Busy Philipps: Quentin Tarantino you are f-ing canceled

wenn33546886

Busy Philipps has no problem saying what’s on her mind and right now, it’s Quentin Tarantino. As Kaiser reported yesterday, audio of Tarantino claiming Roman Polanski’s victim “wanted to have it” resurfaced after Uma Thurman revealed he had spit on her, choked her with a chain, and had her do a dangerous stunt that left her with permanent damage. I’d never known about the Stern interview before yesterday and I’ll be honest, I still haven’t listened to it. I don’t need to hear it to be incensed by his comments. Busy did listen to the interview and although she isn’t asking everyone else to, she does want to make sure everyone knows what Tarantino said. According to a series of tweets Busy posted on Monday, she is done with the director in every way. NSFW – language, just in case you didn’t get that from the headline.

I think a lot of people feel like Busy does about this. A man would go to such lengths to protect a person he finds talented, he’d put the onus of a sexual crime on a 13-year old girl who had been drugged. Unbelievable. Busy’s tweet that she’d been told to audition in short shorts and flip-flops for Tarantino almost sounded like a trigger. It reminded me of when Rose McGowan posted Adam Sandler’s awful audition demands. I won’t have any problem adding Tarantino to the list of people I don’t watch/support. I think Kill Bill Vol. 1 was the last thing I saw of his anyway. I assume he will find a friendly outlet to publish his side, just like he did after Uma’s interview but I honestly can’t think of anything he could say that would make this better. Even an apology would ring hollow. So, I’m all for Busy for calling him out on it in the way she did. Because the truth is, Tarantino might be inconvenienced by this but ultimately work will come find him while talented people like Busy have to hustle every day.

Busy’s day did improve, though, because she got one of Kim Kardashian’s promotional packages. She’s a “Bae” btw. I don’t care about the perfume itself, but I’d love to get my hands on that chocolate heart.

wenn32474597

wenn33591032

wenn33669541

Photo credit: WENN Photos and Twitter

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

96 Responses to “Busy Philipps: Quentin Tarantino you are f-ing canceled”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Ayra. says:

    While I was never a huge Tarantino fan, I maybe watched a small handful of his movies and my opinion of him progressively got worse after Weinstein, this week I finally read up on him and…. DAMN.

    I truthfully had no idea that he was so freaking deranged, and it’s chalked up as him being a talented director and method acting for the actors.

    • SilverUnicorn says:

      I had never seen one of his movies until Django Unchained (then I also checked Kill Bill and could hardly stomach it). I also saw The Hateful 8 later on.

      The treatment of women in all the movies is AWFUL.
      Someone must have forgotten that Kerry Washington has her face smeared with Leonardo Di Caprio’s blood in the movie (a very disgusting scene!); Jennifer Jason Leigh gets beaten up for laughs and fun in the hateful 8…

      • LAK says:

        His early films were good, but he also had a very good producer to rein him in. After KILL BILL, they made one more film together, INGLORIOUS BASTERDS, before parting ways. Every film without that producer has been a study in self indulgence for QT was left free to explore every idea that popped into his head unchecked.

        I watch his later films with dismay because they needed to be edited (alot) and curated better. You can see what he was trying to do, but with no one to rein him in, it is all self indulgence and unnecessary.

        Mind you, with no one to stop him, it reveals more about QT than he realises.

      • SilverUnicorn says:

        “Mind you, with no one to stop him, it reveals more about QT than he realises.”

        At this point, I hope they stop him from making movies altogether.
        But he’s white and male, so it’s just wishful thinking, isn’t it? :-/

      • LAK says:

        He has said he will retire from hollywood after ten films. The Manson film is number 9.

        Sadly, he will get the financing for that as well as no 10.

      • Bridget says:

        @LAK: you can tell the difference too. QT needed someone to help edit and produce, because otherwise he falls into self indulgence. I saw Hateful 8, and both the husband and I had the same reaction – the movie felt like it was still in draft form. It was self indulgent and QT’s worst impulses went unchecked.

        That’s been the through line with everything that’s come out – he’s so concerned with the movie and his vision and authenticity, that he prioritized it over people. I don’t think he’s a sadist, I think he’s the pinnacle of white male privilege.

      • ORIGINAL T.C. says:

        His editor was a woman. She passed away I think after NGLORIOUS BASTERDS. She was the one that would pull him in.

    • Morning Coffee says:

      I think the last Tarantino movie I watched was likely my first – Pulp Fiction. I just don’t find horrific violence and the word FUCK used ad nauseum to be entertainment.

      • blondems says:

        I agree with you completely @MorningCoffee. I struggled through Pulp Fiction because I was a teenager and it was supposed to be ‘cool’ and wondered why I was the only one who didn’t seem to like it.

        I only got up to the part in the first Kill Bill when she gets out of the hospital and sees the ‘P*ssy Wagon.’ It got a laugh as I recall which just disgusted me. Like, how funny that the guy who violates a comatose woman has this on his car! I stopped watching and never saw another…

      • Hazel says:

        Me, too. Well, I saw Reservoir Dogs (on dvd, thank goodness, so I could fast forward thru the torture scene) then Pulp Fiction. His movies are just not for me.
        Good for Busy.

      • Ksenia says:

        Agree, @Morning Coffee. I could never fathom or fall into the hype around QT—I too saw only “Pulp Fiction,” and a few scraps of his later films–maybe five minutes each–of some of his later movies. The brutality, the violent misogyny, the unpleasant and uninteresting characters, the poor editing, the absurd and lengthy self indulgence—these were just a few of my problems with his films. Plus, his giving himself a kind of “artistic license” (his raw arrogance grates on me!) by having characters speak the “n” word like KKK members every other minute just enrages me. I’m not surprised by this story of Uma’s; there has always seemed something very sadistic, and domineering,, about QT. Would be delighted to see his “artistic” license” taken from him permanently.

      • Brian Brown says:

        Check out Jackie Brown. I love that film. It’s one of his best actually.
        I like the Kill Bill films.
        Pulp Fiction and Reservoir Dogs are not my cup of tea.
        But I draw the freaking line at The Hateful 8. It literally was just an excuse for him to have characters say the N word over and over and over again. So distasteful and unnecessary.

  2. Liberty says:

    Good for her. His comments are insane, disgusting. Cancelled.

  3. Cee says:

    I feel her anger. She’s so outspoken and passionate when she gets going.

    Tarantino is cancelled along with any idiot who comes to his defence.

  4. Nicole says:

    Word Busy. I stopped watching his movies after he tried to say he has a “pass” to say the N word anytime. Nope.

  5. Sam the Pink says:

    He will have his defenders because of “the art.” Because he makes movies that the right people enjoy. That’s why.

    I’m tired of people trying to justify looking past abuse for art. You know what? Fuck your art. I don’t care if you’re the greatest filmmaker of a generation, if you write the great American novel or if you can create a painting that can bring people to tears. I’ve said it before, but it bears repeating – there is no piece of art on this planet that is worth more than human suffering. Who cares about his art, or his process, or his feelings.

    • SilverUnicorn says:

      “Fuck your art. I don’t care if you’re the greatest filmmaker of a generation, if you write the great American novel or if you can create a painting that can bring people to tears.”

      THIS.
      And the equivalence ‘tortured/abusive artist=marvellous art’ should be binned forever!

    • Jeannie says:

      This is so true!

    • Surely Wolfbeak says:

      Most of the people defending Polanski, Allen, and their ilk are doing it because they don’t want to give up their art, not because they really believe these men are guiltless, whether they admit to themselves or not. People can still watch Rosemary’s Baby, or Annie Hall, but they need to do it in context, aware that this art was made by monsters, the same way people watch Birth of a Nation, or Triumph of the Will.

      • Otaku Fairy says:

        “People can still watch Rosemary’s Baby, or Annie Hall, but they need to do it in context, aware that this art was made by monsters, the same way people watch Birth of a Nation, or Triumph of the Will.” That’s how I feel most of the time about this issue of who other people work with or who’s work they partake in. It doesn’t require you to defend the indefensible. But for a lot of the people who make it their mission to defend the Polanskis and Allens of the world, it’s not just about not wanting to give up their art. It’s about attitudes they have about women and abuse allegations in general.

    • BengalCat2000 says:

      I had a really hard time with Woody Allen. His movies were so special to me and I associate them with a loved one who passed away. But I’m happy the floodgates are finally opening and these people are being exposed.
      #FuckYourArt

      • Sam the Pink says:

        Me too – his early stuff (Sleeper, Take the Money and Run, Everything You ever wanted to know about sex, etc.) I adored those films – but I can’t watch them now. Because I know better. Regardless of whether the art has anything to do with his actions. Because I know if I watch those films, I’m basically saying “Well, yeah, but….” And there can be no buts when it comes to things like rape, molestation and abuse. You do it, you deserve to be a pariah. And I don’t think that’s excessive. This keeps happening, people keep getting away with it. Maybe it’s time for some hard lines to get drawn. I’m for it.

      • Kitten says:

        I don’t care for most of his movies, but I watched Midnight in Paris in a really cute old-fashioned theater near my hometown with my French mother and it was such a special experience for me. I love Paris (like a lot of people) and I loved that movie. It’s hard to let that stuff go but the truth is that his movies are forever tainted by his actions so I’m not sure I’d even be able to enjoy Midnight In Paris the way I did back then, anyway.

      • milla says:

        I have no problem with movies i saw before i knew what i know now. Especially since Allen and Polanski made their best movies before they became child molesters.

        As for qt, i didn’t bother after the 90s. So i saw maybe 3 or 4 movies. They are all the same. You see one, you’ve seen it all.

        Artists are well known to be creeps. Lennon, Gaye, MJ, Hitchcock, Picasso, they will always get a pass.

  6. littlemissnaughty says:

    And this is why I didn’t care for his apology. Fake as f*ck. Is there an insult, a cliché, a statement more indicative of a misogynist d*ckface than “She wanted it.” I say there isn’t.

  7. hindulovegod says:

    I’m with Busy. It’s insane to me that Franco was the breakout star of Freaks and Geeks. He was the least interesting actor on that show.

  8. BaronSamedi says:

    It’s cool that she’s canceling Tarantino. I would love it even more if she mentioned the people Uma Thurman herself specifically called out as the ones SHE would like to be held responsible.

    Once more all the outrage is about the shiny, famous target while the cochroaches behind the scenes scuttle back into the shadows. I can’t help but feel like this is a lot of performative outrage that will ultimately not lead to much change in the long run.

    The agent who harassed Terry Crews has his job back, the agent Uma Thurman called out seems to get no pushback at all, etc.

    Even if Tarantino never makes another movie (which is unlikely) these men will still do their thing behind the scenes. So, yeah, good for Busy for making a spectacle about canceling Tarantino – let me know when she talks about the other guys.

    • Emmlo says:

      In these tweets, Busy is responding to QT’s defense of Roman Polanski and his blaming Polanski’s 13yo victim. She mentions Uma’s abuse as context but that’s not the focus of her ire at this moment and I don’t blame her.

      • BaronSamedi says:

        Oh, thanks for that correction then. Totally worthy of canceling him over – no problem with that. It’s just… the reason this interview from 2013 (I believe) was dug up again at all is the Uma situation so I feel it’s all connected.

        I just think it will all stop at canceling Tarantino you know? And it may be justified and right but at the end of the day all he really did is be a fucked up representation of rape culture at its finest. It is systemic and prevalent and the fact that Polanski never went to jail proves that the idea of the ‘Lolita’ seducing an older man is STILL an acceptable storyline. Scott Baio is currently trying to run the same defense on Nicole Eggert.

        I’m not saying don’t be enraged and don’t cancel people. It just feel like that’s the only the conversation happening again. I’m missing the nuanced conversation on how these men got to be the ages they are and STILL think these are ok opinions to have. What keeps going wrong there and how do we change minds?

    • Severin88 says:

      ‘Performative outrage’ ☝️☝️☝️ Excellent.

    • Bridget says:

      I agree. There is plenty to hold QT accountable for. He clearly knew about Weinstein, but felt that his movies were worth the trade off. But the rest? QT is going to be roasted over an interview 15 years ago, but we’re not going to talk about how that viewpoint was so prevalent that Polanski won the damn Best Director Oscar that year? You’re right – he really is the direct representation of rape culture and the way a lot of people thought at the time. I don’t think it means that he needs to be excused, but I feel like all the attention is going to the most famous name, even if it’s on the perimeter. There is a LOT to unpack in what Uma said, and yet the outrage is focused on the famous target. But I feel like when it’s not the names that people want to discuss, it gets glossed over. She mentioned CAA? People are only interested when it’s Reese Witherspoon’s husband. It’ll be interesting when the Boston Globe publishes their piece on CAA.

      • Sky23 says:

        I think CAA is not getting the attention because look at the amount of celebrities they represent non of them are going to speak out against their agency. They also have great PR and are blocking the media from talking about it. Promising exclusive pictures and interview of celebrities goes along way to keep some media Outlets silent.

      • Kitten says:

        I agree with you completely, Bridget. Tarantino is problematic AF but he is just one player in a major and pervasive problem–one that is not exclusive to Hollywood, by the way.

      • BBCB says:

        So why don’t we call out everyone who defended Polanski at the time of The Pianist then, Bridget? Weren’t they normalizing it? Honestly of course the most famous people are getting called out. You are such a contrarian on all your comments Bridget.

    • magnoliarose says:

      I am so with you about this.
      I find outrage sort of hollow for me lately. There are so many liars and people who have said horrible things and done worse who were just lucky enough never to have it recorded. So situations like this are useless. Didn’t she work with Franco on Freaks and Geeks? And an episode of Entourage with Piven? I am a little more interested in HER personal experiences if she chooses to share.
      She canceled QT and…I guess I am confused about why she is so angry at QT. I fail to see what this accomplishes for her or how it changes anything. She is free to say what she wants of course. I don’t think to silence anyone is ever the answer, but I am just tired of these things getting people all riled up and righteous when the tiny little peeps about Woody Allen just a month ago were like dragging the unwilling an inch forward.

      I want the perps and the complicit people discussed with these kinds of headlines and this sort of coverage. It is like the aristocratic habit of saying how TERRIBLE it is the weather is chilly for a ride but it is UNFORTUNATE a plane crashed in the Atlantic killing 200. ?

      QT was a coked out misogynistic mess who lifted his ideas from Asian cinema, Blaxploitation, and small foreign films since the Reservoir Dogs. He’s been a whacked overrated hipster auteur from jump street. NOW everyone is pearl-clutching from what? Shock? Has he ever NOT been repulsive? Did anyone ever think he didn’t have a fetish for violence against women on screen? I always thought that is what the fanboys loved so much about him.

      This is just too much Hollywood piling on while ignoring the elephant in the room and being self-congratulatory in the process.
      Some days they work my nerves with their “courage”. On social media of course. Because nothing is real if it isn’t tweeted.

  9. Emmlo says:

    I love Busy and have followed her career since the Dawson’s Creek Days. She is 100% correct about Quentin and I love her for speaking out. Ellen Pompeo called Busy her hero for these tweets. ❤️❤️❤️

  10. Gaby says:

    Ok, I just can’t deal with Tarantino anymore.

    Specially given the timeline between Uma’s and Daryl Hannah’s incidents.

    Uma told him about Harvey *before* they even started shooting Kill Bill, Daryl Hannah told him what Harvey had done to her during promotion for Kill Bill vol. 2, and he STILL chose to work with Weinstein for his future projects.
    He may have tried to stand up for Uma, but he damn well knew it wasn’t an isolated case when Hannah talked to him, and again he chose his connections over the well being of women that worked for him.

    Canceled!

  11. QueenB says:

    When Howard Stern is the voice of reason you gotta start thinking about your opinions, Quentin.

  12. adastraperaspera says:

    So glad she is speaking out. He is gross.

  13. Redgrl says:

    He just got so self indulgent with his last movies – I despised Hateful 8 – Jennifer Jason Leigh’s character was just a torture porn punching bag. Didn’t realize how deep this ran with him. Canceled.

    • Surely Wolfbeak says:

      I was done with him after Django Unchained. I don’t feel that his films have the intellectual depth people project onto them. Why didn’t they get out of the cage at the end of the movie? Because Quentin Tarantino wrote it that way!

  14. Maya says:

    I hope you all also cancel those people who continue to support these vile creatures.

    Leo D has signed up to act in his next movie, Margot Robbie & Brad Pitt are also rumoured to have signed on.

    • QueenB says:

      Im very interested to see how they will react. This is all fresh in the news they can claim they had no idea like with Woody Allen.

      • Maya says:

        Exactly – I am going to wait and see how they are going to react/handle this.

      • Bridget says:

        I sincerely hope that this movie is going to be scrapped. SOMEONE has to read the room, right?

      • littlemissnaughty says:

        I have a terrible feeling that the only one who will/would be asked is Margot. Who – if this happens – might actually go with the “We had great conversations about this, he gets it now. I totally educated him and turned him into an ally.” route. I will vomit.

      • magnoliarose says:

        In the era of 45 Bridget, our collective stamina for anger and our ability to maintain outrage are greatly diminished.

        The next big lying assaulter will be outed soon (I hope) and this story will be forgotten. Our neurotransmitters and cortisol levels are destroyed at this point.

      • Parigo says:

        What littlemissnaughy said. ONLY Margot will get the hard questions and will have to justify while Leo with his lifetime of grossness will skate by.

    • Otaku Fairy says:

      Quentin is clearly problematic AF, but because as far as we know he hasn’t actually sexually assaulted someone himself, I don’t think this needs to go as far as canceling people for working with him. If we start demanding that actresses and others in the entertainment industry reject work with every shitty man with money and power, that’s going to be a lot of lost work and a lot of women who can’t sit with us. Pessimistic, but true.

      • Jayna says:

        Absolute truth spoken here.

        And he’s an asshole in the way he spoke about the Polanski deal, very disgusting, but basically Hollywood had a lot of people standing in support of Polanski. So are their views much different or, worse, indifference for the sake of great art? And his victim has been out there supporting Polanski for a long time, in support of his nomination, in support of him winning, in support of him coming back. That he has paid society already for what he did. She has more hate towards the media and the justice system for what happened to her than him. She even stated that she would rather go through what happened with him again than ever testify in front of a grand jury. She has said she was happy with the deal cut with him and that the judge agreed, and then went back on it, and that all of the events after that, the justice system, the media intrusion, on and on, hurt her life more. She has said he served his time and should be able to work here.

        So his gross opinion about the Polanski rape disgusts me, especially in the way he said it, but supporting Polanksi came from a lot of women and men in the industry. I mean, let’s remember who delivered the Oscar to Polanski at a film festival in France. Harrison Ford. There’s the photo of them smiling together. Who is a huge supporter of his coming back? The great Martiin Scorsese. The list goes on and on.

        But, no, I would never cancel someone that worked for Quentin in the least and don’t get people that do. Because in that case cancel every single person that supported Polanski. Cancel every violent movie. Tons of directors are assholes or a pain to work with. Quentin hasn’t sexually assaulted a woman. He’s just a jerk, but on-set actors and actresses seem to like working for him. I don’t hold that against them. Again, I don’t watch his movies, because they aren’t the kind that I like. But I know people that love his movies.

  15. SM says:

    A casting call requiring women wear shorts and flip flops? Just a small addition to confirm he is a pervert with a fetish for sexualised violence and he continues to make a carrer out of it. This is why he also was ok with HW being a sexual predator.

    • MostlyMegan says:

      It was probably for the character Melanie in Jackie Browne, as the character’s costume was cutoffs and flipflops. So I don’t see the big deal there. The character was meant to be a super hot surfer chic with an amazing body – that is part of the script.

      • Save Mueller says:

        I’m guessing it was for Death Proof based on the timeline. Not that it changes anything.

    • Lex says:

      He has a known foot fetish also!

  16. Loo says:

    Not defending QT, what he and others said 15 years ago to defend Roman Polanski was vile but I wouldn’t compare this to a Woody Allen or Roman Polanski situation because he’s not being accused of sexually harassing or assaulting anyone. Your mileage may vary on whether it’s just as bad but it’s not the same thing and I refuse to say that it is.

    Now this is not coming from some blind fan of his. I think he’s he’s gone downhill as a filmmaker but those 15 year old words which a lot of Hollywood agreed with, are not going to kill his career.

  17. Bridget says:

    2003, the year that the QT interview came out, is the same year that Polanski won the Best Director Oscar. But yeah, Tarantino is the problem here.

    • Sam the Pink says:

      Why can’t they BOTH be problems? If MeToo has been good about anything, it’s been going beyond calling out individuals and pointing to how the whole system permits this to keep happening.

      Nobody is saying to ignore Polanski. But those who defend evil, who enable evil, deserve their comeuppance as well. That’s like saying that since Larry Nassar is behind bars, let’s focus on him and not the bevy of enablers – who, i remind you, had multiple chances to step in and save an untold numbers of girls from abuse.

      Pursuing the criminal doesn’t mean you take your eyes off the accomplices.

      • Bridget says:

        My point is that they’re NOT both problems. There’s this flood of public condemnation of QT, and yet very litttle discussion about anything else. As someone pointed out above, people are only interested in discussing the most famous name, and it’s all OUTRAGE. Tarantino is spouting off a viewpoint that was at the time so prevalent that Polanski was given the highest honor by Hollywood that year. A lot had to go into that snow job of a campaign. A lot of people who would have absolutely known better advocated for Polanski. We’re not talking about them, though. It’s the big names on the periphery (I swear, if one more person talks about Meryl Streep leading the applause I’m going to scream) that get all the outrage. Notice how no one is talking about the names that Uma specifacally checked as being responsible?

      • magnoliarose says:

        Because he isn’t an accomplice.
        The accomplices would be Angelica Houston, and I can’t recall the other person who was in the house at the time of the assault. I don’t blame Angelica. It made me pause for a second, but that is it.
        What he said was stupid and icky, but they were words. Not even close to being an accomplice or complicit since the crime happened when QT was a child.
        The actions are the problem. Not a creepy interview in 2003.

      • BaronSamedi says:

        But isn’t this exactly what is happening? I actually don’t know any names besides Larry Nassar’s because it feels like they are getting no coverage. Did anyone lose their job over enabling him for all this time? Is anyone even being charged with being an accessory to his crimes? Is there an investigation?

        And yeah, QT said this fucked up shit defending Polanski but obviously ‘Hollywood’ agreed because he got an Oscar that year. We can of course cancel QT now but it won’t change the fact that apparently it was completely acceptable to think this way back then. Too bad for QT that he’s one of the few on the record about it I guess?

        Now everyone gets to feel good about making a big production of canceling QT and then what.

      • Sam the Pink says:

        Bridget: He is excusing the drugging and rape of a CHILD. I personally think a little outrage is quite fine here. Outrage means we still have a sufficient moral compass to realize that his words are vile and indefensible. And please stop conflating the Uma accusations with this interview – they are distinct events that show two distinct nastys to QT’s personality. What happened to Uma is terrible, but, here, we are discussing the RAPE of a CHILD (not sure how many times I can emphasize that for ya). He deserves every single thing he gets right now.

        Magnoliarose: There are 2 kinds of accomplices – those before and after the fact. Emablers ARE accomplices because they allow the offender to go on and potentially repeat the actions. More then one girl was victimized by Polanski (we know of, I think, 3 – God knows how many more). Enablers ARE scum, precisely for reasons like this. They promote excuses, normalization. And I’m sorry, but “stupid” and “icky?” Girl, please. Stupid is blurting out a secret. Icky is a fart joke. QT tried to JUSTIFY CHILD RAPE. That is not stupid. It is not icky. It is vile enabling on a high level. But I’m glad you are detached enough to be able to use such gentle words.

        Baron: The media IS covering the Nassar trial, and lots of people who enabled him are getting forced out – the MSU president, for one. Just because you aren’t following it doesn’t mean it’s not out there.

      • Bridget says:

        @Sam: you’re going off on a tangent.

        The reality is, Tarantino’s Comments didn’t happen in a vacuum. Again – NO ONE is talking about the fact that this viewpoint was so pervasive at the time that Polanski won the Oscar that same year. You can’t say that they can both be problems when only one part is being discussed publicly. As others noted above, Tarantino’s interview is indicative of rape culture and the general acceptance of sexual crimes at the time. Have you seen the Polanski documentary? Did you read how they trotted out his victim to make a statement during his Oscar run? QT is on the periphery but being treated like the main story.

        And Uma’s experience is absolutely germane to this discussion. That’s literally what this entire discussion has been about and why people are discussing this interview in the first place. Why on earth would you say that it isn’t?

      • Sam the Pink says:

        Bridget: a tangent is something unrelated. I’m sticking to talking about QT, so please learn some definitions before making any accusations.

        You claim this viewpoint was pervasive. Well, here’s the thing – nobody else was going on Howard Stern to DEFEND CHILD RAPE. QT did, so why not point it out and hold it against him? That’s like arguing that because not all criminals get caught, we shouldn’t get so worked up when we catch one red-handed. That’s stupid. The fact that some other people feel the same way as QT is not an excuse for QT or a defense. He is the one on tape, again DEFENDING CHILD RAPE. We may know others feel the same way, but we don’t have proof to nail them to the wall. We’ve got the evidence for QT, so why not hold him accountable for it?

        As to my point on Uma – I was pointing out that Uma’s story, while terrible, involves an adult woman and no rape. It reveals QT’s proclivity towards violence towards women and his disregard for her well-being, but it is not a story of sexual violence (her Weinstein story is). This is a story about a defense of something so horrific, any argument about it basically is full evidence of a complete lack of decency.

      • Bridget says:

        And yet I notice that you’re STILL not even discussing my larger point. In fact, your continued insistence is proving it. But kudos for going to Webster.com

      • Hazel says:

        Magnolia rose: I think I recall reading that both Jack Nicholson & Angelica Huston were there at the time.

      • Bridget says:

        I just find it ironic that people are behaving as though Howard Stern interview that no one remembered somehow carries more weight than the highest honor that industry can convey.

      • LV487 says:

        Well, here’s the thing – nobody else was going on Howard Stern to DEFEND CHILD RAPE.

        No, Whoopi Goldberg wasn’t on the Stern show, but she did describe what Samantha went through as “not rape rape.” The grand jury transcripts weren’t available until 2009, up until then, all anyone had was Polanski’s version of that night. Angelica Huston described Samantha as sullen, not looking like a scared 13 year old little thing. She was no help. It wasn’t just Quentin who held this viewpoint.

      • magnoliarose says:

        @Hazel
        Thank you. That makes sense.

        Sam, You are ignoring the point. There is context and a more considerable picture involved. I remember the whitewashing of Roman Polanski. A lot of people who are ordinarily level-headed thought the same way QT did AT THAT TIME. The waters were successfully muddied to the point people started thinking Polanski was the real victim of smears and a lying teenager. We are talking about a part of an interview as if the entire interview was about this one subject.
        Anyone who has read my comments knows I am NOT minimizing what Polanski did. My point is the true story unknown to anyone back then. All of what we see now is a result of recent revelations and untangling of a lot of lies.
        My anger and disgust is directed at Roman Polanski. I only recently read the court documents because they had not been available. His actions offend me more than one voice in a million others that year. You didn’t hear about any protests and riots did you when Polanski won?
        Rape culture is a reality.
        I want this to change with every fiber in my being.
        I just think by focusing on this it makes it easier to do nothing. It is safe and changes nothing.
        It is another form of the Times Up pin. Complicit people are the ones funding his projects and working to make them successful.

    • ORIGINAL T.C. says:

      Never forget: Natalie Portman also signed the petition to release Polanski after he was finally captured. Yeah I’m waiting for CAA and the names Uma dropped to be interviewed or called out on social media. So far *crichets*.

      Oh look: shiny new toy!

    • BBCB says:

      Bridget your comments on this have been awful. QT and others who said that a 13 year old girl was asking for it and a willing accomplice are perpetuating the culture and need to be called out. You are seriously here acting like no one ever has called out Polanski. Of course he was able to still get work for decades, because of the culture and attitude perpetuated by people like Tarantino. Honestly as someone who was assaulted as a teen, your comments on most articles on this site are terrible. Just stop.

      • BBCB says:

        Also, Sam, Magnolia et al… keep doing the Lord’s work. This troglodyte Bridget came after me on a comment I left about this the other day saying Tarantino wasn’t the only one who defended Polanski because there was a huge push to get him an Oscar and other’s defended him. Um did they say 13 year old party girls are asking for it? As someone who went through something similar to Samantha, Bridget’s rebuttal to my comment was triggering. Those who defend assault perpetuate the culture that allows it to continue.

  18. Jess says:

    Good for her. I’ve been a Tarantino fan since Pulp Fiction but he is now canceled. So disgusting. In light of all of this talk of how he treats women in film, it also puts his prospective Sharon Tate movie in a new light. Totally gross.

  19. Amy McLaughlin says:

    Hm I wonder how Busy feels about her BFF Michelle Williams working with Polanski..

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PO35CxpRmow

    • Brian Brown says:

      She would never in a million years have a chance to appear in either one of their films. So, her speaking out here means nothing really for her. Her better-regarded friend on the other hand would actually have something to miss out on. She’ll keep mum.

  20. Snowflake says:

    Hypothetical, if a 13 year old girl wanted it, you are still a POS if you are a grown man and sleep with her.

  21. Nello says:

    Love that she is calling out QT, but her spazing over KKW’s stupid perfume !makes me hate her again.

  22. JA says:

    The flip flop request kinda makes me gag because Tarantino has admitted to a huge foot fetish….he’s EWwwwwwww and cancelled!

  23. Jordan says:

    But will she take a selfie with the victims and make it about her is the burning question.

  24. Chelly says:

    Celebitchy:

    Did you ever cover the story about Nicole Eggert accusing Scott Baio? Only asking cause I’m not sure but I think she filed something w the police about it & he should be canceled as well. Although, I think he kind of is

    • Brian Brown says:

      I think they did several days ago actually.

      • Chelly says:

        No I didn’t see it maybe I didn’t look well enough but I hope they do. His accusations are ridiculous & more social media outlets need to call him out

  25. Pandy says:

    I used to enjoy his OTT violence and dialogue but his last few movies weren’t that great truthfully. His comments on poor Samantha Geiser … I can’t get past that. Never cared for or listened to Stern either. I believe he’s cut from the same cloth.

  26. Rachael says:

    I had the exact same reaction as Busy, so I’m vicariously glad she said it publicly. I’m so furious that I ever even liked his movies. Inglorious Basterds is dead to me now.

  27. EMau says:

    Tarantino is that type of guy who could never get a date in high school, so he made it his mission to get into the film industry, so he could use it to his advantage. He is no better than Weinstein.