Let’s start a rumor about Michael Fassbender & Lupita Nyong’o coupling up

Here are some assorted photos of Michael Fassbender at TIFF. He’s still there! I guess some people really do stay there to party. He’s giving interviews and stuff too, but mostly I think he’s just hanging out and going to all of the hot parties, where he probably dances like a bro to R. Kelly. The close-ups of Fassy’s face are from the 12 Years a Slave photocall. The black leather jacket closeup is from the Fox Searchlight party over the weekend. The photo of Fassy walking around is from last night, he was leaving the Soho house.

Personally, I think Fassbender still feels a little bit burned about what happened to him during the 2011-12 awards season, where everyone was telling him that he would get an Oscar nomination for Shame and then he didn’t. This year everyone is telling him that he’ll get nominated for 12 Years a Slave, so Fassy is trying to keep his expectations low this time around. Here are some new quotes from Fassy:

Playing violent slave-owner Edwin Epps: “He’s a human being, so I approached him with a very human touch. I tried to find his voice first. I worked with a lot of different tapes and our dialect coach helped me out a lot. And then I just spent a lot of time with the script. It was about finding the human being in Epps, because obviously what he does is pretty terrible, but… I don’t know, there’s something in there where I feel a little sorry for him. He’s a victim of the time as well, in a way. He’s in love with Patsy and he can’t deal with it, he thinks, ‘How can I be in love with a slave?’ So he sets about suppressing her and beating her to try to beat it out of himself. So I thought that there was a really amazing humanity in that alone. So that was my in: the love for Patsey and how he was processing that. I think I see Epps as a representative of the time, all the ugliness and despicable is culminated into this character.

His responsibility with the character: “Yeah, there’s a responsibility to play the character as a human being as opposed to me standing outside of him going, “God, Epps is a terrible person, I’m going to portray a terrible person.” I’ve got to try to understand him and try to get under his skin and do it to the best of my ability. His love of Patsey was something that Steve and I had talked about right at the beginning. Steve would always quiz me, “So, what do you think about Epps?” For me he was a tragic character because he’s in love with Patsy and he couldn’t process that love and he didn’t know what to do with it. I thought he was a real combination of all the ugliness of that time and the slave trade…. all in this human being that I could represent. He’s like a boil on the skin of the society at the time. I see him as a victim as well, you know? And I guess looking at him like that and trying to find a human being it helps you avoid becoming a clichéd evil slave owner or landowner. It was important to find a human being so that audience members – even as horrendous as he is at times – they recognize something in him. They can see something in him that they recognize, and I think that’s more effective.

Working with Steve McQueen for all of SM’s three films: “It’s painful (laughs). But really, it’s just an incredibly special experience working with Steve. From the beginning of my career I’ve been seeking, looking for somebody like Steve – somebody who will bring the best out of you and take you to the limit of yourself and then beyond it, and then maintain that level of beyond the limit… if that makes sense (laughs). The focus on set is incredible, and not just with the cast but with the entire crew. There’s just this sort of absolute do or die philosophy on set. It’s just amazing, One of the many great things about Steve is that he allows you to believe in your instincts, and so whatever choice you make is the right choice, because you’re in the right moment.”

[From Flicks & Bits]

I was going to mention this at some point, but I didn’t realize before now that Fassbender’s character is love with Lupita Nyong’o’s character. And that makes sense. You know what I love? I love Steve McQueen’s casting process – Fassbender’s Shame character was in love with a black woman as well. And I doubt it was difficult for Fassy to play like he was in love with Lupita. McQueen knows his friend so well, and he always sets him to work opposite a woman of color. Plus, I’ve been sort of wondering if Lupita and Fassbender might have something in real life. She serious is just his type – dark, petite and beautiful.

Photos courtesy of WENN, Pacific Coast News.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

119 Responses to “Let’s start a rumor about Michael Fassbender & Lupita Nyong’o coupling up”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Pastyousayyouneverknew says:

    Lupita is GORGEOUS! If he won’t have her, I will ;) lol

  2. xboxsucks says:

    she is gorgeous,i would approve these 2;-)

  3. LL says:

    It could happen but I while I reading on many sites that she’s a lesbian. Sorry to say, I may be one of the few women who doesn’t thinks he’s all that. He’s a great actor with a great voice and attractive but something about him that I don’t see like many others do. To each its own I guess.

  4. Abby says:

    I think they would make a cute couple as I find her to be stunning with a great fashion taste as well (so far what I have seen her wear at TIFF).

    Btw some people gave Fassy lot of flak for saying his charachter loves Lupita’s charachter as he rapes her yet calls it love. Everyone objected to his use of the word ”love”.

    I can’t comment if he was right or wrong as I am yet to see he movie.

    • jinni says:

      I am completely side-eyeing the use of that word (read comment below) and am wondering what kind of person uses the word love to describe such a sadistic situation.

    • Virgilia Coriolanus says:

      I think he just used the wrong wording–if he had said “had feelings for Patsy”, then it would’ve been different. Obviously his character didn’t really love her i.e. didn’t do what he could to treat her the way a human being should be treated. But he had feelings for her, feelings that went beyond “is this slave relatively healthy so he/she can make me money” type. And he didn’t know how to handle that; wasn’t taught how to handle anyone’s feelings and thoughts but his own, really. Back then the man was the head–and very few questioned that status quo and won.

      I’m not offended by it; I get what he was trying to say. But you have to be careful when you speak of such sensitive subject matter—especially ones that affect a lot of people.

      My mom recently started tracing back our family history, and she found all the way up to our many times great grandfather–who was born about 30 years before the Emancipation Proclamation–his name was Ben Pearsons. Because of the fact that my grandmother’s side is VERY light skinned (I’m talking blonde hair, blue eyes in a few of her siblings), I wouldn’t be surprised if there was a master/slave relationship.

      If anything, this makes me want to see the film even more—very few films I’ve seen about slavery acknowledge this type of relationship beyond a few scenes. I’ve only seen it in ‘Roots’ and ‘Queen’.

      • Abby says:

        I agree with you that the word love wasnt used properly by Fassy.

        @Mslewis…wow I didn’t know that aspect about slavery. Hmm but I still think that none of the slave owners would have loved the slave no matter how beautiful she was because of the engraved hatred put in white folks towards POC.

        Also NOT to brag about Cumerbatch or anything (since I am his fan) but an interviewer has asked him during the premiere that you are playing a good slave owner and I swear he gave her a WTF expression saying slave owners can never be good. Being nice to slaves can never compensate for the fact that you own their freedom. I was like atta boy you show her LOL

      • kc454 says:

        Virgilia, my family history is very similar. My 4x Great Grandmother was Half White-Half Indian, and she was acquired by John Henry Harvey when she was 15 in South Carolina and was a house slave. He ended up having 5 kids with her and sometimes taking her on trips with him to Philadelphia and New York so that no one would mistreat her while he was away. As a kid I often wondered where part of my family’s paleness came from and why I am brown skinned, but covered in blonde body hair that glistens like LED lights when at the beach or pool in the sunlight. My grandmother was always quirky and funny acting about mixed relationships and for decades no one would answer our questions growing up about our history. Finally, late last year, one of my Great Aunts finally told the story and I was shocked at how much detail she still remembered and what they saw as young girls. My grandmother is 95 now, and we just celebrated my grandfather’s 100th birthday this past weekend, and I must say, they both still got it.

    • mslewis says:

      He used the right word. If you go back and learn about how the “Masters” raped their slave women, the women were the prettiest and most sensual and the owners and/or their sons felt “love” for them and that made the men feel guilt and shame and that is why they raped them so violently. Also, the men did not have sex with their wives too often because of the lack of birth control and the wives would put a halt to sex after having a child or two. Pregnancy wasn’t easy so raping your slave girl was the norm. Of course, sometimes there was just violence and sex for satisfaction but some owners actually cared for the slave and any children born of the union were usually treated fairly well (still slaves but they worked in the house rather than the fields).

      I actually think Fassbender is being very insightful. Back then, the term “love” was different than it is now, I think, so Fassbender is using the correct word to describe the feelings he thought that character felt. He has obviously done some research.

      Of course, some poeple will get annoyed with what he said but, oh well. Got to have a little controversy.

      • Hiddlesgirl85 says:

        I’m sorry, but what?

      • jinni says:

        Seriously? These guys weren’t ashamed of what they did. Young white men were even encouraged to sow their wild oats with unwilling slave girls/women.

        The reason why pretty/attractive slave girls/women were the most expensive slaves was because slave owners wanted to buy them for sex, period. Not because they fell in “love” with them. Lust maybe, but not any form of love.

        You’re telling me that 10-12 year old girls were just so sensual (because they weren’t just raping grown women) that these guys couldn’t help themselves? That these women were “raped so violently” because these guys couldn’t handle their feels? Really?

        They raped black women because they were easy to get access to and no one considered it possible to rape a black woman because they were considered inherently oversexed, even little girls.

        Real love nor any distorted, delusions of love, nor any guilt or shame had anything to do with this. They did it because they wanted to and could get away with it.

      • T.C. says:

        Wait what? The masters raped and beat the slave women because they were in love with them? So were they in love with the male slaves too that they beat? This is do sick definition of love even for the 1800′s.

      • Dia says:

        I have personal family history regarding this issue. It’s just that my great great grandfather was French and moved to Louisiana to strike it “rich” he fell in love with his slave my great great grandmother and they left the states and he married her in France as a free woman.

        They later moved back when slavery was abolished and they lived out the rest of their lives in the US as a free couple.

        When I hear that the master “loved” the slave but “raped” her I say that is his still a monster. If he loved her he would have made different choices. period.

      • Tara says:

        Oh sweet God you can not be serious. Violence against women is a sickening, often sadistic brutality that sometimes manifests as a rape. Other forms can be stalking, assault and battery, psychological/mental cruelty etc. rape is violence not sexuality and there is nothing conflicted about that. True, emotional attachment/detachment and reconciliation is an extremely complicated process for anyone including slaveowners in the past. But please make no mistake – once a woman is sexually assaulted the slaveholder has made the decision to deal with his issues (internal conflict, lust, superiority, societal expectations, guilt, brutality, personality disorders etc etc) through deplorable violence.
        It is also extremely important to understand that slaveholders viewed female slaves as property while their own wives, daughters, sisters and mothers were put on a pedestal as examples of pure, Christian models of white virtue. And in cases where this was only acknowledged as a societal token the wives were also victims of domestic violence. This fact made the female slave a double victim to the slaveowner’s aggression/lust and his wife/daughter’s emotional impotence, cruelty, sanctimony and/or outright jealousy.
        As for the favored status of any offspring of a female slave this was largely due to the fact that these children would have a lighter complexion and were therefore more valuable. In addition it was easier to control/manipulate a slave by treating her children better. Her goal was to see that they were as well fed, clothed and protected as she could manage. The slaveowner used all of this to his sole advantage.
        This is not to say that a slaveowner was incapable of feeling love for a slave. History gives us examples that attest to this and sometimes with favorable outcomes but it deals a crippling blow to justice, human rights and the history of slavery to equate sexualized violence with the conflicted emotional landscape of slaveowners.
        I gave Fassbender a bit of a break but your comments made me shriek.

      • Virgilia Coriolanus says:

        That’s an awesome family story! I wish more people were like your grandfather….like the Lovings. The husband was white; wife black–they got married in a state that allowed interracial marriage, and when they moved back, less than a month later they were arrested. So they moved OUT of the state, to Washington(not sure, I think it was the same state they got married in).

        I wish more love stories ended like your grandfathers’…

  5. lori says:

    I thought he was still with Louise?

  6. Side-Eye says:

    I SHIP IT! I also find the bit about his character being in love with her interesting. It reminds me of this cases of really repressed homosexuals who act similar.

  7. shelley says:

    I love him. I will be his chocolate

  8. lassie says:

    Fassy loves him some color so why not?

  9. Lia says:

    I was just waiting for this! They need to be a couple!

  10. Renee says:


    ETA: The comment I was responding to disappeared so I am going to apply it to Harpreet and Jinni’s comments below.

  11. Harpreet says:

    I dunno, why aren’t we giving both Terrence Howard and Fassbender a pass…is it because they are easy on the eyes, it is easier to sweep their domestic abuse issues under the rug?

    Not hating, just wanting your opinions…

    • LL says:

      A reason for TH would be people really don’t care about him or his life.

      But for MF it’s because he’s considered good-looking and white. Most people over things like that when they good-looking. But also, I think people didn’t see the ‘proof’ of his alleged domestic violence.

      I think part of my dislike(or indifference) of him would be that allegation. Something about it is just…

      • fingerbinger says:

        @LL Race has nothing to do with it. Mike Tyson is a convicted rapist and admitted he abused Robin Givens. He was on Fox and friends and they were fawning over him. Don’t make it about he’s white and can get a pass because he’s white.

      • LL says:

        @fingerbinger – If don’t think race plays apart of it, then so be it for you but most things such as race plays a major part of it. Sean Penn is accused of beating and raping his wife at the time(Madonna) but since then has 2 Oscars.

        For Mike Tyson, the reason why people ‘overlook’ his conviction is people believe he didn’t do it. I not saying I agree but that why Tyson is so ‘beloved’ now.

      • fingerbinger says:

        @LL Tyson abused Robin Givens. She admitted it and so did he.He actually said that the best punch he ever threw/landed was at her. My point is race is not the issue.

      • Sara says:


        Tyson paid big time for his crimes. His trial was a circus, I still remember the scathing articles that were written at the time. Ofcourse there was the usual misogynistic victim blaming but that was coupled with the not-so-subtle racist editorials (black man = natural rapist).

        Once he was convicted he pretty much became a social pariah. He did his prison time and came out to find that none of his friends were picking his calls, no one was offering title bouts and his accountant had robbed him blind.

        Which is partly why he was so frustrated during that Holyfield bout. He knew at that point that his value derived from his punch, that, he had no friends. Once he was banned he spiralled into drug abuse and bankruptsy. He stayed in that hole until a new generation revived him as a meme. He is not a figure of respect, he is a figure of ridicule and hrembraces it.

        To suggest that Tyson got off easy is hilarious. Now contrast that arch with that of Charlie Sheens.

      • FingerBinger says:

        @Sara I didn’t say Tyson got off easy I didn’t even suggest it. If you paid attention, the initial point that LL made was because Fassbender is white and that people are overlooking the allegations of abuse.Tyson is black and people aren’t really bringing up his criminal past anymore. He’s doing one man shows and appearing on the Tony’s. My point,again, is that race is not a factor in “overlooking” or looking past alleged or real criminal shenanigans.

      • TheOriginalKitten says:

        It’s overlooked because the victim dropped the charges against him and withdrew her claims, plain and simple. I’m not gonna indict the guy based on a he said/she said scenario.

        I haven’t heard about any other accusations of domestic violence from Fassbender’s myriad of exes but I think most people feel like me–if another woman comes forward and accuses him of abuse, the lust will rapidly disappear.

      • jaye says:

        NO ONE thinks that Tyson is innocent. He ADMITTED he abused Robin Givens.

      • Max says:

        Mike Tyson has been to hell and back for his sins, he did NOT get a pass. Which is more than I can say for Penn, Sheen and co.

        Obviously race factors in how black perpetrators are treated in wider society. Comeon, there are dozens of studies on this phenomenon!

    • Side-Eye says:

      Well, for one thing there have never been any hard receipts with Fassbender, nor has there ever been any incidents since that one shaky accusation.

    • Onnie says:

      We dont know if he was guilty or not. But I do agree. If Michael Fassbender was seen as ugly he would get a very bad wrath from the ladies here.

    • T.C. says:

      How can you give Fassy a hard time when there was no evidence, no arrest and the D.A. investigated the case but found nothing. No other girlfriend has reported any trouble with him. There is no there, there.

    • Mr.Smurf says:

      We did discuss MF’s domestic violence rumors when they first came out into the mainstream. They were dismissed because at the time of the filing of the domestic violence, California had/has a law that says that even if a victim of domestic violence withdraws her suit, the DA will still investigate it. He wasn’t charged with anything. Plus the ex (Leasi Andrews) has a history of accusing previous boyfriends of assaulting her. Also, whenever Fassbender has been in ANY romantic/sexual scenes with women, they always talk about how respectful and courteous he is towards them–how he goes out of his way to make them feel comfortable to the best of his ability.

      That’s why I don’t believe the rumors.

  12. jinni says:

    I don’t appreciate that he’s trying to make an abusive relationship between a slave and their master in to something else. Epps doesn’t love Patsey. You don’t rape someone you love, you don’t beat someone you love, you don’t hold them against their will and deny them their basic human rights, so why is he trying to frame the character like this?

    As for the Epps being a victim of his time, is he for real? Plenty white people knew slavery was wrong, they were called Abolitionists and they were very much alive during the time of slavery, so this whole idea that Epps just couldn’t help himself because that’s how it was back in the day is bull. I can’t believe he actually used the word “victim” to describe this guy. “Victim” of what his white privilege. Whatever Michael.

    • xboxsucks says:

      there is no romantic relationship,he loves her,she doesnt but because he is the master and she ,the slav,e he doesnt take a no so rapes her:-(

    • xboxsucks says:

      sorry i thought you were talking about steven.
      michael s character is a piece of shit,there is no other way of putting this.

    • xboxsucks says:

      sorry i thought you were talking about steven.
      michael s character is a piece of shit,there is no other way of putting this.

    • Side-Eye says:

      I don’t think you’re looking at it from the perspective and the situation in which he’s giving it. He’s not saying it’s an okay or acceptable relationship, but explaining how his character is conflicted by his emotional feelings and his status which causes him to act out in hate. I’ve seen this happen, for example, in people who are homosexuals who have grown up in an environment that is very homophobic and in a way some of them try to repress it by targeting anything that reminds them of it in a harsh, aggressive manner, as if attacking externally the things that internally conflict them. So there could be a part of him that really does love her, but the only way he knows how to react against years of being taught that these people are scum is to react violently to suppress it. This doesn’t make his actions acceptable or okay, but I don’t think Michael was saying it was. (Plus, like he said some actors just try and humanize their characters to make them easier to play.)

      And I think you’re simplifying the Abolitionist movement way too much. Most of that was started in the North or by Quakers and I don’t think his character was ever raised by that kind of doctrine and those he saw were likely whispered about with condemnation–as horrible as it may seem, not everyone can just get up and go and shake off years of indoctrination and ignorance.

      • jinni says:

        You don’t think that slave owners were aware that their was a growing movement in the North that was trying to free “their property”?

        He shouldn’t have used the word love if he meant what you wrote. The character sounds like he just happened to focus all his warped obssession on the Patsey character, like a lot of abusive people do they have that one person that gets the brunt of their sick behavior. Just because he picks on her more than the other’s doesn’t mean it’s because she has a special place in his heart.

        Plus, painting up that kind of behavior as having anything to do with love is classic abuser mentality.

      • Side-Eye says:

        Yes, they did. But you’re again failing to understand from the slaver’s perspective freeing them was wrong. Treating them as more than property was a complete foreign concept to most of them, and seeing a bunch of people they already have beef with try and steal their stuff wouldn’t magically change that. Perhaps he used the wrong word, but his core meaning wasn’t hard to grasp.

      • jinni says:

        Also, just because someone is raised in a screwed up environment doesn’t mean they can’t realize it’s wrong and change. Real life ex. of this is John Henry Newton ex-slave owner and slave ship crew member that became a abolitionist and wrote the song Amazing Grace. So upbringing is no excuse.


      • Side-Eye says:

        And I don’t like the implication in your last sentence.

    • T.C. says:

      Maybe it was a case of lust then using his power as a slave master to rape and beat her into submission. I don’t know but it doesn’t sound like love to me.

    • Lucrezia says:

      I think what Michael was trying to get at was something along the lines of gay-bashing perpetrated by repressed homosexuals. Epps isn’t wandering around romantically mooning over Patsey. It’s not love in that kind of romantic sense. But he desires her, is confused/conflicted about that feeling, and takes it out on her.

      The psychobabble term for it is reaction-formation. When you repress a feeling (something you may not even be consciously aware of) by acting in the completely opposite manner.

      Love is probably the best word Fassy could come up with. I can’t think of anything better unless I’m allowed to use an entire paragraph rather than a single word.

      • Virgilia Coriolanus says:

        I think that it’s more than desire. Because that was the norm—the slave women were there for the owner’s leisure. So desiring a slave wasn’t something that a normal slave master would get up in arms about, for the most part. It probably wouldn’t even be something that they thought twice about…that’s just how it was.

        If you wanted her, you took her–you were the master, it was your right. End of.

        I think it’s more than that–like he desires only her. He pictures her elsewhere–as his wife maybe…THAT’S why his character treats her like that. Because he wants more, but *knows* it’s wrong–in his day.

        My guess, anyway….

      • Lucrezia says:

        @ Virgilia: exactly. I even thought about writing something similar: it wasn’t just lust because he would’ve simply hit it and quit it. That’s not what happened. In the book (and I’m assuming in the movie), most of the beatings are because Epps’ wife is jealous (and so demands Patsey is punished for even the slightest infraction). But the most severe beating happened when Epps thought Patsey was having an affair. Pure jealous rage.

        So it’s something that’s not good/healthy love, but is more than simple lust. I went with desire, but I can see why you misunderstood. There really is no simple word. Warped-love? Obsessive desire?

      • Virgilia Coriolanus says:


        I haven’t read the book or seen the movie, I just based my opinion on what I’d read so far in interviews.

        From what you said, I’d amend my original statement a little. So Epps’s wife is the one who mainly beat Patsey? From that I’d guess that Epps allowed it to happen because of the fact that he had feelings for Patsey, and that wasn’t right–to have feelings for a slave, that went beyond “is this slave healthy enough to work?”

        I can’t really label what those feelings were. I think that she made him feel deep down that the “system” was wrong, that he wanted, in some way, to be with her, to be able to walk around with her without any social or legal repercussions. It’s difficult to even type this–it’s complicated.

        Pretty much I think some way, Patsey caused him to challenge the order of the day, internally. And he couldn’t handle that. So he let his wife do whatever she wanted–he probably felt that his wife was justified, because she had been a faithful, good, Christian wife–the norm of the day. And that it denigrated her, to not only sleep with a slave (which was normal), but to have feelings that should’ve only been reserved for his white wife.

        I also think that (based on him whipping her when he thought she had an affair–with Solomon?) is that as long as she was with no one else (I’m sure no other slave wanted to get involved with that mess), then he was okay with what was going on.

        It is kind of like Schindler’s List–there’s something about her that makes him realize that she is human. I mean, I just can’t believe that during that time, based on skin color, language, and religion people felt that blacks weren’t fully human–we all have the same bodily functions, don’t we?

        But I’ll have to watch the movie to find out more–when I do see it (I intend to drive two hours to the theater and preorder this movie when it comes out on dvd), I’ll be glad to discuss more with you. I like your point of view.

        Did you see the movie?

      • Virgilia Coriolanus says:

        Lucrezia, I had another thought on the part you spoke about–Epps getting jealous because he thought Patsey was having an affair.

        That’s another issue that plays a huge part in his character and actions. From what I’ve read and seen on slavery–the masters didn’t care if the slaves that they raped were married, had a “boyfriend”. Why would they?

        The fact that he even gave it a thought beyond, “that husband of hers better make himself quiet or scarce when I ‘visit’”-if he even acknowledged their relationship (most of the time, I don’t even think that was even thought of), is a HUGE red flag to himself and to Patsey. Which is scary. Because that goes beyond rape. Because if this had been a “normal” circumstance, he would’ve as you said “hit it and quit it” and moved on to his next victim.

        But he wanted her. And (far as I can tell from the story) only her. I can’t fathom that. I don’t ever want to be in a position where some guy is so fixated on me, that he’ll do anything to anyone-including me-to get to me. And this is in modern times, where I can feasibly go get help, maybe not from police, but from friends, family (I’m sure if I asked, I’d have more than a handful of my over six feet tall cousins take care of any issues I may have)—but Patsey can’t.
        Under the law, she is nothing. She can’t even run away–they kept their slaves so ignorant of the world around them. At most, they’d be able to tell you what county and what state they lived in. The more I learn about slavery, the more I just don’t understand how people can do things like that to each other.

        I have a feeling I’m going to be crying throughout the majority of this movie. I was looking at pictures on Buzzfeed of the 9/11 pics–I started tearing up. Just from looking at the pictures!

      • Lucrezia says:

        @ Virglia: I’m glad you checked back :) I haven’t seen the movie, just read the book … my opinions are all based on that. It does sounds like the movie is very close to the book, but they might not be exactly the same. When we’re talking about Epps’ motivation it’s all speculation anyway. It’s not like he was having deep-and-meaingfuls with Solomon!

        I didn’t mean Epps’ wife personally beat Patsey. (My bad – I wasn’t clear. I’m failing harder at communicating than Fassy is!) A woman wouldn’t raise a lash – though she wasn’t above throwing sticks or bottles at Patsey, and even attempted to bribe Solomon to kill her! She does try a few times to order Solomon to beat Patsey when Epps is out, but Solomon talks his way out of it. (Note: Wifey is actually quite kind/sweet towards all the slaves except Patsey.)

        What I meant was that most of the beatings were done by Epps (or by someone else under his orders) but at the instigation of his jealous wife. This tends to happen when Epps is drunk: when he’s sober he usually refuses his wife’s demands (though not always). Solomon also says Epps does love his wife (the quote is something like “loves her as much as a cruel man can”). So it’s terribly complicated: he’s not simply doing it to stop her nagging, he must also feel a fair bit of guilt for cheating and/or making her unhappy.

        The “affair” beating: Patsey goes to the neighbour’s to borrow soap. (Note: Wifey won’t let Patsey have soap … totally unsubtle attempt to make her unattractive to Epps.) Epps thinks Patsey slept with the neighbour, so he makes Solomon beat her. Solomon gives her 30 lashes, then pauses, hoping that’s enough. Epps threatens him, so Solomon gives her 10-15 more, then throws down the lash, refusing to continue. So Epps takes up the lash himself, beats her until he is exhausted and just about kills her. Her spirit is broken after this savage beating.

        What’s peculiar about the whole situation is that the neighbour (Mr Shaw) “made a wife of his ex-slave”. Obviously she wasn’t legally his wife, but Shaw had his slave-lover set up not just as a well-treated concubine, but as full mistress of the plantation. But he wasn’t definitely wasn’t respected in the community: even Solomon suggests he’s debauched/unprincipled. So it’s another layer of complication: would Epps have got suspicious of any other neighbour, or is part of because he was jealous of Shaw’s relationship with “Mrs Shaw”? If that was part of it, was Epps conscious of his jealous feelings, or not?

        Obviously we can’t ever know what was going on in Epps’ head, but I tend to lean towards: yes – he was jealous of Shaw, but no – he wasn’t conscious of that feeling. I think he’s totally repressed any “unacceptable” feelings.

        (Great conversation btw – definitely catch you next 12 years thread :) )

      • Virgilia Coriolanus says:

        I got it when you meant that the wife instigated most of the beatings….I do find it interesting that she can’t contain her dislike/hatred of Patsey–very telling that’s nicer to the other slaves. It’s also telling that Epps won’t beat Patsey unless he’s drunk or if he feels like he needs to prove something to everyone around. Because surely they know that he’s favoring Patsey in some way–does he in the book?

        I get what you mean about the relationship between epps and his wife. Is Epps one of the slave masters that always raped his slaves, off and on, or is it just Patsey that he gave some “special” attention? BEcause I can see how that would make his wife catch on quicker–if all of a sudden her husband’s hanging out in the slave quarters, than sleeping with her.

        I just feel for Patsey, especially since this was a real person—at the end of the trailer (that I’ve seen a million times), we see Patsey and Solomon hug and wave goodbye to each other–I think that’s when he was freed. That’s got to hurt, to leave behind some you love in that kind of hell.

      • Lucrezia says:

        Obviously we only get what Solomon has decided to tell us. And we’re heading into territory that is either not mentioned at all, or only vaguely implied.

        Favouring Patsey: Solomon doesn’t really say anything about Epps favouring her. It’s framed more as Solomon feeling sorry for Patsey, who’s caught between the lustful man and the jealous wife – trapped between love and hate.

        Raping other slaves: Epps didn’t have that many. He wasn’t old money or big money. There are only 8 or 9 from memory. The only other female slave was an older woman, Aunt Phoebe. So could’ve been a lack of opportunity or it could’ve been something Patsey-specific.

      • Virgilia Coriolanus says:

        Lucrezia, I get what you mean. It’s all conjecture at this point. Just from the trailer I thought that he was rich–old money, because it seemed like he had a lot more than 8 or 9 slaves.

        I’m interested in the ins and outs of the “relationship” between Epps and Patsey because we hardly ever see this type of master-slave relationship as one of the main focuses in a film or book. In all of the ones I’ve read, they either took place in the past, and/or were barely mentioned in passing. So I’m glad to see we’ll see one master-slave relationship where they weren’t “in love”—like “Queen” (which I love).

        Plus I have nothing to do in my spare time (because I’m a loser) but think of responses to your comments on this.

        Obviously I can’t say for sure, until I’ve seen the movie, but I do think that Epps does have feelings for her–that society has obviously taught him are wrong. I go back to the jealousy part. In all the books I have read about slavery, about the masters raping the slave women–they didn’t give a flying f*ck if the woman’s husband was in the room or not. If they knew that that kid was too pale to be theirs….and so on. It didn’t matter.

        So the fact that he almost beat her to death because he *thought* she was sleeping with someone else……well, I like that they aren’t making him just your ordinary villain–like you said on the downthread. Is he evil because a bunch of white men were evil in the South around that time, or is it the culture?

        And I am proud of Brad Pitt for producing this movie–not just because I’m a fan, but because he has a black daughter. And from what I’ve seen, the white halves of the family (at least where I’m from) tend to try and ignore race. Where my dad is from, a lot of people are very ignorant–they’re the type that love rap music and all that shizz, but have no issues saying the n word (and I’m talking about the twelve year olds now).

        The older ones just don’t get it at all. And you can’t even go off on someone, because then they’ll say ” oh they’re all like that”–because you’re one of three black people that they’ve ever talked to. So I’m glad that Brad is taking the time to learn about his daughter’s heritage–I know she’s not technically American, but you know some dumbasses will act like…dumbasses. And slavery and the Civil Rights is why.

    • dagdag says:


      I think by using the word `victim` Fassbender saw Epps as a very brutal, vicious sadist who could never experience simple love and happiness. He dehumanized slaves and the girl touched a spot in him that would have made his world questionable. Hence the extrem brutality against the girl.
      Actually, a very miserable life. And hell for his victims.

      And still existing, like `kill that witch`.

    • Stef Leppard says:

      It seems that Michael was just trying to find something human about the character in order to bring more depth to the role and this was how he found it. He’s not saying the rape and violence are justified. He’s just discussing his process of bringing the character to life IMO.

      • Sixer says:

        I took his remarks as apropos to acting also – how do you play a character who has done something so awful? Because, to be credible, you have to *be* him to an extent. And presumably Epps didn’t see himself as a monster – no matter how we see him.

      • Lucrezia says:

        I think that understanding that very few people consider themselves evil is important for more than just acting.

        If you simply write bad behaviour off as being done by evil people, then you’re probably missing the root cause – and you can’t do anything to stop it happening.

        Also, if you say Epps (and other cruel slave owners) were simply evil, then what’s the implication? That there just happened to be thousands of evil men in the US south at that time? That most men are evil if they can get away with it? I don’t like either of those ideas. It makes more sense to me to think that the culture itself was bad: turning people who would otherwise be decent/normal into evil monsters.

        Edit to add: not disagreeing that Fassy’s motivation here was specifically about acting … I’m just thinking aloud about the broader implications. I don’t think it’s good to simply write Epps off as evil – I think it’s really important to understand WHY he (and others in similar situations) acted evilly.

  13. Bijlee says:

    Lol he worked with a dialect coach. We’ll see fassy we’ll see.

  14. Sixer says:

    Ok. She is beautiful. They would be a hot couple. I agree.

    But still no Idris coverage? Or perhaps the buzz THardyBlokeman is getting for Locke? Pretty please with a jelly tot on top, Kaiser.

  15. TheOriginalKitten says:

    Man…Fassy is looking GOOD in these pics–I think my crush is coming back.

    Also, dude knows how to rock a leather jacket like no other.
    F*ck Cumby and his scarves and flip-flops.


  16. Mel says:

    I think she is so beautiful. She looked gorgeous in the white dress that was posted the other day.

  17. Felice says:

    I saw the movie and I would not call it love. She worked the hardest amongst his slaves and his wife hated that he gave her attention. *spoiler* I saw the rape as a ploy. My opinion but maybe I have to see it again. She was very good. I see good things in her future.

    • Virgilia Coriolanus says:

      I am incredibly jealous that you saw the movie already.

      I think MF just used the wrong word. I guess I’ll have to see the movie first, but I think it really was that Epps had feelings for Patsy and blamed them on her–which is why he tried to break her down. It’s not so different from the era of thought where “if a woman is raped, then it is her fault”.

      Any feelings that he had for her beyond her BASIC care and needs, he saw as her fault, her seducing him, her making him see her as human when he *knows* she’s not–in his eyes. So I think Fassdong just used an easy word.

      So no, it wasn’t love. It could’ve been–if he had freed her and the rest of the slaves, sent them all to freedom (North/Canada), seen WHY it was wrong, and done something about it.

  18. stace says:

    She is absolutely stunning. Can’t wait to see the film!

  19. Itwillrain says:

    His teeth look disgusting. I haven’t seen him in anything so I guess I can’t see his appeal…. Sounds like a jerk too.

  20. Lucretia says:

    He had a character who could have been a caricature and instead he tried to find a way to make him real. A real character is going to be far more disturbing for an audience; they can’t dismiss him and feel superior, as they would with a caricature. Self-hatred expresses itself in outward acts against victims, too. It seems to me that he took a thoughtful approach to a difficult role.

    • jinni says:

      The thing is that Epps was real. The way he’s written in the book is really how he was according to the guy who was enslaved. Maybe people acting that way wasn’t really a caricature, but was how some slave owners really were. So I feel that trying to add something else to the way Northup presented Epps is doing a disservice to Northup’s narrative/life story. But than Hollywood always changes biographical stories to fit their agenda w/o regard for the person they’re making a movie about.

      • Lucrezia says:

        Jinni: question for you. Do you really think Epps saw himself as an evil rapist? (Obviously he is from our perspective, but it’s unlikely he thought of himself that way.) So what do you think was going through his head as justification/reasoning for his actions?

        Obviously you don’t like Fassy’s guess. And Epps’ motivation/reasoning is not specifically addressed in the book (even if it were, it would’ve been Northup’s guess anyway … not like any of us can ever really get inside someone’s head). So what do you think Epps was thinking/feeling?

        I’m honestly curious.

      • jinni says:

        Lucrezia: I doubt he saw himself as evil. He’s a man that was doing whatever he wanted with his property which at the time he had a legal right to. I honesty think that he did what he did because he could. Nothing deep or complex. No excuse about not being able to deal with the fact the he had feeling for her, so he took his disgust for himself out on her.
        She was the unfortunate person that for whatever reason he latched on and got the majority of his abuse.

        There are people like that, who become obsessed with an individual for no particular, logical reason. They simply saw the source of their obsession and it was a done deal.

        I just don’t like that Michael is saying that this guy thought he was in love with Patsey. I feel like he’s trying to soften the ugliness of the situation and what happened to her. Some actors don’t like playing the bad guy (because their afraid of what the role will do to their image), so they try to paint them up as misunderstood. I don’t know if that exactly what Michael was trying to do, but that how it comes off to me.

      • Lucrezia says:

        Thanks for replying. :)

        I neither fully agree nor fully disagree. I think the difference between our viewpoints is simply a matter of how deep you want to go. Personally, I want an explanation for the obsession. “Sometimes people just get obsessed” isn’t good enough for me.

        I’m interested in both the conscious reasoning (what Epps believes he thinks/feels) AND our best-guess at what was really going on unconsciously (what Epps doesn’t realise he thinks/feels).

        Repressed “love” (where “love” = warped, twisted desire) explains the obsession quite neatly. But by repressed, I think it’s fully repressed. I don’t think Epps understands his feelings for Patsey, just that they make him uncomfortable.

        I’m not sure if Fassy would agree with me or not. He does say “Epps thinks ‘how can I be in love with a slave’”, but he could’ve easily meant that that thought was part of an unconscious process.

        I don’t think calling it love softens the ugliness at all. In some ways it becomes all the more horrific. It makes it a problem of the culture promoting evil, not just Epps himself being evil. Which is it’s own peculiar level of horror: there but for the grace of God go I, that kind of thing. If Epps (and other cruel slave-owners) are a victim of the time, it just goes to show how many people will act evilly when society says it’s okay to do so. That, to me, is the real horror.

  21. Finny says:

    Love Fassy but those Butterball teeth are a huge turnoff for me. You can see the buttery teeth peaking through those thin lips in the first pic. No bueno.

  22. MeowuiRose says:

    He isn’t in a relationship with Lupita. Sorry to break it to you. He already told me he loves me!

  23. Elodie says:

    Well, from the acting angle I guess (good) actors try to portray characters as being complex and not completely good or evil but I think audience vary in their interpretation of things, but the way he said it comes a bit off to the “normal” dude who would say view his character as a piece of ***. I mean for example Schindler list, the dude was in love with a Jewish woman even though he was a nazi. Epps is a monster, regardless of his “love” (whatever the character thinks it is) towards Patsey. Love doesn’t hurt. People don’t enslave, abuse, and rape those they love, so imo the character was a deeply tormented man that didn’t really know what love is and was a sadist who enjoyed to torturing others for his own dominant pleasure, add to that to break Solomon-Pastey. So as much as I get what Fassbender was trying to say by “love” i.e. the Epps character blames Patsey for his own feelings and takes his self-loathing out on her (which is well known as manipulation thus very disturbing) he definitely did a “oops!” choice of words here.
    As for the rumor… Eh… almost like a norm that people would ship him with any pretty Black/biracial/POC woman (include co-star) he’s seen with so…

  24. Lucy says:

    They’re both talented and crazy beautiful. So, why the hell not? I ship it!!!

  25. vixo says:

    Wonder if he is her type ? But they surely would make a stunning looking couple !!

  26. ShakenNotStirred says:

    I saw the film and went to the Q & A here in Los Angeles last week. Fassbender’s take on Epps was that he was in love with Patsey but did not know how to process this given the environment of which he lived in.

  27. LilyT says:

    MOST beautiful children of all time.. I say they should go for it

  28. FoxyKnoxy says:

    He used the term word “love” from the character’s perspective. I think people are taking his words too literally.

  29. Guest says:

    Lupita is a smart, talented and beautiful black woman who does not need Mr. Fassbender’s groupies to “ship” her with him. Although I suppose it is better than shipping him with a married man who has a child. How many of our best and brightest black women should he have access to? Sadly many of today’s movie consumer does not understand/accept the concept of personal boundaries.

    • Virgilia Coriolanus says:

      Where’d you get that from? Seems a little random–the married man w/a child.

      The shipping (at least for me) is only a fantasy—don’t get your panties twisted up. It’s just a joke….it doesn’t help that Lupita is GORGEOUS. Either I didn’t get a good look at her in the trailer (she’s only shown for a split second) or they seriously made her under or something, because she didn’t look like anything special in the movie–I’m guessing it’s the former.

      And this is a gossip site, not a movie review site–we’re going to ship EVERYONE.

  30. Blue says:

    I think Fassbender’s going to be great in this like he is in everything. He and Lupita would make a fantastic couple, she really is just his type. This is going to be a hard film to watch but I just know it’s going to be incredible. McQueen and Fassy always make an amazing team. I loved both Shame and Hunger.

  31. Virgilia Coriolanus says:

    You know what this post has done to me? Now I’m going to be watching the trailer every day until I watch the movie—I’ll be preordering that bad boy. I’ve never been eaten up in anticipation before about a movie–the only time that’s ever happened is waiting for Book 7 of Harry Potter. This post/Fassdong’s interview just got me worked up even more. Great info.

  32. Tania says:

    I think Lupita is probably too good for him! Her skin is amazing. What a beautiful woman.

  33. Aly says:

    Very sorry, but I don’t see what the big fuss is over this girls looks. Yes, she is pretty. I couldn’t honestly say I think she is any great beauty though. She does have some great skin, very smooth.

    Looks don’t matter much in comparison to her acting ability, which I hear is off the charts. THAT is what I find most interesting about her, along with being a former Yale student. I fully expect to be blown away by her in 12 Years a Slave.

    As far as “shipping” her with Fassbender, it’s funny that he can’t be in the same room with a Black woman without people wetting their pants with excitement and anticipation. Geez

    BTW, that thing Michael said about his character being “in love” with the woman he repeatedly beats and rapes makes me wanna puke..

  34. Goldie says:

    She used to date Chiwetel… so never gonna happen homies.

  35. ichsi says:

    Okay, I’m usually the last person to defend the equalisation of love and rape, BUT the main criticism is based on the assumption that theirs is a plain Master/Slave relationship. From what I’ve heard of the movie so far, it apparently is quite a bit more complex. So I will wait till I’ve seen it to judge this comment.