Amandla Stenberg DM’d a NYT critic about her review, then all hell broke loose

Okay, I was only halfway paying attention to this Amandla Stenberg-Lena Wilson controversy last week and whenever I saw a new headline about it, I was like “is this still happening?” At best, this is all some huge misunderstanding. At worst, it’s a queer New York Times critic attacking a young queer woman of color over the younger woman’s reaction to a piece of criticism? This is just… so unnecessary, all of it. The story began when Lena Wilson watched and wrote a New York Times review of Bodies Bodies Bodies. Amandla, who stars in the ensemble horror movie, “clapped back” at Wilson via a DM. Wilson then posted Amandla’s DM on her public profile and suggested that Amandla was homophobic? It kept going and going too.

Amandla Stenberg took to Instagram Stories on Thursday to clarify why she sent a pointed DM to NYT’s Lena Wilson after the critic posted their back-and-forth on Twitter late last night. It has since inspired hundreds of comments about everything from homophobia to how critics write about actresses and their bodies, particularly Black women.

“Ur review was great, maybe if you had gotten your eyes off my tits you could’ve watched the movie,” Stenberg wrote to Wilson on Aug. 8. The DM was in direct reference to this line from Wilson’s review: “The only thing that really sets Bodies Bodies Bodies apart is its place in the A24 hype machine, where it doubles as a 95-minute advertisement for cleavage and Charli XCX’s latest single.”

Wilson responded by saying that she’s “generally a big fan of your work, but this sure is something. Really wishing you well in your career and life.” She then took the exchange public by posting it on Twitter and questioning whether Stenberg also sent messages to critics Alison Willmore of New York Magazine/Vulture, Justin Chang of the Los Angeles Times or Anthony Lane of The New Yorker, all of whom reviewed Bodies Bodies Bodies. (Wilson, who blocked Stenberg on Instagram, took her Twitter private Thursday afternoon.)

[From THR]

After that, Amandla went on her IG Stories and posted her reaction to Wilson’s comments, and addressed why she DM’d Wilson in the first place. Amandla said in part:

“I just thought I would get out here really quickly cuz I’m receiving a lot of commentary on the internet for being a very naughty girl and sending a DM that I thought was hilarious. I’m proud that a piece of work that I was part of was described as such in such a renowned publication. That is a really unique experience that I get to have.”

She continued by saying that because both she and Wilson are gay, “I thought that, as gay people, we would both find this comment funny. I was also curious to know why Lena would say such a statement, but Lena decided to publish it and say that I am homophobic for saying that.” Wilson did post that on Twitter, writing, “Always weird when the homophobia is coming from inside the house.”

Aside from that, Stenberg said that the amount of commentary she’s fielded about her breasts “is so extreme” and has been happening since she was a teenager. “I could literally be wearing a t-shirt and just because of the size of my boobs, there will be some sort of sexualization or commentary on my chest…”

“Lena, I thought your review was hilarious. I thought my DM was funny. I did not mean to harass you and I do not wish you any harm. You are allowed to have your criticisms on my work and I’m allowed to have my criticisms of your work, and that is A-OK with me. I wish you the best anyways. Thanks to anyone who has gone to see our 95-minute advertisement for cleavage.”

[From THR]

Amandla is exactly right – Wilson is allowed to write her movie reviews and Amandla is allowed to react to those reviews. I didn’t even think Amandla’s DM was threatening or harassing in any way – it reads as a youthful (and entirely private) clapback and Wilson probably should have dealt with it privately, if Wilson felt the need to react to Amandla at all. I mean, if a celebrity DM’d me to stop obsessing about her chest, I would probably apologize and promise to do better. I totally understand what Amandla is saying too, about how she’s just existing with breasts and that freaks people out.

When Lena posted Amandla’s DM, she did so in this video, below. She… published Amandla’s DM without her consent and tried to pretend like Amandla was publicly attacking her or something. This is wrong. Lena Wilson is in the wrong.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

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

103 Responses to “Amandla Stenberg DM’d a NYT critic about her review, then all hell broke loose”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Aurora says:

    Karen’s are gonna Karen. Self victimization seems to be on the rise among people who apparently feel “left out” of oppression.

    • Chic says:

      Wilson is offended that Stenberg has more “ power” than her. It’s not about the movie or critique.

      • BeyondTheFringe says:

        I mean, if we’re gonna play the “who has more social power” game here, it’s probably the white woman claiming to have been wronged by the black woman, regardless if they are both queer or not. And Wilson ought to know that.

        Her comment does not make sense.

      • Nic919 says:

        Wilson wouldn’t be a critic for the NYT at her age if her dad didn’t work there as well. She’s offended in a Karen way to be called out for anything. Stenberg’s comment was pretty harmless and it is ridiculous to say it was homophobic when it was coming from a queer woman being sent to another one. Wilson is just using the Karen playbook against anyone who dared to criticize her.

        For a while I thought this was a story about Lena Dunham, who also doesn’t take criticism well.

      • MeganC says:

        Wilson’s comment was sexist and inappropriate. If it had been written by a man it would never have been published.

      • Drea says:

        The power comment that Lena makes is so stupid, right?

        First of all, some people always have more social capital than others, it’s just how society works, for better or worse.

        Second of all (and the bigger point), Amanda sent a PRIVATE message. This dumb writer is the one that decided to make it public and play the victim. It has nothing to do with power, and everything to do with wanting to be the victim.

      • DK says:

        @MeganC, thank you! That’s what I didn’t understand: how on earth is it homophobic for a woman to ask someone not to write about her cleavage publicly – in fact, not just publicly, but in arguably the biggest newspaper in our nation?!

        The only relevance of the gender of the writer of such unnecessarily objectifying content is that, exactly as you say: if Wilson were a man, one hopes an editor would have shut that line down before publication. They should have shut it down in any context.

        It’s true, Stenberg’s initial DM doesn’t read as a joke to me, either, as many of you have mentioned. But I actually like that line as a defense, since surely if Wilson actually dealt with the content of Stenberg’s comment (“stop commenting publicly on my body”) rather than just tone policing a Black indigenous queer woman, she would have had to actually justify her gross comment.

        And her justification likely would have been similar: “It wasn’t meant to be taken seriously, it was supposed to be a light-hearted comment,” etc. – because there is no other justification.
        So good for Stenberg for asserting that tired, see-through defense first.

      • why says:

        is she tho? she is a white woman and has a platform (nyt). heard she is a nepobaby too, so there’s a privilege in there

    • Milkweed says:

      You solved a multi-year riddle for me with this comment! Thank you! My sister-in-law sucks and OMG, she’s a gay Karen! I completely didn’t realize Karens can be gay, but of course they can. How small-minded of me. My sister, her wife, is so laid back and kind, and my sis-in-law is a viper ready to unleash on anyone, in-person and online. She’s liberal, but is ignorant, entitled, racist, and anti-trans. It has confused me so much.

    • Myeh says:

      While this critic may feel left out of the whole meal that is “oppression” they sure are demonstrating their winning at the privilege and entitlement Olympics.

  2. Kelly says:

    Idk that DM read very pointed and salty to me. She seems to be backpedaling acting like it was just a joke. Do people DM jokes to strangers and expect them to laugh at them?

    They both need a chill pill.

    • Mercury says:

      @kelly nope. Lena is very wrong here

    • Joanne says:

      Please explain what was wrong with her DM. She kept it private and pointed out the review shouldn’t focus on her body but on the movie. @kelly

      • Kelly says:

        The review didn’t focus on her body. The review didn’t even mention her besides putting her name on a parenthesis after naming her character. That cleavage comment – the only reference to any actors body on that review – might’ve not even been about her. The review was about the script being unoriginal and vapid.

        Sure she’s being a whiny brat making it public when it started private, and claiming it was homophobic (girl what?) but Amandla’s comment does seem unnecessarily pointed and over the top for a review that hardly mentioned her, for a comment that wasn’t even about her.

      • Nic919 says:

        The review said it was a 95 minute ad for cleavage and if you look at all 4 main women in their costumes , none have visible cleavage except for Amandla, and it not even that obvious on her either. In fact one is wearing a t shirt the entire time. So this cleavage comment really can’t be directed to anyone else but Amandla, even if it’s entirely incorrect.

    • girl_ninja says:

      No. Lena Wilson is wrong and she weaponized her white woman tears to garner support from other white people to attack Amandla a black gay woman. Lena seems like a spoiled brat who can dish it but not take it.

    • Kate says:

      So I actually agree that her DM was salty (didn’t read like a “joke” to me – more sarcastic) but not threatening, harassing or intimidating. (Golly, my response would have been more colorful in the same situation.) Wilson’s 1) publishing it and 2) creating a narrative that she’s being harassed or victimized is completely out of line. Total Karen move.

      • ThatsNotOkay says:

        I read it as a joke and a pretty hilarious one at that. Because if Wilson were really about shaming the male gaze, she could have clearly framed her criticism that way. But she didn’t–she wrote it in the way male critics have written about female bodies since the beginning of motion pictures (for more recent complaints, see Natalie Portman). Since Wilson didn’t take care to frame her critique in a way that wasn’t objectifying Amandla and shaming her for having a body, Amandla sent her a PRIVATE DM that was pointed with a little acid on it, and she in response didn’t take care to frame her criticism of Wilson’s criticism in a way that didn’t shame Wilson for objectifying her. I personally am fine with Amandla’s response. She’s been putting up with white fragility sh*t her whole life, since she was cast as Rue in the Hunger Games. Wilson needs to wash the lenses through which she sees and critiques the world–maybe take some classes, if not on writing, then on how not to be part of the problem.

    • Anony83 says:

      And if Lena hadn’t decided to make herself into the Real VictimTM by going on IG Live and whining about the (not at all) “threatening” DM, you never would have read it at all. If Amandla wanted to use their social power to shame Lena for that review, they had plenty of opportunity to do so on their OWN social media.

      They didn’t.

      The person trying to get attention and trying to get Amndla harassed is Lena. The projection is strong with that one AND with her retractors.

    • Drea says:

      The entire point is that it was a DM. There was no public shaming, not until she did it to herself by making it public. And then choosing to die in the hill by calling out the power differential? Nah. Amandla sent a private message – did not threaten her, and didn’t call her out in public. Lena did this to herself.

    • Fabiola says:

      It seems like backpedaling to me. She’s just trying to save face. Why didn’t she have an issue with the other critics? Actors can be so annoying. We are all reviewed on our work.

      • NCWoman says:

        She didn’t have an issue with the other critics because they didn’t reduce her performance to “cleavage.” The critic apparently felt that, as a woman, she should be allowed to get away with a sexist review. She was privately rebuked. She had a public hissy fit. This is all on the critic.

    • James says:

      @Kelly Lena is that you?

  3. FancyPants says:

    I haven’t seen “Bodies Bodies Bodies,” but I can believe Wilson’s cleavage comments because I did watch A24’s “X,” and that film is nothing but BOOBS BOOBS BOOBS, to the point that I felt sorry for the actresses in the movie. I wouldn’t have found Stenberg’s DM funny myself (it gives off big “why are you so obsessed with me” energy from my point of view), but critics don’t live in a bubble where they can say whatever they want without criticism in return.

    • Mrs Robinson says:

      So true— and I absolutely don’t mean this as justification—but critics are absolutely accustomed to being in that bubble. I heard a New Yorker critic say that the artist’s intention didn’t really matter, that it was up to the critic to determine the cultural relevance, as if it existed completely independently from the artist once it was made.

    • Anony83 says:

      Multiple people who HAVE seen the movie said they didn’t notice anything particularly “booby” about the movie unless you count Amandla existing as a person who also has boobs.

    • Gold Ladder says:

      I saw the movie. It opens with Amandla’s and Maria Bakalova’s characters making out, there’s 10 seconds of Rachel Sennot’s character pretending to grind against another character and There’s a brief scene where the characters are swimming. That’s it. And even calling those scenes sexual or cleavage ads are Cirque Du Soleil level stretches.

    • sunny says:

      I think her generalization of A24’s horror is totally misplaced. I mean The Witch only has nudity at the end and as part of the plot, and Ari Aster’s horrors are what A24 is mostly known for but and he uses nudity rarely. As to X, there is a lot of nudity but I would argue that is because Ti’s greater ambition and the whole point of the film is to explore his own discomfort with aging(hence using the trope of sex workers youth and comfort with their bodies to juxtapose against the elderly, farmers) so you see a lot of bodies in that film, the sex workers as well as the elderly Pearl.

      Bodies, Bodies, Bodies, has like one intense kissing scene in the beginning and has a lot of young 20’s dressed as casual 20’s throughout the movie but to lump it in as if cleavage is a main feature leaves me wondering what the critique was paying attention to or if she was so disengaged with the plot she began noticing other things.

      Anyway, posting Amanda’s dms seems a ridiculous response to criticism of her review whether or not sure agrees with the feedback at all.

  4. Iris says:

    I’m sorry but it makes no sense saying that Amandla has more social power when Lena was the one who posted the DM and made it public?! It’s not like Amandla was telling her stans to go hound Lena.

    • rawiya says:

      I was just coming in to make this comment! Amandla sent the DM on August 8th… and Lena waited until almost two weeks later to post about it?? None of Amandla’s fans were probably aware who Lena was until *she* started talking about it.

    • Pix says:

      It seems that Lena Wilson decided she was going to harness Amanda’s social power for her own use. She saw this as an opportunity to make herself happen. I suspect that’s the reason for the delay. She was trying to decide how she was going to victimize herself. Lena posting that DM shows her unprofessionalism, immaturity, and worst of all – her blind ambition to make herself relevant. So she got what she wanted. People are talking about her, but I would argue that she’s a dirty player in the this media “game”. The NYT should absolutely not use her writing again. She made herself the story and that’s a not the point of journalism.

  5. Amy Bee says:

    Lena Wilson overreacted to a harmless DM. There’s something deeper going on there.

  6. BeyondTheFringe says:

    “I don’t want this person who has more social power than me to think it’s f*cking ok to do something like this.” ??????

    To do what? Send a shitty, pointed though ultimately harmless DM saying that maybe you missed the point of the movie? Or worse that your review contributed to continuing problematic characterization of black women’s bodies? She wasn’t publically ostracizing you, like, say, you did her when you posted the DM.

    This was ultimately in private between two people before Wilson posted in a huff like Stenberg was trying to get her cancelled. She’s allowed to write her review and Stenberg is allowed to say “shitty review” and move on.

    I don’t get this.

    • BelgiumSugar says:

      I agree, I don’t understand what Lena is referring to that Amandla is supposedly doing?

      Lena should have kept it private, attention seeker.

  7. Anna says:

    Ugh. The critic is in the wrong. Also Amandla doesn’t have “more social power”.

  8. Nic919 says:

    Wilson is a nepobaby and is insecure with any type of criticism. That’s what happens when your dad has been editor at various major magazines, including the NYT and yet you believe your position was earned.

    • TheOriginalMia says:

      Now things make sense. No wonder she overreacted. If she’s going to be this thin-skinned, she shouldn’t have taken this job or be a critic. Guess she’s going to hide behind her private profile for the rest of her time at the Times.

    • Drea says:

      Omg, this makes her “power” comment all the more terrible.

      What an entitled brat.

  9. WiththeAmerican says:

    Someone who writes for the NYT and is white is whining that a black artist has more power than her. So that why she published a DM. Um…

  10. TheOriginalMia says:

    Lena needs to grow up. Amandla didn’t threaten her nor demean her. She pointed out something she felt influenced Lena’s review. Instead of Lena ignoring the DM or clapping back in a responding DM, she decides to publish a private message and play the victim. Amandla thought she had an ally in a fellow queer person. She forgot not all queer are your friend or family.

  11. girl_ninja says:

    Lena Wilson is a spoiled brat and seemingly insecure. It seems to me that and used a young black woman’s body in Amandla to garner interest in her. What a disgusting thing to do to another person. I’m glad Amandla defended herself. White people (often women) seem to revel in dismissing and attacking in so many ways. I’m tired of it.

    This Lena sounds like another awful more famous Lena.

    • K8erade says:

      I propose that we have Lenas alongside Karens now.

      Lena – A woman who believes she that her privilege and (typically Liberal Arts) education give her voice and experience precedence over others. This person believes that bodies and experiences are hers to freely exploit without discretion and is shocked when there is pushback and criticism over her comments.

  12. Talia says:

    How can she say Amandla has more social power than her, when she works for the NYT and she got the job because her father works for the paper! There is another video going around twitter were Wilson is arrogantly proclaiming

    “All the thing I’ve done to get were I am! Number 1 one of the most crucial thing is that I am a very talented writer and I’m skilled in the art of cultural criticism, this is not a flex my therapist will be gobsmacked that I said something so self affirming in such public venue. I come from a long line of writers in my family and Arts criticism is a particular form that I seem to just be naturally good at, and I’ve never received any kind of formal schooling in arts criticism buut here I am again NOT a flex just a fact! The first thing I ever wrote for the NYT I wrote it 24 years old it was barley edited and it made the front page of the culture section, so that’s what I’m working with”
    Never says her father got the job and idk in my opinion should Amandla have written to her? No but they did dm Wilson privately mind you and Wilson chose to post it instead of handling it privately! I’ve seen the pictures of the movie and ppl who have seen the movie point out none of the other women in the movie show cleavage, so clearly the line in the review was targeted at Amandla just because they’re wearing a tank top in the movie and of course they have cleavage because they’ve got boobs -_-

    It’s so obvious she thought people were going to vilify Amandla and side with her not even questioning why Amandla wrote it and why SHE Wilson chose to post it publicly instead of keeping it private and her logic on calling Amandla homopobic!?

    • BeanieBean says:

      Oh, that is so funny! Her ‘I’m such an amazing writer & talent; look at me! I got a writing job with a prestigious newspaper with zero qualifications, ’cause I’m that good!’ Oh wowie zowie! Zero self-awareness at all. Daddy had nothing to do with her gig, nope! she’s just that special!

      • Sandra says:

        I had to look up if that was a real statement !!

        How do you reconcile these thoughts?!

        “I’ve worked so hard to get where I am AND yes my family name gives me an advantage but the name didn’t help me get the job! It just made me
        More talented and creative- genetically, so talented that the first thing I ever wrote was independently so good that it was don’t page culture center, and my dad didn’t even help”

        anything to tel herself it isn’t nepotism.

  13. Veronica S. says:

    I think they both come across badly in this. When you’re a creative, you’re going to deal with creative criticism. That’s the reality, and pretending otherwise is inane and disingenuous. Frankly, I find her decision to go after her critic to be deeply immature. You produced a piece of art that people are required to pay to consume. They react based on what they feel they got on return for their money. I get that her feelings were hurt, but let’s not try to walk it back as a joke and play innocent.

    I would not have aired it publicly, though. Social media is not the place to take things up, especially with celebrities who absolutely have power in numbers there. So that was immature and frankly stupid on Wilson’s part, not to mention a clear attempt to start a dogpile (that backfired). I can get why she was put off by the comment and felt it was homophobic. I don’t think it was, but you do encounter that as a wlw sometimes. In this case, I think it was just clearly an actress who couldn’t handle critique.

    • Mimi says:

      So interesting how you are choosing to interpret Amanda’s relatively harmless comment as “going after” her critic. She didn’t threaten or slander her in anyway. She didn’t rage or personally attack the writer. She simply struck back at a particular line in the review and did it privately and had apparently moved on with her life. Yet, you are centering her as the one who overreacted.

      • @ Mimi, agreed. Amandla wasn’t attacking nor threatening. Plus she DM’d Wilson privately.

        Wilson has dug herself into this hole, no one else. She can’t handle criticism nor can she handle having her review being criticized. Apparently Wilson isn’t adept at being a critic, as it’s apparent in her actions, all of them. Wilson went much too far and I hope she pays for it dearly.

      • Veronica S. says:

        I don’t know what you find interesting. I find it inane for anybody in a creative enterprise thinks it’s worthwhile to snap back at critics, even privately. Like, they’re critics. They’re doing their job, too, even if you don’t like the results. It’s not like she personally singled out out Amandla as she did her feelings toward the film. She expressed the general sentiment that she found the provocative clothing distracting where the film is concerned.

        I do think Wilson was an idiot and a jackass for taking this to twitter and attempting to turn it into a public fight. Between the two of them, Wilson comes off worse, mainly because in her position, I’d just roll my eyes and block somebody accusing me of being unable to do my job because their tits were on display. This drama blowing up is her own doing, and she’s getting exactly what she deserves for airing it publicly.

        But I do find it disingenuous for Amandla to pretend like she was making a joke there when she very obviously was not. That was clearly a snipe, and she knew what she was doing. She’s allowed to react to her critic, sure, but I do think it reads immature.

    • Anna says:

      I don’t think her cleavage comments is “creative criticism”.

      • Veronica S. says:

        It is if the review is discussing how women’s bodies are used in the film. That’s a source of criticism in plenty of reviews. Wilson may or may not have had a legitimate complaint there, as I can’t speak for it having not seen the film, but I do think it’s ridiculous for Amandla to pretend like they made that comment on the joke. Like, she has a right to her feelings about the critique, certainly, but I certainly wouldn’t have read it as funny if I was on the receiving end.

        I do think Wilson is far worse taking it Twitter and trying to cause a scene, which caused the reverse of what she expected. The dogpile is exactly what she deserved for playing dramatic victim over something that was easily fixed with an eyeroll and a block.

    • MC2 says:

      This thread feels just like the story….

  14. Hannah Lee says:

    “I was just checking my DM’s because (someone sent me a DM that made me happy).” That’s a weird statement already, even before you get to the AS part of the video. Like, how did you know what was in your DM’s before you actually checked them? So already Lena is giving off “unreliable narrator” vibes to start.

    Then she goes on to make a complaint that makes no sense, like AS’s remark is so self-evidently offensive that it deserved a public clap back. It wasn’t and it didn’t. I feel like I’m missing something here. Also I’m trying to remember the details, but wasn’t there a flap a few years ago about a film critic from The NY Times writing a review filled with comments about actresses’ bodies, not Lena IIRC but some guy?

    • MC2 says:

      And making sure to flex Jennifer’s Body when the dm was about her objectifying a woman felt purposeful…..like Megan Fox didn’t have an issue being only viewed for her body & look how well that movie did!

  15. Pointillist I’m says:

    This is what Black queers have to put up with from white queers who assume they are the authorities on homophobia and queerphobia. I am so disgusted that Lena automatically thought that Amandla was being homophobic even though she knew Amandla is queer also. She would not have said that if Amandla was white.

    • Relly says:

      I agree with this _so hard_ except I need to quibble with one point: I don’t think LW actually truly thought AS was being homophobic. I think she just decided to say that in order to claim #biggestvictim status and detract from her own body shaming / misogynoir.

  16. BeyondTheFringe says:

    If I was a terribly jaded cynic, I might wonder if this was all a ginned up social media fight to create coverage for the movie.

    If I was a mildly jaded cynic, I’d wonder the circumstances were actually legitimate but some flack said, “Run with it. Add fuel to the fire. All press is good press.”

    And If I just had eyes, I’d wonder why a white queer women who probably fancies herself an ally would feel the need to throw a black queer woman under the bus to get some attention on social media.

    Ain’t none of it good.

    • teecee says:

      You think a nepo-baby New York Times critic is engaging in pay for play? They of all people don’t need the money.

      Honestly my least favorite part of gossip websites is commenters turning everything into a conspiracy. Occam’s Razor: sometimes people are just jerks. Wilson thought this would turn into an Ariana Grande situation and that they would get praise and attention, but people actually looked at what they wrote, took note of how they behaved and framed the interaction, and decided they were a clout-chasing entitled Karen. End of.

      • BeyondTheFringe says:

        Gawd. I didn’t say the first two more conspiratorial options were true.

        I was merely pointing out the effed up, weird world we live in where those first two options have happened in other situations before and therefore make responsible consumers of media look critically at all these dust ups now.

        And the third option is arguably exactly what happened. So no conspiracy there. End of.

      • Anna says:

        Never thought I’d see the phrase “Occam’s razor” on a gossip blog comment section.😄

  17. Eowyn says:

    Lena Wilson’s review focus is racist objectification of a queer Black person. She did not engage with Stenburg as an actor performing a role but rendered them into a hyper sexualized Black body. She then played victim of homophobia when Stenburg called out the aggression and dehumanization. Notice she fails to acknowledge Stenburg as a fellow queer person.

    • SIde Eye says:

      @Eowyn excellent points.

    • K8erade says:

      This is what a lot of people in my circle call Liberal Arts college racism. Basically, it’s the idea that bodies and lives that aren’t in the same white privilege circle are subject to ownership and scrutiny if those within that circle. For a textbook example, see: Lena Dunham.

      • James says:

        Did you also go to my university? That description read similar to what I witnessed happening in various social circles :/

    • MC2 says:

      100% @Eowyn

      @K8erade Simply intellectualizing racism, without seeing themselves as active players, is quite an entitlement.

  18. Relly says:

    If white tears could be used as an energy resource, we could stop importing oil.

  19. Kirsten says:

    The DM was totally inappropriate. The review doesn’t mention Stenberg’s body at all. In fact, the only time Wilson uses her name is in a parenthetical credit. Wilson actually says the movie is, “nicely acted.”

    • Blithe says:

      The review does, though, mention “cleavage”. In the spirit of implausible deniability, are we now pretending that said “cleavage” was free-floating and unattached to anyone capable of critiquing the critic?

      • Kirsten says:

        Obviously a lot of the actors show cleavage/skin. But there are like 25 people starring in this movie. For Stenberg to take the review to mean that people are doing nothing but obsessing over her chest (esp. when she’s barely mentioned) is a bit of a stretch.

      • Lady D says:

        Merci and lol, Blithe.

      • Gold Ladder says:

        I saw the movie. There’s only 7 people total who appear on screen at any time and one of them isn’t even shown for a whole minute. There’s only one person the cleavage comment could be about.

    • Drea says:

      Ok, so what if the DM was inappropriate? It was still a DM. Not for public consumption until Lena decided to make herself a victim out of all of this. And then people saw through her absolute BS.

    • Zara says:

      Look at the photo of the main cast. Amandla is the only one showing even a bit of cleavage — and it IS only a bit. It is clearly about Amandla. All she’s doing is wearing a tank-top, not going topless. The comment was crass and unnecessary. Other reviewers have confirmed the film is not especially sexual.

  20. Mimi says:

    So what? Amandla can only respond if she’s personally attacked? She can’t be offended on behalf of her colleagues?

  21. Rea says:

    Critics feed of energy Amanda should not have DM’d her. It backfired on her, Why give someone power over you like that? Now she is being splattered all over the media and LW is playing the victim role.

  22. Edith says:

    Amanda was being bratty and a bit nasty in her DM. She clearly was NOT curious to know why the critic said what she said – she never asked her in that stupid DM!!! Her explanation is passive aggressive as well. Not her finest hour.

    Should the critic have made it public? Debatable. Quite frankly, I think most people here are over-estimating the value of a critic getting into a dumb spat with an actor. Is it that helpful to her? She could have let it slide, much like Amandla could have let it slide. What has she gained from this?

    Example #1849673 why and how social media has degraded folks’ social skills.

    Still ain’t seeing the movie!! 🤣

    • Drea says:

      She didn’t want an answer from Lena. Obviously. Why do you think that was required of her?

      And debatable on making the DM public? There was no threat, no abuse of power, nothing, until Lena twisted it and cried her tears for her own gain. Bad for her that she didn’t realize that people would see through her entitled brattiness.

    • Tan says:

      All them words just to say u above it all and u don’t care. Ok here’s a internet cookie and a pat on the head and the reward for most moral person on the internet.

  23. AnneL says:

    I think the DM was a little salty, but Lena’s the one who made it public. That was immature, unprofessional and just plain whiney. My sister’s a writer. She worked at the NYT as a fact-checker and after years of experience in journalism has been able to something published in the paper or magazine once in a long while. She managed that without having any connections at all, but she would never be tooting her own horn the way Lena did and sure wouldn’t throw in a mention of her therapy process to boot. This woman seems kind of insufferable.

  24. Nanny to the Rescue says:

    I believe the critic was petty AF, but generally it would be better for artists to ignore critics, they’re often bitter fools anyway. Like this Wilson is given additional power that she shouldn’t have been given. On the other hand, this will lift awareness for the film, so win-win?

    Also, what is with “celebrities” lately sharing private messages on their SM? Can somebody tell them this is really a no-go?

  25. Anna says:

    Was it inappropriate enough to sicc the internet on Amandla?

  26. Mothra says:

    The movie has Pete Davison/Davidson on it, ugh. I have an irrational dislike for him.

    • MC2 says:

      Every.single.woman he has publicly dated says kind things afterwards about him. He treats women well, no matter how messy he is, and despite his BDE, so I stan.

  27. K8erade says:

    If I were Lena Wilson I would have laughed it off and taken it in stride. Had she said nothing and left it at that or at worst made an anonymous talking point of artists pushing back on their critics, I think she would have gotten a lot farther. I do think Amandla had a point about the body criticism. We don’t need those kind of reviews in this day and age.

  28. 100roseshouse says:

    This is maybe a bit disingenous on Amandla’s part when you pair the statement “just because of the size of my boobs, there will be some sort of sexualization or commentary on my chest…” with the pasties dress. I mean, show your body if you want! But also don’tdeny that you wear clothes to invite commentary or sexualization of your body.

    • Nic919 says:

      So wearing a revealing outfit at a totally different and unrelated occasion warrants being criticized for having cleavage in a movie where she wore a tank top that covered her up far more? Make that make sense.

    • Gizmo’sMa says:

      Did I really just read ‘she asked for it’ as a response? In 2022? Look I don’t necessarily agree with some of the takes on this. I think Lena is a racist Karen trying for a come up off of Amandla. But saying she is asking for commentary on her body bc she is wearing a dress with cleavage TO A PARTY is sexist and misogynistic.

  29. Em says:

    I think Lena completely should have just shrugged it off (she overreacted) and Amandla’s DM was immature (which isn’t surprising – she’s young!).

    They’ll both be fine.

  30. JGoodie says:

    It honestly feels so weird/gross to see Lena go after Amandla for a private DM she chose to take public. And it’s grosser to see that Lena’s going on tiktok now telling her followers that Amandla seems “unwell” for…not appreciating her body existing being referred to as an ad for cleavage. Amandla had thoughts on Lena’s critique, so she must be crazy.

    Although in Lena’s defense I do want to point out that she started at NYT *before* her dad did. Her dad wasn’t an editor there at the time, just at the biggest paper in Dallas and also a Pulitzer Finalist and Managing Editor of FiveThirtyEight. Which I’m sure didn’t help her career in the slightest.

  31. Auntie Git says:

    Anyone have access to a non-paywall of the actual review? I’m very curious about that…..

  32. Jenn says:

    Actors have every right, in public or private spaces, to respond to critics. And they exercise that right pretty often (along with everyone else, it can feel like)!! Lena Wilson’s video is bizarre, incoherent, and humorless, but it also feels like she just reeeeally wanted everyone to know she was fielding DMs from Amandla Stenberg — so embarrassing and weird. It also makes her seem super inexperienced: A critic receiving an unsolicited DM is literally a Tuesday. Like???

  33. Hell Nah! says:

    @Jenn: YES, YES, YES to all you’ve said!

  34. Cee says:

    Are all Lenas terrible?