Discussion
  • Read More
    Bob McLennanWilliam Hughes
    12/06/17 12:10am

    Who the fuck is this guy again?

    Did someone in 1990 say, “we need a young William Forsythe for this role,” then quickly realized their mistake, but no one remembered to cut this chump loose, so he just ended up landing forgettable roles in forgettable movies for three decades?

    Reply
    • Read More
      NeuroticmooseBob McLennan
      12/06/17 12:18am

      While Rappaport completely deserves to put on blast for his idiotic comments, I take umbrage with you grouping in the likes of Big Fan and True Romance as “forgettable movies”

      Reply
    • Read More
      austenpaulNeuroticmoose
      12/06/17 12:33am

      Cop Land, Beautiful Girls, Zebrahead, Higher Learning, Deep Blue Sea...

      He was the right guy for the right time. Last century.

      Reply
  • Read More
    xy0001William Hughes
    12/06/17 12:16am

    the most amazing thing about Michael Rapaport is that he’s a 47 year old white as fuck man that says things like ‘homey’ and ‘homeboy’.

    Reply
    • Read More
      Mr Glitchxy0001
      12/06/17 12:44am

      I’m surprised he didn’t throw a few not!s in the mix.

      Reply
    • Read More
      seven-deucexy0001
      12/06/17 9:58am

      What the hell does “white as fuck” mean? And why can’t he say “homey” and “homeboy”? Are you suggesting he’s culturally appropriating words that should only be spoken by PoC?

      This line of thinking is racist as fuck.

      Reply
  • Read More
    Mr. ThreepwoodWilliam Hughes
    12/06/17 6:03am

    There’s never the wrong time. Decorum is fiction. People just don’t want to feel uncomfortable when they’re not prepared for it. Well, get prepared.

    Reply
    • Read More
      atticaMr. Threepwood
      12/06/17 10:09am

      People just don’t want to feel uncomfortable when they’re not prepared for it.

      I know! It’s just like I felt when a client took the hand I offered to shake his and put it in his mouth! Totally unprepared to be uncomfortable!

      Funny how that’s okay in only one direction...

      Reply
  • Read More
    Random MonkWilliam Hughes
    12/06/17 2:20am

    Thing is:

    if Oliver is “not a reporter” then why was he at this press screening, asking questions, if he wasn’t expected to ask these exact questions? What abut the past 10 years makes anyone expect Oliver to be the guy to softball questions about upcoming films?

    All i can think is, “it’s December 2017. You gave Oliver a microphone and access to Hoffman, an accused grabbypants. What did you THINK would happen?”

    Reply
    • Read More
      j4x_Random Monk
      12/06/17 7:09am

      This is the appropriate take.

      Reply
    • Read More
      greymanRandom Monk
      12/06/17 8:04am

      Yeah, that sort of stood out to me as well. Somebody had to know, or at least suspect, that Oliver was going to say something on that stage. Maybe they didn’t realize how far it would go?

      Or, maybe the organizers (and the production company for Wag the Dog) realized that this was the only way to drum up any interest at all in a celebration of a middle-of-the-road movie most people had utterly forgotten about?

      Let’s be honest here, if they had some random presenter on that panel lobbing softball questions about the production of the film, do you think it would have gotten any attention, at all from the media? Instead we’ve got a story that is taking up a reasonably outsized chunk of the news cycle and getting play on network TV, cable news, all major newspapers, and all over the internet. For days.

      Reply
  • Read More
    Lucky WilburyWilliam Hughes
    12/06/17 12:12am

    I really doubt that many people in the audience were upset by John Oliver bringing up the allegations. I would have loved to witness that and I say that as a fan of Dustin Hoffman. And as a fan of his work, I think he should take responsibility for his own actions and Oliver was giving him an opportunity to own up to it. Clearly he didn’t take it. “It was 40 years ago and she never said anything” is the same thing Roy Moore and his supporters are saying. He should know better than that and Oliver was absolutely right to call him out on it.

    Reply
    • Read More
      revoluLucky Wilbury
      12/06/17 7:53am

      Exactly, Dustin could have taken that opportunity to be somber about the whole situation, instead he went into flight or fight mode.

      Reply
    • Read More
      DomhnallTrumpLucky Wilbury
      12/06/17 12:50pm

      I think if I was in the audience for a viral moment like this, I would be excitedly telling all my friends about how I was there to see it live.

      Reply
  • Read More
    Timothée2KWilliam Hughes
    12/06/17 1:01am

    I like John Oliver and Michael Rapaport. Anyone that follows or listens to Rapaport knows these types takes are just his shtick. He usually lays into Trump or less sympathetic targets than Oliver but one should take them only so seriously.

    I don’t think Hoffman should’ve been surprised at the questions in this climate—especially as he’s given rather weak and dismissive responses. I also think Oliver was more than a bit self-righteous here and could’ve made his point and put Hoffman on the spot without it devolving as it did. I don’t really consider him a journalist and as a moderator, it was beyond unprofessional. It was like an odd, IRL op-ed.

    In particular, this argument from him really bugged me: “If you’ve given no evidence to show it didn’t [happen], then...” One can believe those who have accused Hoffman of being a boor, harasser, assaulter or “creeper around women” and still see how requiring someone to prove a negative is problematic in the broader picture.

    Reply
    • Read More
      Sylvester McMonkey McBeanTimothée2K
      12/06/17 11:00am

      In particular, this argument from him really bugged me: “If you’ve given no evidence to show it didn’t [happen], then...” One can believe those who have accused Hoffman of being a boor, harasser, assaulter or “creeper around women” and still see how requiring someone to prove a negative is problematic in the broader picture.

      That part got me too. While I 100% support what John Oliver was doing, it’s basically impossible to prove a negative. I’m kind of surprised Hoffman didn’t jump on that, as it would have been an easy way for him to redirect the questioning and clear some space for him.

      Reply
    • Read More
      G.E.O.Timothée2K
      12/06/17 5:54pm

      I used to like Oliver until he doubled down on the “Middle Aged British Man With the Opinions and Sensibilities of a Berkeley Freshman” routine. It’s tiring and his feigned disbelief at basic human self-interest makes me want to watch Care Bears instead, anything. This moderator stuff is classic Oliver, knowing that he’ll be backed by his self-righteous viewer base.

      And Dustin Hoffman is a bit of prick regardless of whatever misconduct he’s guilty of, just so you know where I stand.

      Reply
  • Read More
    austenpaulWilliam Hughes
    12/06/17 12:21am

    When you said “high-profile voice of support” I thought you meant this.

    Reply
    • Read More
      zzyzazazzaustenpaul
      12/06/17 12:33am

      That’s disappointing.

      Reply
    • Read More
      dirtsidezzyzazazz
      12/06/17 12:36am

      A bit, yeah. I mean, it’s not exactly cut and dry that an event designed to honor a person is the right place to confront them about stuff like this, but... when is the right place? It’s not like Hoffman’s attending panels on sexual harassment.

      Reply
  • Read More
    Ferdinand CesaranoWilliam Hughes
    12/06/17 1:19pm

    I normally like the work of John Oliver; but his act of surprising Dustin Hoffman with this line of questioning was the wrong thing to do. This was not a court hearing; it was a panel celebrating a film. Hoffman was entitled to believe that he was going to be treated as an honoured guest, not grilled like a criminal defendant. To bring him there under false pretenses was unethical.

    Hoffman should have been told beforehand that Oliver intended to bring up the allegations of sexual assault, so that he could have decided whether or not he wanted to participate. His reactions indicate to me that he was not so informed, and that he was blindsided by Oliver’s questions.

    Let us consider that a celebrity who gets into trouble will usually cancel upcoming appearances on late night talk shows, because that celebrity knows that the hosts will bring up the issue in question. Hoffman should have been given the same option; he should have been informed that Oliver was going to pursue that line of questioning.

    We all have a duty to deal with others in a straight-up manner. Luring someone into an elaborate game of “gotcha!” is the domain of sleazy operators such as Geraldo, Jerry Springer, Dr. Phil, and the like. Oliver diminished himself and surrendered some of his well-earned credibility by engaging in practices that put him in league with people like that.

    This was an ethical failing on Oliver’s part. If he felt that he could not in good conscience host a tribute to Hoffman (which is a reasonable position), then he should have stepped down, rather than taking it upon himself to transform the event from a celebration into an interrogation.

    Reply
    • Read More
      BabbylonianFerdinand Cesarano
      12/06/17 1:53pm

      John Oliver didn’t “lure” anyone into anything. He was hired for a gig, was probably given little or no direction (because who would have the guts to try to feed him questions?), and decided to stick it to somebody who’s had no problem sticking it to others in the past. If Dustin Hoffman didn’t want to be asked controversial questions, he could have made a little more effort not to be controversial in the first place.

      As for the many “Won’t somebody please think about the audience?” posts, guess what: That audience now has something actually worth remembering, something far more interesting than moviemakers bloviating about how great they and their movie used to be.

      Reply
    • Read More
      WanderingScoutFerdinand Cesarano
      12/06/17 11:06pm

      John Oliver isn’t a film critic or an entertainment reporter. He’s a guy with a show that is entirely about calling out assholes for being assholes.

      What the fuck did they think he was going to ask him? What lenses they used to shoot the boardroom scene? If the cinematography was inspired by Francois Truffaut?

      They hired John Oliver and he showed up as John Oliver.

      It’s like hiring Eminem to play your kid’s birthday and being shocked he starts rapping about his dick instead of doing John Mayer covers.

      Reply
  • Read More
    BrickstarterWilliam Hughes
    12/06/17 12:08am

    This is no big deal, we’ll just give all of his roles to Bill Burr from here on and no one will even notice.

    Reply
    • Read More
      basementshowBrickstarter
      12/06/17 12:34am

      Not true! I like Bill Burr much more than his guy, and would appreciate seeing him in more Hollywood roles.

      Reply
    • Read More
      benexclaimedbasementshow
      12/06/17 9:39am

      Yes, noted woman-respecter Bill Burr. Good thinking.

      Reply
  • Read More
    Zardoz MobileWilliam Hughes
    12/06/17 12:49am

    I’ve got to ask: does anybody else take actors as seriously as they take themselves?

    Reply
    • Read More
      ValidPoint
      12/06/17 1:02pm

      That’s Mister Actors to the likes of you.

      Reply