#to be fair in that instance i was like 13 (although nobody knew that) but still. wild. | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

cinema-tv-etc · 3 years

Link

The Secret Sources for 'Bombshell': Why Ex-Fox News Staffers Broke Their NDAs for Filmmakers

n an attempt to re-create the toxic culture at the network under Roger Ailes, creators spoke to multiple women still bound by confidentiality agreements now under renewed scrutiny: "Come after me. I don't have anything."

In March, former Fox News anchor Juliet Huddy met screenwriter Charles Randolph over drinks at the Royalton Hotel in New York to talk about the moment when her life imploded. The writer, best known for co-scripting The Big Short, wanted Huddy’s input for his next film, Bombshell, a Lionsgate drama about the women who exposed sexual harassment at Fox News, including Megyn Kelly (played by Charlize Theron) and Gretchen Carlson (Nicole Kidman), who filed the lawsuit that led to the firing of network chief Roger Ailes.

For Huddy, sharing her story meant returning to some painful history — and violating the nondisclosure agreement she signed in 2016 when she left Fox News over allegations that Bill O’Reilly sexually harassed her. O’Reilly denied the claims, and Huddy departed Fox with a settlement in the high six figures and a promise of silence. The fallout left her with a sense of fatalism about breaking her NDA. “I lost my house. My television career combusted, and I couldn’t get a job for over a year,” says Huddy, who now co-hosts a radio show for WABC in New York. “So come after me. I don’t have anything.”

In order to paint a vivid picture of the network’s culture, Bombshell’s makers spoke to about 20 people with a connection to Fox, including multiple women bound by confidentiality agreements, a task that sent the filmmakers into territory usually left to investigative journalists. “We have all taken an oath to protect our sources,” says Theron, who also produced Bombshell. “But we tried to communicate as much as we could with everybody. Yeah, I’ll just say that.”

The legal gray area of NDAs related to sexual harassment has only gotten murkier in recent days. On Oct.?25, MSNBC host Rachel Maddow broke the news that NBCUniversal would release employees who contacted the company from their confidentiality agreements — a measure that some critics, including new Time’s Up CEO Tina Tchen, called insufficient, because it places the burden on employees to identify themselves first to NBC. As producers set to work on movies and TV shows documenting the #MeToo movement, including an adaptation of two New York Times reporters’ Harvey Weinstein book, She Said, more filmmakers are bound to grapple with NDAs.

Watch 'Bombshell' Trailer

Bombshell, directed by Jay Roach (Game Change) and due in theaters Dec. 13, depicts the complicated experience of being female at Fox News during Ailes’ tenure, an era when a meeting with the boss might include a request to twirl — or more. “We kept getting told women would warn each other, ‘Beware of the spin,’” says Roach. “You would hear the PTSD in their voices. It sounded like a horror?film.”

The $35?million movie, which interweaves real Fox News footage (obtained via fair use), shows a workplace where women faced demeaning comments from male co-hosts, policing of their appearance by male executives and unwanted sexual propositions. Roach’s crew obtained photos and details from Fox personnel in order to re-create key elements of the physical space, including Ailes’ office. They did not, however, reach out to the current Fox employees portrayed, such as Sean Hannity or CEO Suzanne Scott, according to a network?spokesperson.

("Since the 2016 departure of Roger Ailes, Fox News has worked tirelessly to completely change the company culture. Over the past three years, we have created an entirely new reporting structure, more than tripled the size of our HR footprint, instituted mandatory in-person sexual harassment training, started quarterly company meetings and mentoring events as well as implemented a zero tolerance policy regarding workplace misconduct for which we engage outside independent firms to handle investigations. No other company has implemented such a comprehensive and continuous overhaul. We are incredibly proud of our team and will continue to emphasize transparency across all Fox News Media," says a Fox News spokesperson.)

Kelly’s attorney, Bryan Freedman, says the former anchor had “no involvement” in the film, although some scenes draw on stories told in her 2016 memoir, Settle for More. “Megyn has never met or spoken to Charlize, and she did not sell the rights to the book,” Freedman says. “In fact, Megyn was as surprised as anyone when the trailer dropped.”

Carlson, who has testified before Congress in support of a bill that would ban NDAs in sexual harassment settlements, cites her own when asked about the movie. “It’s really frustrating that because of my NDA, I can’t participate in any of these projects,” she says. “It’s why I’m working so hard on the Hill to change that.”

In the wake of NBCUniversal’s statement about its NDAs, multiple former Fox News employees, including Carlson, have called on their old network to release them from their confidentiality agreements. It’s unclear what the consequences may be for women who violate their NDAs in order to speak with filmmakers, and Fox has declined to comment on whether it would enforce them. Former Fox contributor Tamara Holder, a Chicago attorney who now focuses on women’s rights, signed a settlement with the company in 2017 after she said she was sexually assaulted by an executive there. Holder, who did not speak to the filmmakers, says she faces a $500,000 penalty whenever she talks publicly about her time at Fox, which the network threatened to enforce in 2018.

The law around such agreements is shifting as secrecy provisions that were crafted before #MeToo come under increasing scrutiny. New laws in California and New York prohibit the use of NDAs in cases of sexual harassment. “Most companies have not been enforcing these NDAs since #MeToo because all they would do is draw attention to their bad practices,” says Elizabeth Tippett, a University of Oregon law professor specializing in #MeToo cases.

For some of the Fox News women under NDAs, talking to filmmakers has been freeing. Rudi Bakhtiar had her contract as a correspondent at Fox terminated in 2007 after she complained about sexual harassment, an incident she says she has mostly buried. In a scene in Bombshell, a male supervisor propositions Bakhtiar, played by actress Nazanin Boniadi, at a meeting. Before shooting, Boniadi reached out to Bakhtiar, who asked to meet with Roach and Randolph. “The movie has been very cathartic,” says Bakhtiar, who now hosts a radio show and is making a documentary about the Kurds. “I didn’t want to admit to myself how angry I am about what happened. The movie meant that I had to face this.”

By the time Randolph called Huddy, Bombshell was already shot, and he described to her a scene where Kelly visits her character, played by Jennifer Morrison, at a local Fox affiliate where Huddy had been relegated after rebuffing O’Reilly. The scene with Kelly never took place, according to Huddy. “I thought, ‘Well, God, he’s contacted me kind of late to get my perspective,’” says Huddy. “I really do hope that they did their due diligence. I hope that they kept in mind the fact that while Gretchen and Megyn were turned into heroines, there were quite a few of us whose lives were turned upside down.”

The movie includes other creative flourishes — The Five co-host Kimberly Guilfoyle never handed out “Team Roger” T-shirts, for instance, though she was a staunch Ailes supporter.

Some of the women depicted in the movie say they weren’t consulted — and they’re frustrated to have no part in the telling of their own stories. Julie Roginsky, a Democratic strategist played by Ahna O’Reilly, appeared regularly on The Five and Outnumbered until she filed a lawsuit in 2017 alleging that she was denied a co-hosting job after refusing to have sex with Ailes. Roginsky's scene is a fictional interaction with now CNN anchor Alisyn Camerota, who approaches Roginsky's character in the cafeteria and asks her about being harassed. “Nobody reached out to me about this movie, but if they had, I would not have been able to talk to them because I have an NDA,” says Roginsky. “That allows the moviemakers to take license with our stories. It is frustrating that other people have taken advantage of my silence by creating a character.”

Shortly before production started, Roach and Randolph had an audience with a key figure who represented Ailes’ point of view — his attorney, Susan Estrich. During a two-hour meeting at her house in Los Angeles, Estrich says, she asked the filmmakers questions about the Ailes lawsuits. “And when all the answers were wrong, I knew that they had only talked to one side,” Estrich says. “They’re very talented people, so I expect it’s a good movie, but I don’t think anybody should make the mistake of thinking it’s fair and balanced.”

For some of the women depicted, Bombshell is a grim reminder that they feel less like heroines of the #MeToo movement than its casualties. “For speaking up, we’re now unemployable in the industry,” says Roginsky. “That’s the tragedy. Rather than Hollywood telling a story of ‘I am woman, hear me roar,’ what really happened is the women all got drummed out of the business.” Huddy has a suggestion, however: “Maybe they could have a sequel.”

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/secret-sources-bombshell-why-fox-news-staffers-broke-ndas-filmmakers-1250668

#'Bombshell'

0 notes

theconservativebrief · 6 years

Link

Twelve Thai boys had scarcely been rescued from a flooded cave by divers and Thai Navy SEALS before the intention to shoot a movie adaptation was announced by PureFlix, the production and distribution company that focuses on faith-market releases like the God’s Not Dead series and The Case for Christ.

A day later, a second film about the events was announced, this time helmed by Jon M. Chu (director of the upcoming Crazy Rich Asians) and produced by LA-based Ivanhoe Pictures. Ivanhoe’s president announced that the company had been selected by the Thai Navy and Thailand’s government to develop the film.

It’s not uncommon for multiple movies or TV shows about the same person or real event to come out around the same time. Think of 2006, when both Oliver Stone’s World Trade Center and Paul Greengrass’s United 93 came out. Or 2016, when the documentary O.J.: Made in America and the scripted TV show The People v. O.J. Simpson: American Crime Story were both released. It happens a lot.

And this rescue story, which garnered weeks of high-profile news coverage and captivated people around the world, will inspire more than just these two films. For instance, Deadline reported that Discovery Inc. ordered a documentary about the rescue mission to first air on Friday, July 13 — just days after the rescue — and the Wall Street Journal noted that books are likely on the way, too.

But these two “fiction” films attracted particular attention because of questions about how the story would be approached by the two companies, fueled partly by comments Chu made on Twitter about “whitewashing,” as well as competing efforts to obtain the rights to the story — and the realities about who owns those rights.

On Wednesday, Chu — who is Chinese-American — weighed in via Twitter, confirming his intention to make his own film in response. In his tweets, Chu suggested that Hollywood might “whitewash” the story.

“That won’t happen or we’ll give them hell,” he wrote, saying that “anyone thinking about the story better approach it right & respectfully.”

And though Chu didn’t name Pure Flix specifically in the tweets, the timing suggested it was in response to the company’s announcement about its intention to make the film.

I refuse to let Hollywood #whitewashout the Thai Cave rescue story! No way. Not on our watch. That won’t happen or we’ll give them hell. There’s a beautiful story abt human beings saving other human beings. So anyone thinking abt the story better approach it right & respectfully.

— Jon M. Chu (@jonmchu) July 11, 2018

Its a bit early 2truly discuss but the biggest lesson I learned frm making #CrazyRichAsians is that we must tell our stories especially the important ones so history doesnt get it wrong.This one is too important 2 let others dictate who the real heroes are https://t.co/ZmnSBFvPI3

— Jon M. Chu (@jonmchu) July 12, 2018

We have the power to not only MAKE history but be the historians that RECORD it too. So that it’s told correctly and respectfully. Couldn’t just sit here watching how others would “interpret” this important story. https://t.co/kRv5k9plDU

— Jon M. Chu (@jonmchu) July 12, 2018

Reached by email for comment on Thursday, Chu’s publicist said that “his tweet is his statement.”

For his part, Pure Flix producer and founding partner Michael Scott said in a video posted to Twitter that his goal was to make an inspiring movie, but not necessarily a “Christian movie.” According to company reps, the company intends to produce the film through Pinnacle Peak, Pure Flix’s more mainstream brand.

Reached via email in Thailand, Scott explained why he was interested in the project. “This story has a personal connection for me, as my wife (who is from Thailand) knew Navy Seal Saman Kunan who died during the rescue,” Scott wrote. “I spend many months here a year, and it was incredible to see a miracle happen with these young boys and the rescuers.”

A Buddhist monk holds a prayer ceremony at the entrance of the caves a few days before the rescue Photo by Linh Pham/Getty Images

Scott reiterated that Pure Flix’s intention was not to make the movie “for one specific ‘religious’ audience … Often times people try to turn a story meant to inspire into a political statement, or with a specific agenda in mind. As we pursue this opportunity, we are considering how to keep the film authentic to what occurred and who was involved.”

Though Pure Flix has been the target of some criticism (including from me) for elements of its movies, there’s nothing in its history that would specifically suggest it would “whitewash” the rescue story. Nor is Pure Flix a “Hollywood” studio by any real definition of the term — it often produces and distributes its films itself, outside the entertainment mainstream, and its streaming service consists largely of films and TV shows that aren’t part of the entertainment produced by Hollywood’s biggest studios.

That makes Chu’s tweets a little curious. But there’s a history behind them, whether or not Pure Flix is the right target.

As Vox’s Joss Fong and Christophe Haubursin explain in this video, Hollywood has a history of not just giving Asian roles to white actors, but also using those roles to mock Asian people:

Hollywood’s best Asian roles still go to white people

The most recent instance of “whitewashing” controversy roiled in 2016, when Scarlett Johansson was cast as Motoko Kusanagi, the Japanese lead character in Ghost in the Shell adapted from Masamune Shirow’s manga. The film’s producers chose to make the main characters more white rather than casting Asian actors for the roles — a practice that seems remarkably backward in the 21st century.

Though the term “whitewashing” is usually applied to casting, Chu may also have been alluding to Hollywood’s history of making “white savior” movies, in which stories about people of color or in distant lands are supposedly made more “relatable” to an American audience by inserting a white and often American figure into the story who saves the day. That criticism was leveled, for instance, against The Great Wall, a film about Chinese people that kind of randomly inserted Matt Damon into the story, too. (The film turned out to be a dud, if an eye-popping one.)

And although a number of the divers who helped rescue the boys from the cave were white Europeans, the story is, fundamentally, a Thai story with Thai protagonists; the ex-SEAL who died in the rescue attempt was Thai as well.

So it’s likely that in saying that “we have the power to not only make history but be the historians who record it,” Chu is worried the film will center the outsiders who came to help rather than the community at the heart of the story.

But whether or not whitewashing is ultimately part of the PureFlix project, Chu’s comments did attract attention to Ivanhoe Pictures’s version of the story. And that brings another consideration into play: Who owns the rights to this story? Can there be two Thai cave rescue movies at once?

The short answer: Yes, and it’s likely they will.

David A.R. White, co-founder of PureFlix, told the Wall Street Journal that the company was pursuing life rights from some of the people involved. “You get their stories, and then it’s a matter of making sure the writer can tell the story in a dramatic and inspirational way,” he told the WSJ. “At the same time, these stories still have to be entertaining and moving.”

“My co-producer Adam Smith and I are in the initial phases of producing and gathering information,” Scott confirmed by email. “We are talking to several people about the film release and considering a partnership, if it makes sense.”

For its part, Ivanhoe Pictures is in talks with “the most senior officials in Thailand, both on provincial and national levels, about the rescue project,” according to Variety

“If it’s a newsworthy event. If the story’s fact, then nobody owns that story,” entertainment and intellectual property lawyer Stephen Rodner explained by phone. Rodner, senior counsel at Pryor Cashman in New York, has long worked with clients seeking to adapt true stories for the screen.

To put it simply, Rodner said, any newsworthy story is fair game, at least under US law. Even a public figure can’t block someone from making a movie about his or her life, though Rodner notes that “the one thing you can’t do is libel anybody in the film.”

However, the private details of an individual’s life, as well as elements of the story that were not publicly reported, are not as readily available. To gain access to those, a production company would need to find ways to make deals with individuals and entities involved in the story.

It all boils down to access. Because Ivanhoe Pictures is working with the Thai Navy and the country’s government, for instance, they may have access to people, places, and information more easily in making the film.

And at least under US law, acquiring life rights can give the filmmakers access to information that may be private. “I assume they could make a contract with the people involved and get information that nobody else has,” Rodner said. “They can also, by contract, have them not cooperate” with any other production, noting that the people under question in this case are not US citizens and thus the laws may vary some.

But “as far as making a film on a newsworthy event, anybody could do it,” Rodner noted. And there’s no way for one production to block another from happening, unless one screenplay blatantly rips off another. Publicly reported news stories are fair game to anyone.

Given the commercial value of the story, there’s a strong possibility that both films could go ahead, and maybe even be released around the same time.

Rescue workers at the cave on July 4, days before the rescue succeeded. Linh Pham/Getty Images

And that’s a smart business move. As critic Lara Zarum wrote in the Village Voice following the release of Clint Eastwood’s The 15:17 to Paris, Hollywood has always had a fascination with quickly retelling tales of heroism, stretching back to the 1930s. Since 9/11, those stories have taken on a particularly triumphal and patriotic cast for Americans, in movies like Lone Survivor and American Sniper.

But, as she notes, “the acceleration of this process over the past decade means more and more people absorb these incidents not through reporting but through the prism of Hollywood convention, with all the mythologizing and smoothing-over of inconvenient bumps that implies.”

It’s possible that’s what Chu is worried about: that the movie version of the rescue story will become the version of the story in people’s minds, and that it may displace the Thai community who rallied around the rescue attempt in favor of a white savior.

For their part, PureFlix sees the film as an inspirational tale anyone could appreciate. “I believe this story demonstrates all the elements audiences long for — hope in the midst of tragedy, a miraculous story, the determination of the boys, their coach and the rescuers. It exemplifies the power of the human spirit,” Scott wrote. “This was an event every parent could identify with and that united our world as we all prayed for a miraculous outcome, and one we received.”

Making a movie takes a while, so we won’t know the results right away. But for now, the race to bend the Thai cave rescue saga into a captivating big-screen spectacle is on.

Original Source -> Competing movies about the Thai cave rescue are already in the works

via The Conservative Brief

#IFTTT #The Conservative Brief

0 notes