As we’ve been covering all week, Nate Parker’s attempts to “get ahead” of the stories about his past have sort of fallen flat. Parker was charged and put on trial for rape when he attended Penn State in 1999. While he was found not guilty, everything about the case is a matter of public record, and every piece of that public record is being and will continue to be disseminated in the media this year as Parker becomes the centerpiece for a major Oscar push. His film, The Birth of a Nation, already received rapturous reviews at Sundance, and most critics already have the film on their short-lists for Oscar contenders.
But, as I said, Parker’s attempts to do damage control in advance of the film’s release have actually made everything worse. Every outlet is digging through court transcripts and witness statements from 1999, and Parker’s 2016 statements are coming across as blasé, self-righteous, self-serving and narcissistic. Instead of seeming like a man who made mistakes in his past and now realizes he behaved terribly in college, he comes across like… well, like a predator who is still making excuses for his behavior. That’s just my take, and I really do believe that this was a bad week for Nate Parker and his Oscar campaign. But surprise! The Birth of a Nation is still going to have a big gala premiere at the Toronto International Film Festival!
The Toronto Film Festival is standing by plans to give Nate Parker’s Sundance sensation The Birth of a Nation an international premiere next month to launch the movie’s Oscar campaign.
“TIFF is proud to help bring Birth of a Nation and the important story it tells to audiences. We will present the film as planned,” festival organizers told The Hollywood Reporter on Wednesday in a statement. Toronto is sticking with The Birth of a Nation after a woman at the center of a college sexual assault case involving director-writer-star Nate Parker was revealed to have died in 2012.
Parker’s Birth of a Nation became a sensation at Sundance, where it debuted and was sold to Fox Searchlight for a record $17.5 million after an all-night bidding war. Fox Searchlight plans an Oct. 7 release for Birth of a Nation, and an awards-season campaign.
On one side, I’m not surprised. I suspect that Nate Parker will make all of his film festival and promotional commitments and that the film itself will be well-received critically. But I also suspect there will be a giant asterisk with this film and it’s not going to get the big awards-push from the studio anymore. No one who reads any part of the victim’s statements in 1999 will want Parker anywhere near an Oscar campaign.
Photos courtesy of WENN.
Of course it is. Money trumps life and justice. This guy will go on unscathed.
He and his co-rapist can die in fire. Hollywood Reporter and Variaty are awful in their coverage of this case, they are doing everything to portray this rapist scum as the victim.
Why rape or sexual harassment in Hollywood in normal thing?
I still don’t understand. This is disgusting.
Roman Polanski, Woody Allen and his adopted daughter, Bill Cosby etc.
Boycott his movie! Boycott!
In a town full of rapists and domestic abusers…I’m shocked! He’ll probably be given the keys to the city.
Every time I read about rapists in HW, I remember cases of child actors. We will never know who did what, so I agree with you 100 percent. I still remember awful stories about Jared Leto, another winner.
I do not understand what the big fuss is about the Oscarssoowhite, since its clear that we are talking about majority of very disturbed people. I am ashamed to be white when I look at pics from those parties and everything related to Oscars and similar events.
POC should be proud of their achievements during sports events, especially now when the US swimmers should that they just frat boys with bigger wallets.
Complete and utter straw man argument. If you’d like to continue trashing victims of a crime, there’s a separate article where you can join right in on the comments.
Additionally, TIFF is held in Toronto, which is in Canada, so your pointless trashing of Hollywood is also irrelevant.
I don’t know how well it really will be received critically. It already had mixed reviews at Sundance before the scandal blew up, and Searchlight spent a ton of money on it as a push for an Oscar in the face of the oscarssowhite criticism. But there are several projects with African Americans coming out soon that don’t involve this accompanying controversy and in fact, may be better than this movie.
The movie currently has 96% on rotten tomatoes so how it will be critically received is not going to be a problem at all. I just wish that such a good opportunity hadn’t come to someone like Nate.
96% from only 23 reviews. Most of those caught up in the furvor of the Sundance premiere. We will see. Whispers are a few critics felt they couldn’t be too hard on the movie because it filled a certain need. Now? To HELL with its creators, their feel good underdog story is a massive lie!!
“Whispers are a few critics felt they couldn’t be too hard on the movie because it filled a certain need.”
Lmao ok girl tell yourself whatever you want.
96% from most of the top critics in the business also. There were other POC-led films at sundance but this one in particular was bought for the highest value that a film has ever been bought for at the festival. It’s great reviews are not merely down to critics feeling like they had to appease supporters of the #oscarssowhite movement. I hate Nate and like I said, I wish someone else had been the one behind this movie but it is what it is – the movie was a critical success at sundance and fox searchlight bought it for 17+ million dollars for more than just pity.
That 96% is kind of amazing when you start reading the reviews and many of them acknowledge the film has “irksome flaws.”
I feel like a lot of people don’t understand Rotten Tomatoes. 96% means it got almost all fresh reviews, but a fresh review doesn’t mean a great review. It’s basically just a passing grade. 96% could mean it got an A+ from everyone, but more usually it means everyone thought it deserved at least a C and no one thought it deserved an F.
If you actually read the reviews, they’re pretty tepid. The support actors get almost unanimous praise, everyone agrees it’s a worthy story, everyone agrees there’s problems. The general consensus is it’s good enough, but no masterpiece.
The Wrestler sits at 98% fresh, The Imitation Game sits at 90% fresh, Once, The Queen and Good Will Hunting sit at 97%, The Hurt Locker is at 98%, Gravity and Argo are at 96%. All these movies are good, and they got good-ish reviews, but not exactly ‘this is our new Citizen Kane’ reviews. They all have some major flaws and they won’t go down as classics. They didn’t get great scores for being amazing films, but for being generally liked.
Kate, taking only the best film winners from your list, The HurtLocker has an average RT score of 8.5/10 and Argo has 8.4/10. Birth of a Nation is currently on 7.6/10. For me the average scores are far more useful and this does suggest a good film, but over hyped if it is being presented as a serious oscar candidate. Early days though and non festival reviews and box office receipts will have a big impact on its chances.
While not minimizing the seriousness of the rape charges, not to give the film it’s due will be a nightmare for HW. He went to trial and was not imprisoned. Can we say the same for Roman Polanski and Woody Allen? There are major issues with the behavior of all of these guys, but they were never denied a place at the table. Allen still gets top notch actresses to work with him. I don’t see HW not pushing this film because it would restart the Oscarsowhite again
Allen and Polanski were already Oscar winners by the time their scandals occured.
Polanski’s was convicted in 1977. He won his Oscar in 2002.
Woody Allen was never charged .
There are several ‘non white’ films out this season. Some are even Black specific that can be picked for award season so that the academy isn’t accused of #Oscarssowhite. Here are 3:
HIDDEN FIGURES
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RK8xHq6dfAo
A UNITED KINGDOM
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3387266/
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2016/jun/21/a-united-kingdom-london-film-festival-david-oyelowo-amma-asante
LOVING
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=33g-ZHBQdNU
I’m so excited for Hidden Figures. It looks really good.
I am excited for these movies but are they originated, written and directed by non whites too? Because thats why so many of us were invested in Nate Parkers film in the first place. That and the black uprising theme especially now with the anti police brutality demonstrations.
I’m so looking forward to Loving, I loved Jeff Nichols other films, and I’m a wee but in love with Ruth Negga (guys, she is SO GOOD as Tulip on Preacher)
I’m also excited for A United Kingdom, I though Amma Asante’s first film, Belle, was incredible. I couldn’t believe how happy and excited I was after watching it, and Gugu Mbatha-Raw was incredible in it. And it has David Oyelowo!
And Hidden Figures? Black girl magic meets space and math nerds? Come on! It almost isn’t fair how good that sounds!
And then we have The Birth of a Nation. another film about black slavery, How fresh does that not at all sound? Directed by a total creep. Hard Pass from Me. Sorry to Aja King, and Gabrielle Union, and all the quality people involved, but nah. I’m not supporting this film.
Naya: Any story about the black (or any ethnicity) experience, told from the POV of black people(or the specific ethnicity) as opposed to the great white hope/saviour/POV is a good thing.
To answer your specific question, some of them are written, directed and originated by black people, but i would hope that you would support story telling in other forms because that is what encourages people to tell them and or originate material from their own back yard as they do with foreign language films.
Lurker: There are so many films coming through this year that i found it hard to pick just those 3 examples. We mustn’t forget Mira Nair’s QUEEN OF KATWE https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eEsz6o50wrY chess nerds!!!
I am personally really looking forward to Loving (Totally agree with Lurker that Ruth Negga is great in Preacher!), but my 14 year old niece is beside herself excited for Hidden Figures. She is a huge STEM/Math nerd, and she can’t wait to see it because even today, her STEM focused magnet school is 75% boys.
Unless it’s just a flat out bad movie, it is really a movie that people can relate to for so many different reasons, and that is a good thing.
Hopefully the Oscars will steer clear of Nate Paker and look at some of the other movies coming out, and Nate Parker will fade away. Who am I kidding though? This is still Hollywood.
LAK: yes to Queen of Katwe, big time! Mira Nair can be hit or miss for me, but I loved the trailer.
And another one: Moonlight, written and directed by Barry Jenkins, withI believe an entirely black cast. The trailer looks phenomenal.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UxDvW-1ZMk
And those are just black and African American films. There’s also Chilean director Pablo Lerrain’s “Jackie”, “The Zookeeper’s Wife”, written by and directed by two women (Angela Workman and Niki Caro), Pedro Almodovar’s Julieta, Front Cover – Asian American men develop an attraction to each other, but one of them is a closeted actor, Spa Night, in which a Korean American man takes a job at a gay spa…
There’s lots, and the more I think about these films, which explore different themes, and intersectionalities, the more I realise that somehow, all the films I watch are by white and starring white guys. How often do we see gay Asian men? How often do PoC get the opportunity to direct? Why don’t I see women’s names beside “written by” in the credits?
More to the point, with all this on offer, why on earth would I go see a slavery film by a rapist?
Lurker: Speaking of films about gay Asian men, have you seen THE WEDDING BANQUET? It’s an early Ang Lee film about an asian man hiding his sexuality from his parents. Comedy.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5kVkRhXt3S4
NOPE, but guess how I’ll be spending the weekend!
not that i condone anything Polanski did, but he did admit his crimes and gave money to his victim to start a life. she eventually forgave him, i will not name her, because, she, the victim does not want to be in the press anymore.
But this guy… If I had to choose between having Parker or Polanski for a babysitter, i would choose Polanski. Yes, he did run away, but no one is covering up for him.
He also never did jail time or shown the smallest glimpse of remorse, in fact he is acting like he is the poor victim who is being exiled unfairly. He didn’ t admit his crimes out of good heart, he did it because it would’ ve lessen down his penalty! He didn’ t give money to his victim because he realized what he did and tried to help her, he did it to buy her public forgiveness in hope that the charges against him would be dropped, and “no one is covering up for him”? You mean like all the celebrities who signed the petition to have him released and who still work for him and support him while he gets the money of his movies and the critical acclaim? Are you serious?
Polanski is not only convicted of drugging and then anally raping a 12 year old girl, he is currently a fugitive from justice. Polanski also had a repeated history with under age girls in the industry such as Natasha Kinski. I am deeply disturbed that you would hand your child over to such a man even if your other choice is Nate Parker. I refuse to argue over which rapist is “better” but fgs never give your child over to a convicted child abuser.
JWQ I did not say that anything he did was OK, but we, the public, know everything about it. And no amount of celebrities will tell me what is the truth.
Can we really compare rapists? I tried, in response to the OP, but either way it is awful.
At least, Polanski’s victim is alive, she has her family. And I do believe that she is OK now. That is all I got.
No, you didn’ t say what he did was ok, you just said that what he did shouldn’ t be considered a big deal because at least he gave money to his victim. You also failed to realize that the woman in question probably told the press he forgave him because he was tired of being harrassed by journalists and wanted to be left alone to cope, not because he is fine with how things went! And the fact that we know everything still makes you write in a way that makes me think you genuinely believe he is not that bad of a guy!
I should be glad that at least you didn’ t use the “well, he had a crappy life and that should be considered his punishment” or the “it’ s been so long, let’ s give him a break” apologies.
Why the need to hold a contest? Why can’t we just agree that Parker and Polanski are both awful people?
So you would let a man who drug and raped a 13 year old babysit your kids? OK
But his co-writer WAS convicted. And the only reason Parker wasn’t is because he had sex with her before. So no
I think Hollywood has ignored Woody Allen and Roman Polansky’s egregious actions in a way that is really shameful. And it is true that the Nate Parker case does represent some pretty intense intersections of race and gender issues. If people in Hollywood don’t come together for Parker, maybe it has something to do with echoes of the historical problems surrounding a black man accused of raping a white woman (which I assume is what people talking about inequity of treatment with Allen and Polansky would be driving at). Maybe it’s because Parker is relatively new on the scene compared to Polansky and Allen when their grossness was made public, so he has fewer powerful friends willing to go to bat for him. Maybe it’s because the culture about rape and what we as audiences are willing to give a pass to is changing – the popular reaction when Polansky was arrested was really anti-Polansky and contrasted pretty dramatically with how the Hollywood bigwigs were treating it. I honestly don’t know how these factors should be weighted or how it will all play out. All that said, I just feel furious when I think about this poor woman being harassed by this asshole and his friends and nobody at her college willing to protect and support her. And I generally balk at the idea of giving black men a pass for rape or abuse because white men have gotten one. I think the solution for that inequity has to be to come down harder on white men who behave terribly.
@Chisey – Thank you for this comment. I wanted to tack on googling last night pulled up links that Spike Lee and Ava DuVernay have been silent on Nate Parker. Oprah Winfrey was contacted, but no response as she is filming at the moment.
I agree. The guy sounds like a creep and I’m not sure I want to go see his movie, but due process etc. Why wouldn’t they premier this film? I hate to say it, but in this instance it really is ‘case closed.’ In the eyes of the law, this guy is not guilty. In my eyes, on the other hand…
Common decency?
Remember, this is an event that happened many years ago, long before he made the film, and he was not found guilty. You may candidate it “decent” to cancel the gala, but it would be absolutely problematic, and could even be considered discriminatory.
On the one hand, the studio needs to recoup their money, so the film has to be marketed and sold, BUT i hope that if it is indeed oscar worthy or has a big campaign push to Oscar glory, that he is not personally rewarded and the reciepients can figure out a way to honour the story without heaping glory on him.
A difficult task given it was his singular drive and push that got the film made, BUT i really don’t want him rewarded AT ALL. Financially he is already rewarded via that big Sundance cheque, but i hope he doesn’t receive Oscar (or any awards) glory.
Rock and a hard place, right? Because, as you say, it’s HIS film in the way some films are the result of one person’s drive.
If I were an awards nominator or film journo, I’d put my efforts towards promoting other non-white driven projects as others have noted above and previously.
One of my friends is on the directors desk at the academy. Rock and hard place city!!!
I can imagine! But it would certainly be best if they looked elsewhere.
It had mixed reviews at sundance so I doubt it will be a smash. The good buzz was from the unprecedented buy from Fox not about how thr film played out.
Either way TIFF can shove it and this movie can too. I’m not supporting it
I don’t credit Sundance buzz. The films never take off these days.
And you are right with yhis film, it was the money that put this film in the spotlight.
Ughh good to know that the TIFF is sticking by his side not matter his despicable actions. This man will become the Woody Allen of this decade. Many people in the industry will find an excuse to support him because “oh is so talented”. This movie and his subsequent work will receive zero dlls from my pocket in support.
Hey everyone attending TIFf. They can show the movie…it doesn’t mean you have to go see it.
I attend every year and the process is that you have to purchase passes before the movie schedule comes out and then you pick movies. The TIFF schedule hasn’t come out yet and I am glad there was this delay for once. I would have picked this movie based on the buzz that was coming out of Sundance. However, now I will skip it because I cannot support someone like this. There are literally hundreds of other movies to choose from at TIFF and many will be great and never get the Oscar buzz they deserve.
In terms of a gala premiere, that is more of how they categorized the movie. It just means that the filmmakers and actors show up to the film. The opening film is still the Magnificient Seven.
I suspect that TIFF couldn’t hold off presenting the film even if they wanted to because there would have been a contract in place when they announced the film being shown in July, before all this really garnered significant attention.
Ohhh! Are you going to go see the Magnificent Seven? I love the original, and some of the actors in the new one. I am hoping that it is a really good remake.
This is the same business that pushes Roman Pulanski films everytime he’s up for a movie and he was convicted of rape. It will be interesting to see the fall-out in a post Bill Cosby world. I am so disappointed, I can’t even speak. I was looking forward to supporting Nate and this movie. His response should have been a lot more apologetic. I do believe that people, with age and experience, can look back at their past behavior and sincerely be regretful of the hurt they’ve caused someone. I can get behind that and look past their transgressions. But DO NOT call yourself a victim. I could understand if he were wrongfullly accused, but he was found innocent on a technicality. His response should have said that when I was young, I had certain perceptions of myself and sex and (if true) didn’t understand the fine line of consent. I let my ego lead me and I thought that I had the right to have sex with someone I had a sexual relationship before. It was arrogant of me, selfish of me and everyday I live with that decision. That’s not the person I want to be and it’s not the person I am now. I’ve learned so much from my mistake and we need our young men to understand the definition of no. I regret what my actions have cost Jane Doe and her family.” He’s been fond innocent in a court of law. Admiting he made a bad decision, wouldn’t have cost him anything. Or maybe, he’s afraid of any civil actions from the family. I am so disappointed in this jerk. I was so proud of what he’d accomplished. I can’t in good conscience, give him any of my dollars.
Heck, i would have settled for him acknowledging that his actions caused another human being harm and he was sorry for that.
Which is essentially saying what you are saying, but for me the sticking point is his refusal to acknowledge ANY harm his decisions AND actions caused and continue to cause the family.
And then compounds the error by using the females in his life as human shields.
You are all right in this. I was in no way absoloving him from that, just forgot to mention it. The rape itself and then serving her up on a platter to his friends is unforgivable. I discussed this with someone and they put in clear perspective: Jane Doe trusted Nate as someone she had previously given her body to and did felt secure that this man would protect her. He violated her body and her trust. It’s a shame he doesn’t have the capacity to sincerely look inside himself and see the wrong in what they did to her. Why can’t he see it? He’s bringing up his wife, daughters, mother, and sisters…. what if the same thing happened to them?
You are absolutely right, but I have a problem with the apology you wrote for him: he might’ ve been unaware of the consent issue, but as far as I understand, he didn’ t just have sex with the unconscious girl, he had sex with an unconscious girl, passed her to his friend who raped her as well, and also invited another guy who turned it down and fled. Inviting other people to the party isn’ t a misjudgement. As it isn’ t stalking your victim for months.
Exactly this. He WAVED on his friends to join in on the “fun” then victimized her AGAIN by stalking her, publicly shaming her, essentially forcing her to leave campus, and eventually drove her to take her own life.
Let’s not pretend that this was one drunken night where consent was not properly sought. There’s a WHOLE lot of other things that happened during their sexual encounter and during the months afterwards that prove this guy was an unremorseful, arrogant bully in addition to being a rapist.
Yup! This isn’ t two drunk idiots going with the flow and realizing the day after that maybe it wasn’ t the best idea ever. This is a man who considers a woman the same way as cattle and who is perfectly fine not only to use her, but to share her with his bros and with total strangers because he is more entitled to decide the best use of her body than her. I mean, why even waiting for her to be awake to ask if she is ok with threesomes, let’ s use her while she’ s unconscious, it’ s a lot easier for me!
So while I see the point you are making Iknowwhatboyslike, and I would agree with you if proofs were given that he was just a young idiot who couldn’ t see the line between consensual and rape, this is not a thin, blurred line.
Listen, listen, he only lead and organized the gang rape and subsequent stalking, harassment, and shaming campaign campus-wide of a woman, driving her to two contemporaneous suicide attempts, and a successful suicide a decade later.
It’s not like he ran over, you know, a dog.
Perspective.
Omg I love you for this snark….took the words right out my mouth.
To add to that snark. We have that disclaimer @ the end of every film “No animals were harmed during the filming of this movie”.
And every time I have to watch YET ANOTHER movie where the rape, torture, murder of a woman is the catalyst that drives the journey for the Male Hero, I find myself looking for a similar disclaimer as the credits roll “No Woman was raped/harmed during the filming of this movie”
Nothing matters in Hollywood anymore. Rape, drunken driving, assaulting people…Hollywood forgives everything for the almighty dollar. I will not see this film not only because he and his friend raped a woman who killed herself but also because I am sick of slavery movies.
It’s not just a slavery film. It’s about Nat Turner who led a slave rebellion. That’s why the film was so important.
still not seeing it. I don’t support rapists. i’ll read a book instead.
I didn’t say you should see it. I said it wasn’t just another slavery film.
I’m hearing that the screenplay is not accurate. That the rape of a slave by a white man drives the revolt.
And that is one of my pet peeves in the book of Hollywood tropes – That the brutal victimization of a woman is needed to jump start the story of the male protagonist. And I am utterly weary of that trope.
Especially when that trope was used, in this case, by two actual rapists.
And BET links a NYT article confirming my suspicions of using rape as a plot catalyst:
“A New York Times article sheds light on the film’s highly questionable plot, in which Nat Turner’s slave rebellion is spurred by the gang rape of his wife by white men. “As more people will discover when they see the film, which is scheduled to open on Oct. 7 in more than 1,500 theaters, Mr. Parker’s script uses gang rape as a central story point, though the attack is not explicitly shown,” the article reads. “The film looks at the slave revolt Turner led in Virginia in 1831, but a storytelling device — the brutal assault by white men on Turner’s wife — feeds a rage that sets the rebellion in motion.” ”
This is troubling on many levels. For one, history shows that Turner never acknowledged having a wife. There are records that indicate Turner’s owner, Samuel Turner, married him to a slave named Cherry, but that he likely didn’t consider the marriage valid and Nat never mentioned the marriage in his writings.
Secondly, for the film to hinge on a rape scene, given Parker’s history, might be uncomfortable for audiences.
Lastly, Turner’s rebellion was, according to his own writings, based on spiritual visions. “In a seventh vision, Nat Turner saw a holy war and believed he was commanded to take up arms against his oppressors,” according to historians.”
http://www.bet.com/celebrities/news/2016/08/19/nate-parker-birth-of-a-nation-controversy.html
With this scandal surrounding Nate Parker I just don’t see this film going anywhere. Also the amount on journo’s at tiff hoping to speak w him is probably gonna be insane, and this’ll be my first time volunteering for tiff
It will be huge because it’s an “important” film, as they say. Hollywood supports rapists and women beaters because the almighty dollar is all that counts.
Hopefully there will be protests at the screening. It’s the least he deserves. Inside Edition had a rerun of an interview with the victim last night that she gave in 2002. She was hounded and frightened of going out or anywhere alone. It made my heart ache watching it, and I can only hope her family have strength and courage.
I personally can’t see the Oscars awarding him after the big spotlight performance of The Hunting Ground at this year’s ceremony, either.
I don’t see why there should be a protest at this screening. After all, there’s never protests at Woody Allen’ or Polanski films. If Cafe Society screens, should people protest there too?
Not Anahit, but I would absolutely support people protesting Cafe Society. In fact, that would immensely brighten my day and give me some hope for our (no pun intended) society.
It’ll be interesting to see how this story plays out over the next awards season. I don’t think the conspiracy some people are peddling on Twitter that he’ll be taken down because he’s a successful black man holds any value. Almost all the reporters at Sundance knew about this rape trial ‘they’ve been saying as much in the articles that came out over the past few days’ and they all unanimously ignored it in favor of talking about he film and the recored breaking deal. I’m sure Sony knew about it as well and that’s why they did those interviews with Variety and deadline, which are notoriously friendly publications. Just look at the way they talked about the case when interviewing Parker.
And this is different from Polanski and Allen because Parker has no weight in Hollywood just yet. He’s not a star or an ‘artist’ the way these two were hailed as for much of their careers. Not to mention that both their cases played out in a time before social media and twitter in particular helped people voice their opinions openly.
And they were just the directors. If you look at the marketing plan for Birth of A Nation, it’s clear that Sony wanted him to be front and center for the whole thing. He’s the star of the movie, produced it, wrote it and directed it. They can’t keep him away from the press to avoid the drama. One of the pivotal points in the movie is a rape. How do you talk about that? How do you have someone like Gabrielle Union, an outspoken survivor of sexual assault, to get out there and talk about this movie after all this?
I don’t think we should be calling for Parker to be forgiven like Allen or Polanski. We should be calling for all of them to never work again.
The movie should be released, there’s a lot of work from other people involved (who probably didn’t know about Parker’s past unlike Woody Allen’s actors), but building an awards campaign around it in the light of recent evidence would be a wrong and cringeworthy move for Fox Searchlight. I know money talks, but releasing it on a smaller platform and keeping Parker away from any promo could save the studio its reputation and some money.
Funny enough, I feel like its not that he raped someone, its that he isn’t sorry. If in his statement he had stated exactly what he did, apologized to the victim and donated the film profits or at least his share of them to anti rape charities I would have been satisfied,personally.
And watched the movie with a clear conscience.Ofcourse I’m not the victim,I feel horrible for her.
Sorry for me it’s the rape. I don’t care how “sorry” he could be that doesn’t change the fact that he rape her, invited his friends to have sex with her while unconscious and then stalked and harassed her afterwards. Saying sorry or being sorry doesn’t grant them a free pass or make up for what they did.
The victim killed herself because of what he and his friends did, so a sorry won’t do for a clear consensus to see this movie.
i would like to hear a reporter ask Nate how he would feel if a man did to his daughter what he did to the victim. how he would like to see the man punished. he keeps hiding behind his sisters, his daughters and other women. let’s hear what he thinks about the same treatment for them.
YES!!! My thoughts exactly, stop using them as shield and start thinking about what if they meet someone like you, Nate, would your stance change or would you blame them like you do your victim. A$$HOLE.
No one ever asks that question to rapists or rapist apologists in public, and it should be asked. I suspect they would go apes**t if something like that happened to a member of their family, but you need to understand that they are special cases because they are THEIR family. And so they are right and innocent no matter what.
It’s incredible isn’t it? I mean, it’s the OBVIOUS question if an abuser decides to show off his links to the women of his life as proof of not being bad to women.
He even told his victim he couldn’t possibly have done what he did … Because he has a sister. He’s been using that line for a looong time.
And that he is a man of faith. Pls don’t forget that…
so this is the Last time I click on a Nate Parker Article, I made my good peace with the fact that IDC if the Movie tanks in any way ( this is so Unimportant when placed against the life of a woman that lost herself after a HORRIFIC Violation) or if his career goes down the tubes or not, I’ve yet to be let down or felt in any way deprived by my consistent and absolute blockage of Fists Brown or R. Kelly in my life, this too can go in the same bin
Because of this case we have been talking about other examples of how Hollywood spinned allegations of abuse to protect their “artists” and investments. Somehow, this time it feels different. There’s more scrutiny (social media yey!) and even though there’s a lot of work to do, sexual abuse is seen differently by society and courts in comparison to the cases usually used as a comparable example. On buzzfeed I read an article that actually explained those differences in a very eloquent way and debunked what Parker as shared about it.
I really suggest you go read it.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/annehelenpetersen/nate-parkers-alleged-rape-and-the-limits-of-hollywood-damage?utm_term=.mrjOvOQrYq#.kmOP2PNZ1l
So glad you shared this…great article!!
Too bad Parker. Karma is a bitch.
Karma ?
He sold his distribution rights to Fox Searchlight for $17.5M.
His victim was raped and took her life.
So what did she do in her past that resulted in her becoming a rape victim? Karma?
Karma does not exist,IMO
Eh, I wouldn’t be surprised if this seriously damages his bankability in Hollywood. The next few movies are the true test.
It’s really gross how various major entertainment news outlets are shilling so hard for this guy. There have been multiple articles in the Hollywood Reporter and People Magazine making excuse after excuse for this abject narcissist.
They are trying to tell the general public “Pay no attention, move along now, and hey isn’t this a great movie?” but the disgusted and outraged comments from both women and men show that this time around, people aren’t buying it.
A rape scene is featured a pivotal point in this movie, the director and his best friend screenwriter committed a rape, and yet we’re all just supposed to ignore that fact and be like “Wow that was such a great movie! Yay!” Puh-leeze.
The Holywood Reporter practically mapped out a plan for him to SURVIVE this SEX SCANDAL. Yeah, rape is considered a sex scandal now…
I hope they all burn in hell.
He gives me the serious creeps. I would find it really hard to watch his movie/support him/take him seriously thinking he’s the kind of guy who, convicted by a court of law or not, has sex with an unconscious woman and invites his friends to join in.
MONSTER.
He lied to the poor girl about how many people forced themselves on her that night. She had to beg for the truth to come out. The jury only saved this guy because there was some oral exchange between them the night before. Hence she could not have gotten raped by him!
Sickening.
Then the entire campus, students, coaches… Everyone!, vilified, harassed and ganged up on her. Why? Because she was white, and alone. She must have been racist and lying! The bullying ended her life. And now, he is the new golden boy of civil rights and racial justice!
I hope he suffers miserably. For the blood of that poor girl is on his hands. I hope nobody gets to see this film.
Repulsive in every way.
Is just a woman’s life we’re talking about, guys. Society has never valued that very much.
Hollywood itself sickens me. It’s stalwart, steadfast defense and protection of its rapists and other sex offenders is the height of misogyny, and the fact that they put money *so far* before any morals or ethics is shameful. They protect their “artists” at the cost of other, apparently dispensable, destroyed human lives. This whole story saddens me beyond words…Also, I have *no* doubt that Nate has known about this woman’s suicide for 4 years; it is certainly not just “news” to him. Horrifying story, exposing a glaring lack of humanity, all around.