James Franco’s accuser: ‘James is absolutely not a Harvey Weinstein’

Embed from Getty Images

James Franco was not nominated for an Oscar for The Disaster Artist. The film didn’t get nominated for Best Picture either, although it did pick up one nomination for Best Adapted Screenplay. This is being read far and wide as the Academy voters hearing about Franco’s sketchy reputation and believing the women who came forward post-Golden Globes. The Oscar noms just happened to come out on the same morning that a few of Franco’s accusers spoke to Good Morning America as well. They say he was not a Weinstein-level monster/predator, but he was exploitative and gross.

Even those accusing James Franco of sexual misconduct don’t necessarily think he’s a monster.

“James is absolutely not a Harvey Weinstein,” Sarah Tither-Kaplan said on “Good Morning America” on Tuesday. “He’s not an unfeeling monster who has no sense of reality.” However, Tither-Kaplan, 26, does believe that Franco, 39, abused his power and influence when teaching at his Studio 4 film school, which made her and four other women who accused the actor of sexual harassment afraid to speak out for years. “I’m shaking,” she said. “Being an actor and working in this industry has been my dream since I was 5 or 6, and I knew that coming forward with this was risking my career.”

Tither-Kaplan reiterated that when she was in Franco’s sex scenes course at the Studio 4 school in Los Angeles, many women felt uncomfortable with the work.

“There were a lot of scenes that were added after we were given the original scripts that I felt — I wished I had more time to consider them or understand the artistic value of them,” she explained. “A lot of times they seemed gratuitous or exploitative … He created an exploitative environment on his sets.”

Fellow accuser Violet Paley, who was in a consensual relationship with Franco when she claimed he pressured her to perform oral sex on him, detailed the alleged incident.

“He kinda like, pushed my head down and was saying, like, ‘C’mon,’” she said, adding that she knows her relationship with the actor complicates her story. “I am regretful,” she said. “I was young. He was a celebrity I looked up to.”

[From Page Six]

I don’t think that Harvey Weinstein should be used as the go-to example of “well, he’s not a total Weinstein.” To be clear, none of it is okay. Sexual harassment, exploitation, abuse, assault and rape are all awful and intolerable. You don’t have to be a Weinstein-esque rapist to make women feel unsafe, to exploit women, to abuse women and to do it all under the guise of being a woke ally. That being said, Violet and Sarah have every right to tell their stories wherever and however they want, and to frame their stories however they want. I still believe that we’ll be hearing more about Franco, and that the LA Times piece came out ahead of schedule because Franco won the Globe. My guess is that media outlets have additional stories but they were waiting to see if Franco got nominated for an Oscar.

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of Getty.

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

21 Responses to “James Franco’s accuser: ‘James is absolutely not a Harvey Weinstein’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. KBB says:

    He wasn’t nominated because he didn’t deserve a nomination. The story came out with only two days left of voting. The allegations likely had very little to no effect on his lack of a nomination.

  2. hmmmm says:

    They cut out the part where the other girl had more specific details about other women and said in some ways he was. It’s really frustrating.

  3. perplexed says:

    “… Franco’s sex scenes course”

    There are actual acting courses for sex scenes? I’m asking this as a serious question.

  4. Tess says:

    Ok he’s not a Weinstein but he IS still a Franco so…

  5. babu says:

    Nope. He is just a very hypocritical creep, sexually preying on less powerful women as their teacher, at work, in his private life and on social media with minors.

    Enough slime already to be cancelled far and wide and forever.

  6. Louise177 says:

    I don’t think James was a shoo-in for a nomination even before the allegations. His wins were for comedy. He would have a tougher in combined categories.

  7. Sigh... says:

    So he’s not “a Weinstein.”
    But more than an “Affleck”…?
    “No” on being a “Spacey,” then?
    Not legacied enough to be a “Hoffman…”
    Maybe kind of a “Rautner”…?
    With shades of a “Louis” thrown in?
    Jury’s still out on what *exactly* an “Ansari” is, right?

    And the list (and shaky defense) just goes on and on…
    (**inhales from my soul**)

  8. K (now K2!) says:

    Well yeah, and Weinstein isn’t Ted Bundy.

    Precisely how low does the bar have to be?