Based on the book by by Towhey and Kantor, this movie felt a little bit too self-centered towards the journalists and too little towards the victims. And it shies away to show the larger cogs of systematic sexualism within the film industry and even the NY Times itself. But why am I not surprised that a Hollywood movie isn't too harsh on itself and puts the blame mostly on one guy, meanwhile we all know there are hundreds like him still in the studio system. The movie makes it look like this huge win (for the journalists) meanwhile even the movie isn't interested about the fate of the victims. One of the witnesses, Laura Madden played by a fantastic Jennifer Ehle is about to go into a life-threatening surgery (because of breast cancer). Just for dramatic effect she'll give her okay to publish her story, right before she gets wheeled into the OP room trope. But the last time we saw her she didn't look reluctant to cooperate, in fact she was the only one who seemed eager to go ahead with her story. There's a lot of this hollow drama, not only does the movie puts the main focus on the journalists who starts crying for getting published (which comes off selfish in context with the cancer patient) but the movie doesn't even bother to tell us if Laura Madden survived her operation or the cancer.
The other scene I found problematic when one of the reporters tells an unsuspecting husband that her wife was sexually assaulted in her work place decades ago. A very irresponsible action and the movie almost was brave enough to give one of their characters a flaw by realizing what she has done. But no, they brush it off instantly as her friend assures her she did the right thing. Of course the movie never follows up with the husband and wife who are left with the shards of this mess.
And that's one of my issues, for me both journalists came off selfish, they never consider ramifications or made moral decisions that could hurt their story. That's why the movie tries this clumsy attempt to show a chad in a bar who harasses the them, this scene came out of nowhere. At least it should have happened in their work place which is much closer to the truth. The movie plays it very loose when it comes to the facts, Rose McGowan played a much bigger part than the movie makes it out to be.
My biggest gripe though is that the NY Times was actually one of the villains in this story (together with NBC), it was them who sat on the Weinstein story for ten years. Not only that but they squashed it themselves when Sharon Waxman was investigating it in 2004. Ronan Farrow from the New Yorker was in fact the journalist who put the pressure on the Weinstein case. And some victims didn't even want to talk with the NY Times at the time because they knew that they have already buried the story six years ago. The Times only went ahead to publish when their hand was forced because of Farrow's article that was about to get released in the upcoming weeks.
Now I know there is artistic freedom and a movie needs to dramatize certain events, but a movie has a certain responsibility to stay true to the main story. It's dishonest work like this that hurts the metoo movement more than it helps.
Not only that but the Times had their own problems with sexual harassment and they kept those persons in the company regardless (Glenn Thrush). This would have made for a much more powerful ending, since the job is far from 'done' yet, but it's just the beginning. The movie truly lacked vision and objectivity. I'm sure this won't stop the movie getting showered in irrelevant awards come Oscar season in a couple of months.
So yeah it's too small in scope, too many loose ends, not very exciting and overall too dishonest with the events.
I agree with the movie on one thing: It is an important story.
But it also deserved a better movie.
The other scene I found problematic when one of the reporters tells an unsuspecting husband that her wife was sexually assaulted in her work place decades ago. A very irresponsible action and the movie almost was brave enough to give one of their characters a flaw by realizing what she has done. But no, they brush it off instantly as her friend assures her she did the right thing. Of course the movie never follows up with the husband and wife who are left with the shards of this mess.
And that's one of my issues, for me both journalists came off selfish, they never consider ramifications or made moral decisions that could hurt their story. That's why the movie tries this clumsy attempt to show a chad in a bar who harasses the them, this scene came out of nowhere. At least it should have happened in their work place which is much closer to the truth. The movie plays it very loose when it comes to the facts, Rose McGowan played a much bigger part than the movie makes it out to be.
My biggest gripe though is that the NY Times was actually one of the villains in this story (together with NBC), it was them who sat on the Weinstein story for ten years. Not only that but they squashed it themselves when Sharon Waxman was investigating it in 2004. Ronan Farrow from the New Yorker was in fact the journalist who put the pressure on the Weinstein case. And some victims didn't even want to talk with the NY Times at the time because they knew that they have already buried the story six years ago. The Times only went ahead to publish when their hand was forced because of Farrow's article that was about to get released in the upcoming weeks.
Now I know there is artistic freedom and a movie needs to dramatize certain events, but a movie has a certain responsibility to stay true to the main story. It's dishonest work like this that hurts the metoo movement more than it helps.
Not only that but the Times had their own problems with sexual harassment and they kept those persons in the company regardless (Glenn Thrush). This would have made for a much more powerful ending, since the job is far from 'done' yet, but it's just the beginning. The movie truly lacked vision and objectivity. I'm sure this won't stop the movie getting showered in irrelevant awards come Oscar season in a couple of months.
So yeah it's too small in scope, too many loose ends, not very exciting and overall too dishonest with the events.
I agree with the movie on one thing: It is an important story.
But it also deserved a better movie.