#heartsandparts

[talkingwoman]

Call me Cassandra….*

Having a history of offending members of the Charmie fanhood, many of whom will not even see this post since they blocked me, I will nonetheless state my bona fifes openly. I love Armie Hammer and I love Timothée Chalamet. Being older, more educated, and a practicing professional provides me with apparently annoyingly inconvenient insights when discussing the two men I love and the years since CMBYN changed so many lives. The upset in the fandom occasioned by Timmy’s liaison with the Jenner person compels me to express the following. Believe me, my goal is to soothe rather than irritate.

First and foremost, I have said before and repeat here that one of the worst failings we have made in viewing the Charmie myth is that we tend to conflate Armie and Timmy IRL with their characters in CMBYN, Oliver and Elio. Neither man is much like their movie role at all. Briefly, Elio is sensitive, highly educated and intelligent, as well as emotionally vulnerable. Timmy is, based upon his interviews, observed public behaviors, etc., probably none of these. He is, as he says, an engaging goofball. Often he misuses and/or mispronounces words and creates word salad answers to interviewer questions. He’s a player more than a mensch, and his ambition knows no bounds. Armie is more like Oliver than Timmy like Elio, but without the redeeming affection the movie version of Oliver brought to the mutual seduction. The Oliver of the book was far less open and affectionate than movie Oliver, but both men were emotionally insincere, dishonest, and manipulative. Oliver was having a summer fling before finishing his degree, marrying, and getting on with life in both book and movie. Even more publicly than Timmy, Armie is a player who admits to manipulating and using people as personal convenience items. It’s questionable whether he remembers anything 😉, let alone everything.

Similarly, we are willfully blind to the realities of the profession that introduced us to Armie and Timmy in the first place. Show biz is a relentlessly demanding and often cruel bit of work. Timmy was born into a theatrical family and groomed through auditions and training from an early age. Small wonder that virtually all of the directors he has worked with mention his drive and ambition to succeed. That desire rules Timmy’s life and he is not likely to squander his opportunities as Armie tragically and so unnecessarily did. There is a new article out that captures this essential characteristic, titled the making of a global superstar. Timmy is surrounded by a team that calculates every move the young man makes, scrupulously. For instance, while Armie has loudly proclaimed his heterosexuality, Timmy’s team has assiduously cultivated an aura of androgyny, assuring that both the gay and straight communities can identify with and thereby claim Timmy as one of their own. The revision of Lee in Bones and All from jock to bisexual predatory adventurer is a classic example. So, in short, almost anything in the public eye should be viewed through the lens of this effort to promote Timmy to the highest artistic and popular levels of his profession. Most of you will hate this, but Timmy’s utter and complete failure to utter one supportive word about Armie, once his role model and mentor, throughout the shitstorm that Armie’s professional and personal life became. Many no doubt wish and fervently hope that there is still a viable bond between these men, but if there is, it requires a very steep price from one of them.

Before I go, one little observation that I hope will bring some solace regarding the PDAs seen at the Beyoncé concert. Kissing is an expression of intimacy that is usually accompanied by intense mutual gaze. Both participants in these lip locks looked directly toward the camera the second the kiss ended, not at each other. Telling…,

*Cassandra was a figure in Greek mythology who was reviled and tortured for telling true, but unwanted truths.

[olivereliocorcordium1983]

@hereforcharmie @tonazzi77 @heartsandparts @myvickib  

I sent your messages to my mom so she can show them to my grandma. she could really use the encouragement right now. My mom is up at the hospital, and I was just talking with her on the phone, she said that the nurses were only allowing her to sit up in the bed sit on the side of the bed. when my grandma wanted to go for a walk down the hallway, and my mom asked them if she could go in a wheelchair, and they told her that they wanted her to stay in the bed! my mother, aggressively might I add told the nurse off and tomorrow she is going to see if she can take my grandma in a wheelchair down the hall for a change of scenery. 

I hope they let her do that cuz if they don’t... I am going to go up there myself and personally let them have it, Armie Hammer style. I will not go out of my way to be mean to someone, but this is-  

mentally I have had it. this woman has been through hell and back and you don’t want her to get up from that bed. bitch, you don’t wait until she wants to get up, you tell her “okay its time to get up.” and you let her walk wherever she damn well pleases. 

if she wants to race frank from room 423 in a wheelchair or a damn foot race then you let her do it! she will literally look you in the eye and say, “I can take em.” and go! 

my grandma is not some fragile old lady bro she has more balls than me, and made of fucking steel. If that woman wants to get out of the bed, and go for a stroll she is going to do so whether you want her to or not. That’s the type of person she is heart and soul. She’s got this! 

As for me and how I am doing personally mentally and emotionally I am all over the place. um, i’m sad because my grandma is still in the hospital, a tiny bit of the “fuck you” vibe for the asshole in the family, who I won’t name specifically but someone who I literally told off once before. About already fixing my door trim because Luca decided to break it, so its bent due to the dogs being scared of the rain, and he broke it again. so he did the whole “I’m not fucking with it anymore. if you can’t take care of your dogs, then you need to get rid of them.” line.  

Then was like “Can you not talk to me and go look at the rainbows at the same time?” when he literally called me to tell me that there were rainbows outside my house, from it raining it was a double rainbow. so yeah, um... its the tiny things like this that have pushed me over the edge and on natural reaction, I tend to cry and I am not going to go into the whole self depricating thing that happens when I get like this. Obviously there are people who have it hell of a lot worse than I do. so the “what the hell am I complaining for? you have a roof of your head and you live a privleged life, your spoiled by people who love you shut up!”

All the mean while I have an opprotunity that could change my life very literally and allow me to do what I love. However, the “You can’t abandon your family”, “You need to take care of your family because they took care of you.” that has been drilled into me since birth.  “family first” is causing me to become scared, and scared that if it actually works, I can have the life I want and be who I am, vs who they want me to be just... the Oliver scenario played out in real life. 

[talkingwoman]

Poignant

There is something endearing about the enduring belief of Charmies in a relationship between Armie Hammer and Timmy Chalamet. Today some of the faithful posted pictures of the two men together at the 2018 Golden Globes as if a six year old PR photo has anything to do with either man’s life in 2024. Of course, the entire Charmie phenomenon has always been premised upon secrecy; it is at once the proof that a ship exists and must remain hidden and the sole explanation for the absence of any verifiable evidence that the men have even spoken to one another, let alone seen or spent time together in years.

Rarely has so much emotional meaning been invested in, pardon the pun, “pure imagination.”

The time-honored but by now very tired PR argument applied to Timmy’s female partners (all of whom share obvious physical appearance characteristics) may finally be permanently dispelled by the success of Wonka. Now, our guy is completely bankable in HW terms, wildly talented and versatile as an actor, and apparently a favorite among influential directors. And please don’t forget or dismiss Timmy’s ongoing avoidance of saying anything in support of Armie. Friends, let alone lovers, don’t leave friends behind, twisting slowly in the wind.

There is some rich quote about the seductive perils of reminiscence dancing at the edge of my memory, but I can’t grasp it. No matter, you get the drift, right?

[talkingwoman]

One vague fear about Complete Unknown Like most who have seen the trailer for Timmy’s next knock out performance, I am almost giddy about the new film.  My only lingering concern is that the script and treatment might not meet the standard of our boy’s performance.  The Rolling Stone article on Complete Unknown apparently shares my angst a little bit since they closed the article with the interviewer saying something like “ Since Dylan managed to get himself involved in the production we can assume that it will not be all true.”  To which Mangold, the film’s writer and director simply smiled and said “we’ll let that be your quote.”  Since I tend to fret about such stuff, could some of you please take a moment to reassure me that fan possessiveness about the legend of Bob Dylan will not affect the critical or box office success of Complete Unknown??   I’ve read Dylan fanatics’ critiques of Timmy and sense there will be more stringent evaluations of his performance as Dylan than Rami Malek, Gary Oldham, or Renee Zellweger got for their Oscar winning performances as Freddy Mercury, Winston Churchill, or Judy Garland.  Maybe the safest way to Oscar-land is to portray dead people?  Can you tell I am aching for Timmy’s talent to be acclaimed by his peers?

[talkingwoman]

Hmmm…

Who here is interested to see whether Kylie Jenner does a cameo on SNL the night Timmy hosts? Hard not to wonder whether their romance will be satirized in a skit, acknowledged in the opening monologue, or simply ignored altogether. Shrewd move by Lorne Michael’s and Timmy’s teams to give SNL and upcoming Wonka premiere.

[talkingwoman]

Wanted:  A Mentor for an Adorable Motormouth

GQ Timothee, a sobriquet I use to describe the unique version of this actor created by Dan Riley in what he modestly (??!) describes as his trilogy of articles on our favorite moptop, emerges as someone almost unrecognizable to his faithful fans in all but the truly wonderful photos included in each installment in GQ.  This man, Timmy,  is IMHO in serious need of a mentor, someone on the level of Kevin Costner in the movie Bull Durham was to the young, wild and crazy pitcher played by Tim Robbins:  “C’mon kid, it’s time for us to work on your cliches for interviews when you get to the Bigs.”   Especially necessary for our Timmy when he is at the mercy of a highly experienced interviewer who fancies himself a “Tim whisperer”, full of insider information and shrewd insights into the personality and character of his subject.  Since Riley does not share whether he tapes his encounters with Timmy on their “rambling walks around NY”, relies on notes, or bothers to fact-check with his source when he composes his article, we can only hope that he uses the best practices associated with celebrity journalism (did I just utter an oxymoron?).

To be clear, I am not impugning the ethics or talent of Dan Riley.  Do I think he exploits his continued association with Timmy to get what he wants for a cover article?  Yeah, that’s his job.  He did not achieve his journalistic reputation for writing puff pieces.  I note with some hypersensitivity that Riley always manages to insert a measure of snark into his descriptions of Timmy, e.g., in the article when Timmy was in Woodstock and smashed a collection of empty bottles and said to Riley something like “I just wanted to hear what that would sound like...” seemed to signify the persona of a young actor experimenting for effect, even if disingenuously.  In the current piece a certain amount of shade is thrown on Timmy for showing up late (uninvited, Mr.Riley?) at Riley’s apartment in the heat of a NY night dressed in layers, a cap, and a mask, which in case the reader didn’t get it, Riley proceeds to point out was an outfit  certainly more likely to attract public attention than avoid it.  He then seals that observation by describing Timmy’s  subsequent, somewhat reluctant interaction with fans who recognized their favorite star on the street.  

Mostly, however, Riley lets the comments attributed to his subject speak for themselves and it is here that our boy babbles his way into more disclosures than are prudent or of any value to his own image.  Language and anecdote trip up Timmy  with alarming regularity in his interviews.  I am not at all sure how caissons (as in rolling along in the Marine Hymn) fit into the idea of adultifying as a person,  bedeviled by his actor’s gift? Fame?  Even more confusing is his reference to the 27  club of famous folk who died too young as if their cases apply to his 27yr old self.  Note to Timmy:  these folks, including Janis, Amy, Jimi, Jim, et al were seriously addicted to dangerous substances.  The comparison of accidental overdoses to your existential identity issues really looks lame, even misguided.  Similarly, just joking about being a 17 yr old with the soul of an 81 yr old man comes off as way too self aggrandizing.  What does even a guy at the advanced age of 27 know about the souls of 81 yr olds.?  Wiser to let others describe you that way than to self appoint your status as  resident sage.

Qualifying his pronouncements is an area that Timmy needs much help with from that mentor we are recruiting for him.  Two simple words, “to me” would be such a help in discussing subjects upon which his opinions may well be suspect based upon limited experience or simply wrong-headedness. The discussion of “good” HW and “bad” HW is a stellar case in point.  Such broad and bald descriptions are likely to provoke sneers about Timmy’s entitlement to share his opinion as if it is fact, and further compound the issue by naming people who are part of one category or the other is quite audacious.  “Old” HW is likely to respond with hostility as they may indeed already did in denying Timmy an Oscar nomination for his acclaimed and elsewhere nominated performance in Beautiful Boy.  Recall that in 2018, Timmy took a very public stance announcing that he would never work with Woody Allen again and also donate his salary for RDNY to the MeToo movement.  Apart from attacking an industry icon for alleged events that took place before he was born, and for which Allen was never charged, Timmy allegedly told Allen’s sister, Letty Aronson, a producer with an impeccable reputation that he took his action to improve his chances to win an Oscar for CMBYN. Is it a certainty that the audacity or opportunism of his action cost him a nomination?  Obviously not, but the genuine surprise registered among film critics and fans alike when the Beautiful Boy performance did not receive a nomination invited a lot of speculation to that effect.  BTW, Timmy’s team did not dispute Allen’s account of these events in his recently published memoir.

Of course, to the Charmie community, nothing in the November issue of GQ is as arresting as Timmy’s comments regarding Armie Hammer.  I have much I might say about this portion of the interview, but am not yet willing to commit these ideas to a written, indelible format.  Yep, I’m still struggling with the how could you, why would you angst inducing content of Timmy’s comments. Maybe later, maybe never will I share this.

For any of you who have made it to this point, thanks for your attention (endurance?).  Obviously, these are just my opinions, but the article hit me hard. I still love Timothee Chalamet, respect his tremendous talent, and lament the uncertainty that Riley’s article thrust into my consciousness.  But, wow, are those photos of Timmy stunning, or what?

[talkingwoman]

After a careful reading I am very interested in seeing fandom responses to what I think of as GQ Timmy Chalamet, a persona created in collaboration with the author of the three articles that magazine has run on our guy, accompanying cover and extensive photo shoots. Much to be intrigued by in the piece and some of it may disappoint or alarm even the most stalwart fans. I have some thoughts on several topics, but will need more reflection before sharing them. What is your take on the piece?

@heartsandparts @694699 @onlyastoryteller@saradobiebauer@filmgeekstacy

[talkingwoman]

Why, I wonder?

The article on Armie Hammer published late on Friday night is apparently functioning as a Rorschach, TAT, or some other psychological projective test. Readers appears to find whatever they want to see or believe about this former celebrity and his behavior toward women during his marriage and after his separation from his estranged wife, Elizabeth. Following two years of consistent denials from his legal team and his characterization of his expartners’ complaints as “bullshit”, it’s disorienting to read a more or less complete concession to the accuracy of all of the charges women leveled against him. Note I did not say confession because Armie continues to argue that any and all activities were consensual. The notion of consent, his only legal and personal defense, it appears, hinges not on the decency, honesty, or ethics of his behavior toward any of women, but instead on the narrow legal definition of sexual abuse. Like Congressman Santos, he’s done lots of ugly stuff, but he never did anything illegal. Well, all righty then.

What is the point of this piece, we might ask? From the moment I saw the photo header on the article, the propaganda tone of the article was apparent. Few men are as photogenic as our Armie and the effort to make him look like a man who has suffered great travail was painfully obvious. Questions abound. Why now? Why this author and especially this outlet? Was money exchanged for the interview? What promises were made by the author or publisher about the content and editorial slant of the piece? There are any number of credible entertainment journalists and publications who scrupulously vet their content and would no doubt have wanted this interview. So, what up? The easy answer is that nothing Armie said was challenged. The pedophile youth pastor of his family’s church? No follow-up questions?? An adult godparent knew of the abuse and did…nothing?? This happened a scant twenty odd years ago. Is this person possibly still abusing kids? Is there a responsible person anywhere near this article?

So many troubling things emerged in this recounting. Why were the psychologists who evaluated Armie neither identified nor questioned for the interview but copious quotes from some documents written by someone were provided without context?

Why was the assertion that Armie has never slept with a man included here?

Anyone with any experience at all with addicts, their treatment, and recovery could only be astonished to read that Armie, barely a year out of rehab is moving in with a recovering addict as a sobriety coach. That is simply not done in any treatment program. No sponsor would permit that, and though Armie refers vaguely to a 12 step program, his comments in this article suggest he’s not completed his work on the steps at all. Again, why say this stuff?

Where are the supporters, apart from fans on Twitter, Tumblr, etc, from Armie’s professional world? The Luca comment was not original in this piece. Was no one who directed, co-starred, or produced his movies invited to say anything, positive or negative? Why no mention of this deafening silence?

It will be interesting to see what, if any, industry reaction emerges in the coming days. As noted earlier, fans will find whatever they look for in this article. Armie as victim vs Armie as abuser? One can only wonder if either of these or any other take will prevail.

[talkingwoman]

Acting vs impersonating

Is it just me or is there a trend toward rewarding actors who portray actual persons as opposed to fictional creations. Daniel Day Lewis as Lincoln, Rami Malek as Freddy Mercury, Eddie Redmayne as Stephen Hawking, Gary Oldham as Churchill, and this year Austin Butler as Elvis Presley. I find myself wondering if doing a spot on imitation of someone the public has seen and heard on countless movies or videos is the same thing as creating a character no one knew before in a credible, compellingly believable performance. Looks like Butler has the inside track to carry home yet another award for a wonderful impression of Elvis, which he apparently has a hard time leaving behind when he begins to speak.

Speaking just for myself, I feel that providing a faithful imitation is less about art than taking a character that lived only on a page into a living reality for an audience. What do you think?

[talkingwoman]

Serial killers coming of age is appealing to…??

Over adult beverages a group of people casually debated the moral and artistic implications of films that celebrate violence, cruelty, or human depravity in service of entertainment and financial gains. Intense. The central focus of the discussion was not B&A so much as the currently popular Dahmer series, although Guadanigno’s film and the remake of Interview with the Vampire were mentioned tangentially, and negatively. The core issue emerging early on was that serial killers are unworthy of attention for multiple reasons. Romanticizing violence and humanizing merciless murderers makes sense…how? To whom? No matter how much you like a film star or a director, do you really want to support a movie that depicts asocial, inhumane behavior in any way other than repulsive and reprehensible? That was the question we struggled with. Consensus was elusive but the majority, including serious cinephiles, admitted having queasy, serious misgivings about films presenting human evil and depravity sympathetically. My posts are usually ignored by Charmies, but thought I would share this experience in hopes that it might shed more light than create heat. I’d love to hear what you think

[talkingwoman]

[talkingwoman]

Brian S.’s unexpected outburst about Timmy no longer having to audition for directors or major film roles finds context in today’s Best Actor nominations. For the first time, there is an actor whose talent and range are a genuine threat to Timmy’s spot as “most sought after young male actor” and, not surprisingly, it is Paul Mescal who recently snagged the starring role in Ridley Scott’s sequel to Gladiator. Mescal’s performance in Aftersun is extraordinary in every way imaginable (knew nothing about this guy before). Playing the role of a deeply troubled father of an 11 year old daughter so convincingly that you forget he’s just 26.

Was Brian overreacting? Probably. Still, it’s hard to imagine that Scott would not at least question Timmy’s team about his interest and/or availability for the project. Whatever the case, Mescal has “all the colors” as my drama teacher was wont to say.

[talkingwoman]

Queerbaiting and other misunderstandings

It is not popular on the Charmie network to express doubts or reservations about the actions of people considered essential to the Charmie canon.  Luca is one such person, Elizabeth is most assuredly not.  The interview referenced in the title to this post and available widely online should be required reading for members of the fandom.  It is extremely revealing of Luca’s persona as a director, auteur, and interview subject.  He is dismissive, uncooperative, and perfectly willing to say “I won’t talk about that” when he feels like doing so, which is fine and certainly his privilege, but it flies in the face of devoted Charmies who insist that he has never abandoned Armie Hammer or used the cannibalism scandals to promote his latest movie.  Charmies argue Luca had no such intentions when announcing production of B&A the week cannibalism allegations were launched against Armie, and after years of silence on the topic, had no choice but to answer interviewer questions about Armie’s situation, which this interview, in its entirety clearly documents as untrue.  He shrugs, deflects, or outright refuses to answer several questions.  He is similarly  disingenuous about the decision to reshape the character of Lee from a jock to a bisexual, pretending to not know what queerbaiting means.  For an openly  gay man to pretend ignorance of the term and deny the conscious decision made in his own movie is kinda unbelievable.  What is wrong with owning a decision to try and expand the audience for a movie and/or  further the is-he/isn’t-he mystique about his young protege, Timothee?  Movies are supposed to be money-making enterprises after all.  Finally, using the iconic and much beloved CMBYN as an advertising strategy for a horror and gore movie feels to me like a violation, somehow.  Linking a lyrical first love classic to a sexy, bloody murder spree carried on by two serial predators?  Wish he hadn’t.  From strictly a clinical perspective, a cannibal is most probably incapable of experiencing empathy at all, let alone the emotion of love.  But, hey, as one blogger here wrote to me, it’s fiction; just a movie.  Yep.  And in HW, fellow bloggers, it is always, repeat ALWAYS about the Benjamins.

[talkingwoman]

Who, me???

Usually when someone dislikes a post I have made they just ignore me, but today @dancemonument asked all Armie and Charmie folk to block me. Allegedly, I am a troll, a hater masquerading as a fan, and an unbalanced producer of rants. I’ve been teased for being an overachiever before, but this set of accusations beats all that. My posts speak for themselves. I do not present my opinions as facts. Neither do I call posters with whom I disagree vile names (I.e., cunt) or tell them to fuck off. If this fandom is so fragile that it cannot withstand anything less that 100% adherence to a single narrative, too bad, so sad. Life and humans living theirs are not that simple. Block away @dancemonument. That changes nothing about the reality you so fervently deny.

@heartsandparts @694699 @sometimes-jael @i-am-nsr @silvys

[talkingwoman]

A different take

The academic in me cannot ignore the sweeping and frequently unsubstantiated generalizations about the American public that crop up in some posts about the Armie interview. The interviewer can be critiqued legitimately on journalistic grounds, but suggesting that the piece was written for an audience that is gullible, homophobic, suspicious of the wealthy and the justice system, etc is off the mark. Why? The sweeping generalization about the American public’s perception of the Armie Hammer matter that I can see is equal parts indifference and ignorance. It is only within our fandom that this interview resonates so robustly, excites controversy and debate, fuels already feverish imaginations about people and events we have no direct knowledge of

To one reader, Armie is a much maligned victim of a judgmental and hypocritical system that punishes people excessively for their human failings while offering no chance of redemption. To another, he is a tone-deaf, self-pitying misogynist who refers to himself as a victim of some imaginary woke mob threatening to burn down post-Harvey Weinstein HW. The interview article is written in such a way that either reader can find support for their take

The sad reality for Armie fans like me is that HW and to a much lesser extent, the general public may already have made their decision on this sorry shitstorm and simply moved on. Time will tell

@heartsandparts @i-am-nsr @martinfreemanismyaesthetic @694699 @8lettcrs @dekaohtoura

[talkingwoman]

Awww

Does anyone out there in Tumblrdom think Timmy might consider giving an old human like me a hug? My heart dissolved when he responded to a young fan’s request for a hug with “yeah, come here.” He will always be my sweet skinny noodle and own a piece of my heart❤️❤️

@heartsandparts @694699 @8lettcrs @she’sgonerogue