatever these governing bodies decide, it’s something they should be able to defend when asked about it. Because they will be asked about it. Sorry guys, changing the subject isn’t an option anymore.

The post Does Bryan Singer’s Film <em> Bohemian Rhapsody</em> Deserve to Get Awards Love? appeared first on FASHION Magazine.

Does Bryan Singer’s Film Bohemian Rhapsody Deserve to Get Awards Love? published first on https://borboletabags.tumblr.com/

[jessicakehoe]

Does Bryan Singer’s Film Bohemian Rhapsody Deserve to Get Awards Love?

The ranks here at FASHION are not filled with men. Shocking, right? But there are one or two (there are actually, literally, two). Naturally, when a question about male/female dynamics arises it’s only fair that one of them stand in for the members of his gender and provide some insight. Our last topic of conversation was about controversial Christmas song “Baby, It’s Cold Outside” and today we’re discussing whether Bryan Singer-directed Bohemian Rhapsody should be snapping up any prizes this awards season. Two of our staffers—from the men’s corner, Greg Hudson, and from the women’s, Pahull Bains—talk it out.

PB: When Bohemian Rhapsody won the Best Picture (Drama) award at the Golden Globes last weekend, in addition to perplexity from critics who had largely panned the film, there was a fair bit of outrage on the internet. Evan Rachel Wood tweeted, “So we just..we are all still supposed to be pretending we don’t know about Bryan Singer? Cause it worked out really well with #Spacey and #Weinstein.” Now, I’m all for men finally getting their comeuppance but I also think it’s unfair that the entire cast and crew of a film be punished for the misdeeds of one person, whose shadiness wasn’t known until the #MeToo Flood of 2017. Or so I thought.

Yes, in 2017 Singer was fired as director of the film partway through shooting for causing “on-set chaos”: showing up late, being unavailable for days at a time, disappearing without the studio’s permission. Just a few days later, it emerged that Singer had been accused of rape by Cesar Sanchez-Guzman, who had been 17 at the time of the assault in 2003. So, I thought to myself, production on this film began before this news came out, so we can’t blame the team for working with him. I’m no fan of the movie, but let them have their moment of glory, thought I, wee innocent one.

As it turns out, allegations against Singer—who has directed films like The Usual Suspects and X-Men: First Class—go way, way back. In December 2017, IndieWire published “The Bryan Singer Timeline: a History of Allegations and Defenses, from Troubled Films to Sexual Assault Claims,” and lets just say it’s not a short list, going as far back as 1994 and ranging from allegations of sexual assault and rape to accusations of filming minor boys naked without their permission.

So, now that we’re caught up on Singer’s problematic history, what does it mean for Bohemian Rhapsody as an awards contender? No one was expecting it to win two big awards at the Globes, which has led understandably to increased scrutiny as we make our way through awards season, with the Critics’ Choice Awards, the SAGs, the BAFTAs, and of course the Oscars ahead of us. Do you think the film’s shot at these shiny statuettes should be diminished because of Singer’s involvement?

FIRST REFORMED, but about Ethan Hawke struggling to find hope in a world where Bohemian Rhapsody is probably gonna be nominated for Best Picture. pic.twitter.com/dI4D7kxfJ7

— david ehrlich (@davidehrlich) January 4, 2019

GH: Before I single-handedly bring down Bryan Singer with my rhetoric and rage, I just want to point a couple of things out that are probably not all that relevant. Why do this? Because I’m a man, and we enjoy talking like experts on subjects we just did some half-assed internet research about.

Point 1: The Golden Globes matter to the Oscar race about as much as the Iowa Caucuses do to the Presidential election. You’ll recall, being the astute political observer that you are, that the Iowa Caucuses happen early in the American election cycle. That’s really the only reason they are covered so closely every four years. Sometimes they are a predictor of who the eventual nominee (and president) will be, but often not. Just ask Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum, and Ted Cruz. And, similarly, the only reason the Golden Globes seem important is that they happen early in award season. But they are judged by such a niche group that their picks can seem downright baffling at times. Remember the 2010 flop The Tourist starring Johnny Depp? That was nominated for best picture at the Golden Globes. Have you ever seen Mozart in the Jungle? No! No one has! And yet, it’s a Golden Globe-winning television show.

So, do I think Bryan Singer’s creepiness will effect Bohemian Rhapsody’s Oscar chances? No. I think the fact that it’s a paint-by-numbers musical biopic will hurt its chances. (Seriously, the movie could have been called Walk Hard 2: This Time the Rockstar is Gay). I mean, Rami Malek and his mouthguard might still get a nod, but if you want a good Oscar predictor, the TIFF People’s Choice selection has a better track record. (So, get ready for a lot of Green Book hot takes!)

Point 2: Though she has already addressed and expressed regret about it—and she did so even before #MeToo made it a thing—Evan Rachel Wood starred in a Woody Allen movie in 2009. As with Singer, the allegations against Allen were pretty well-known even back then, but she still worked with him.

I’m not saying Wood is a hypocrite, or that her outrage is disingenuous. Not at all. I bring it up only to say that Wood clearly understands that sometimes actors work with gross directors, even if they should—or at least realistically could—know better. So maybe cut the cast a break when they celebrate what was clearly a huge surprise.

But 2009 was a very different time. And that’s good! If Bryan Singer never works again, that’s awesome. (Even if he happens to be innocent of all the many, many, many allegations–no one should be able to make the garbage Superman Returns and escape with their career). The real problem that’s complicating how we view Bohemian Rhapsody is that Singer is trying to get attention from it. If he didn’t rear his Botoxed head to claim credit for the Golden Globe, we might all be cool with forgetting he was a part of the film at all. Even if he kept the directing credit.

My question that rises from all of this is: why haven’t there been the public apologies and disavowals from actors who have worked with him in the past, the way there were for Woody Allen? So many of Allen’s former collaborators spoke out about how much they regret working with him, and how they’d never do it again. Actors who didn’t, or who expressed ambivalence toward Allen earned their own blowback. But no one is reaching out to Oscar Isaac or Jennifer Lawrence or, I don’t know, Stephen Baldwin, and asking them how they feel about having worked with an accused sex offender.

My theory: it’s because he, and his alleged victims, are gay. After all, it’s easier to ignore crimes in marginalized communities. Maybe there’s some discomfort because straight folks think they don’t understand gay sexuality in the first place—isn’t that normal for the gays—which, yes, is totally a homophobic holdover from when homosexuality was unfairly associated with pedophilia. And while I tend to think the retroactive shaming of actors is mostly performative, it’s still fucked up that we let Singer be Singer for so long.

PB: Hmm, I don’t know. Kevin Spacey’s accused of similar crimes and he’s been getting plenty of heat. I mean, he’s basically radioactive to anyone in the industry now. (Just for the record, though, Singer is married to a woman with whom he has a child, and has said publicly in interviews that he’s bisexual.)

I think maybe the reason Hollywood was slow to cool on Singer is because some of the allegations against him were dropped. As TIME notes, “he has faced two civil suits alleging sexual assault, one of which was dropped and one of which was dismissed.” In the wake of those lawsuits though, a bunch of stories began coming out about sordid “sex parties” Singer either threw or was present at but nothing was ever conclusively substantiated. A Buzzfeed story from 2014 details how Singer was brought “into regular orbit with 18- to 20-year-olds at parties sustained by large amounts of alcohol and drugs — edging precariously close to the line between legality and illegality,” but most of the sources quoted in the piece are unnamed and Singer wasn’t directly accused of misconduct. I think that sort of gave people the license to pull the whole “but nothing was ever proven” card.

Thanks to this latest lawsuit from 2017, though, which is ongoing, people are being denied an easy out. There is now a young man on the record claiming that he was raped by Singer, so there isn’t really any room for equivocating. Also, like you said, the climate has changed a lot in the past couple of years and stories that have been circulating on the whisper network for decades aren’t quite as easy to ignore anymore.

I know you brought up how Globe results aren’t a good indication of what’s coming down the pike—mainly because there’s no overlap between HFPA voters and Academy voters—but the film is still getting a lot of recognition from prestigious awards bodies. BAFTA noms came out yesterday and Bohemian Rhapsody features prominently on the list. So I’m just wondering—what’s an organization to do? I don’t think the film’s going to snag any more big prizes going forward; the backlash from the Globes has been substantial and other awards bodies probably don’t want to be tainted by a similar response on their big night. (By the way, did you see how poor 15-year-old Elsie Fisher, star of Eighth Grade, was dragged on Twitter for congratulating the team on their win?)

Why is everyone being so mean about this? I’m genuinely sorry if I did something wrong :(

— Elsie Fisher (@ElsieKFisher) January 7, 2019

Anyhow, I think what’s going to end up happening is: Malek’s going to continue getting recognition and maybe even some awards for his work, and the rest of the film is going to be shut out from any major wins. It’s the easiest way for them to award the film without really awarding the film, you know? And I don’t think anyone’s going to begrudge Malek a win. He’s got a ton of goodwill in the industry as well as critical praise for his portrayal of Freddie Mercury.

What I do hope for though—especially because we still have many, many awards shows and appearances ahead of us—is for everyone involved to get together and figure out how they want to address the elephant in the room. At the press conference after their Globes wins, the team flat-out refused to answer journalists’ questions about Singer. “That’s not something we should talk about tonight,” said producer Graham King, while Queen member Brian May quipped, “Good question though.” Malek then stepped up, saying, “I will take this one. There’s only one thing we needed to do, and that was to celebrate Freddie Mercury. Nothing was going to compromise us and giving him the love and celebration he deserves.”

They’re going to have to do a bit better than that. Don’t you think?

GH: It always baffles me when public figures don’t have thoughtful, satisfying answers to obvious questions. What are their publicists doing? Actors might not be the best at answering thorny ethical question on the spot (who is?), but they are pretty great at memorizing a script. Someone write that cast some talking points!

Having said that, I don’t really know what the satisfying answer would be. Because I realized, too, after you challenged my interpretation of the case, another reason why there hasn’t been the same retroactive hand-wringing from actors about having worked with Bryan Singer as there was about Woody Allen: It’s because it’s Bryan Singer. Woody Allen is an auteur—being in one of his films was an honour, a sign that you had arrived, or were at least arriving. Bryan Singer made some crowd-pleasing pictures, but no one is calling him an auteur.

I can’t decide whether that makes crafting an appropriate response easier or more difficult. On the one hand, because “working with Woody Allen” was such a cliche Hollywood status symbol, it was easy to understand when actors worked with him, despite credible allegations. Singer doesn’t have the same reputation. No actress has gushed about being granted the opportunity to be in an X-Men reboot. In that light, working with Singer seems less understandable.

But, that also could make it easier. And this seems to be where the cast is headed: you lean in on the Freddie Mercury Tribute and imply that, in the shadow of such an amazing performer, the director is practically immaterial. Bryan Singer? Who’s Bryan Singer? This was basically directed by the spirit of Freddie Mercury!

Also, lingering in the back of my mind, there’s that nagging concern that being fired or denied work because of an unproven allegation is a little dangerous as a precedent. After all, some of the rumours around Singer aren’t about illegal activity so much as being gross in a decadent, predatory, Hollywood way. Of course, the “nothing has been proven in court” defence is the least satisfying argument.

So maybe honesty would be best. Something that says they understand why people might feel ambivalent about the film, because of the director. That that is something, as a cast, they are dealing with, too. But, while we don’t want to shut down the conversation about how we should feel about problematic artists, the opportunity to celebrate Freddie Mercury is an unalloyed good. Then go on to talk about all the things Mercury did for human rights and the LGBTQ community.

And then just ignore the fact that the movie changes so much of Mercury’s story that it’s questionable whether it celebrates the real Freddie Mercury, or some postmodern, nostalgic construct we call Freddie Mercury.

But hating on Elsie Fisher? Let’s get some perspective people. The Oscars have a way of bringing out the darkness in people. That can be good (holding Casey Affleck to account for bad behaviour) and some can be not so good (rage-tweeting a teenager you don’t know). What should award bodies do to mitigate this? Should they vet nominees? And if so, what behaviour is disqualifying? What’s the statute of limitations? Or do problematic award winners just need to give better answers?

PB: Award bodies haven’t had to deal with a lot of scrutiny until fairly recently, so they’ve been able to skirt some of these issues without really shouldering any blame. Now though, their feet are being held to the fire and it’s not going to be as easy to just sit by and say nothing. It’s tricky; there’s certainly no one-size-fits-all solution but in my opinion, nor should there be. We’re dealing with complex issues here and I think everything needs to be addressed on a case by case basis. I really appreciate the diversity requirements the BAFTAs put in place last year: for the two awards categories specifically for British films (Outstanding British Film and Outstanding Debut by a British Writer, Director or Producer), they’re only accepting films that meet two of the British Film Institute’s quartet of core diversity standards.

But of course, different award bodies have different nomination processes. The Academy, for instance, has over 8000 people who submit their nominees for various categories, which then cycle through some complicated process before the final nominees are selected. Because there are so many people involved, it’s easy to play the avoidance game. Who do you hold accountable? But if the final list of five or ten nominees includes some problematic faves that have been in the news for x or y reason, I think it’s the award body’s duty to call for a meeting of their board to figure out the steps forward. Interestingly, I just Googled “Who is BAFTA president” and it turns out it’s Prince William, since 2010! Obviously he can’t weigh in on this stuff but there are other people who can, namely the VPs for film, television and games (?). The Academy, meanwhile, has a Board of Governors that includes Whoopi Goldberg, Laura Dern and Steven Spielberg.

Whatever these governing bodies decide, it’s something they should be able to defend when asked about it. Because they will be asked about it. Sorry guys, changing the subject isn’t an option anymore.

The post Does Bryan Singer’s Film <em> Bohemian Rhapsody</em> Deserve to Get Awards Love? appeared first on FASHION Magazine.

Does Bryan Singer’s Film Bohemian Rhapsody Deserve to Get Awards Love? published first on https://borboletabags.tumblr.com/