( +1 hidden )
January 24, 2019 at 7:59 pm #1202747547
It might, however, it should not! Some people in the industry do not want BoRhap wins anything and they were looking into it since the very beginning and how they could smash movies they did not want to win. It is a fact that, major Film studios and entertainment corporations are negotiating mergers or acquisitions. I am 100% sure they knew in advance about all of this accusation of sexual misconducts, however, they kept silence until the RIGHT moment that is NOW. Why did they keep silence when H. Weinstein was making lots of money out of his movies even M. Streep called him a “God” the same did W. Paltrow before making sure to get their Oscars in their hands. (check on different articles and videos). Please stop being naive! This is a multi-billionaire business and they are trying to making us believe what they want to. The Academy is hands tied actually. Believe me, they are LITERALLY forced to vote for the less controversial movie. Even some of the best-made movies can be banned or worse be overlooked because of their misconducted filmmakers. it does not mean those movies are less winning awards deserving.January 24, 2019 at 8:02 pm #1202747551
“BOHEMIAN RHAPSODY” LOSES GLAAD NOM (EXCLUSIVE)
by: varietymattdonnelly | Jan 24, 2019, 9:20 AM
“Bohemian Rhapsody” has been removed as a best original film nominee at this year’s GLAAD Media Awards, following new accusations of sexual assault and misconduct against director Bryan Singer.
The media watchdog told Variety exclusively it has pulled the film from contention for the prize, in a weighted decision that takes a stand for sexual assault victims. Singer has consistently denied misconduct, and called the Atlantic story “a homophobic smear piece.”
“In light of the latest allegations against director Bryan Singer, GLAAD has made the difficult decision to remove ‘Bohemian Rhapsody’ from contention for a GLAAD Media Award in the Outstanding Film – Wide Release category this year. This week’s story in The Atlantic documenting unspeakable harms endured by young men and teenage boys brought to light a reality that cannot be ignored or even tacitly rewarded,” GLAAD said in a statement to Variety.
“Singer’s response to The Atlantic story wrongfully used ‘homophobia’ to deflect from sexual assault allegations and GLAAD urges the media and the industry at large to not gloss over the fact that survivors of sexual assault should be put first,” the statement continued.
Reps for Singer and 20th Century Fox, the distributor of “Bohemian Rhapsody,” had no immediate comment. The full list of nominations will be announced Friday morning live on Facebook at 10 a.m. E.T.
Time’s Up, the bellwether group formed in wake of Harvey Weinstein’s downfall that is committed to legal support for accusers and gender parity in Hollywood, applauded the decision from GLAAD.
“We are in the midst of a cultural reckoning. Though there was once a time when business as usual could continue amid credible allegations of sexual assault and violence, that era has ended forever. The recent allegations regarding Bryan Singer’s behavior are horrifying and MUST be taken seriously and investigated,” the group said in a statement.
GLAAD had previously championed the film for its unflinching depiction of gay icon Freddie Mercury’s sexuality and battle with AIDS.
“The team that worked so hard on ‘Bohemian Rhapsody’ as well as the legacy of Freddie Mercury deserve so much more than to be tainted in this way. ‘Bohemian Rhapsody’ brought the story of LGBTQ icon Freddie Mercury to audiences around the world, many of whom never saw an out and proud lead character in a film or saw the impact of HIV and AIDS in fair and accurate ways. The impact of the film is undeniable. We believe, however, that we must send a clear and unequivocal message to LGBTQ youth and all survivors of sexual assault that GLAAD and our community will stand with survivors and will not be silent when it comes to protecting them from those who would do them harm,” GLAAD said.
The Atlantic report saw Singer accused of inappropriate groping and sexual relationships with young men. One, a 13-year-old extra on the Singer film “Apt Pupil,” said the director fondled his genitals without consent.
“Other films that involve Singer now or in the future should take note of the backlash to The Atlantic story and other previous allegations. The industry cannot let those who perpetuate harms against anyone – especially vulnerable young people – go unnoticed or unchecked any longer,” GLAAD concluded.
Three other accusers are identified in the story by pseudonyms. One, identified in the story as Andy, says that he had sex with Singer when he was 15. Another man, identified as Eric, says he was 17 when he began having sex with the director. Singer would have been 31 at the time. The third man, Ben, alleges that he and Singer had oral sex when he was 17 or 18.January 24, 2019 at 10:00 pm #1202747656
It sort of annoys me that people need to push this narrative that BR and/or Rami Malek shouldn’t be rewarded because of Bryan Singer’s actions. Why can’t they just not be rewarded because the film and performance isn’t very good?
My thoughts exactly. I thought Malek was fine. Just not award-winning in any way.January 24, 2019 at 10:28 pm #1202747673
Malek was hired before Singer and he clearly didn’t like having to work with him. Still, Freddie Mercury was a dream role for an actor and he did the best he could with it all, both the material and soldiering through after Singer was thankfully and finally fired. The pedophile son of a bitch couldn’t even be relied on to show up on set, simply pathetic.
Do keep in mind that I will never excuse Malek’s weak and faux-ignorant response to these new allegations. That was disappointing, at least say you believe and support the survivors (as I choose to do) or donate your salary like Chalamet did, that would have been cool with me too. That way he would not be making money off art that was mostly (about 80% of principal photography) directed by a child rapist.
Sorry. I might have missed it but I haven’t come across any trade story that indicated Malek was hired before Singer. The only thing I can find is that singer and Malek were announced at the same time in November 2016 (deadline, Hollywood reporter). Prior to that, Ben winshaw was attached and before him SBC. I just would find it unlikely that, even though he had an Emmy for Mr. Robot, Malek would have the cache to get a 50 mill studio film greenlit on his own. He would need an established director. Enter Singer. Which means both must have met and given each approval before the film got packaged and greenlit.
Malek acting clueless (about the allegations AND about siger’s attachment to the project) is not a good look.
But again, even if Singer was a squeaky clean choir boy, I don’t think BR or Malek richly deserve award or acclaim.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.