She Said (2022)

[Bastet]

I finally had a chance to watch this, and while it leaves out how The New York Times squashed Harvey Weinstein stories for years, only letting this one go forward because they were trying to scoop Ronan Farrow's piece in The New Yorker (that race to publish is briefly touched on, but that he had more people talking to him because the NYT's prior conduct left many of the actors reticent to talk with its reporters is ignored), within the vacuum of what it chooses to cover, it is engrossing. 

It's in the tradition of All the President's Men and Spotlight in its storytelling - a chronological dramatization of an importance piece of investigative journalism, illuminating along the way the system that deliberately enabled and covered up the particular abuse - and that it was nowhere near as widely received as either of those films is incredibly disheartening.  It has some minor flaws, of course, but I have no doubt that the epidemic of gender-based harassment and violence being the subject of investigation explored is a big part of why audiences were less interested in retracing how one particular big story of such abuse came to be exposed, rather than the particular merits of the films explaining the degree of difference.

So, I made it a thread.  It’s currently streaming on Prime.

It follows the reporters without minimizing the risk the victims took in speaking with them, or the importance of their bravery.  I really like that it spends more time on the non-famous victims than on the actors.  And, while the film is captivating (the tension in the scene where they get his rep to confirm settlement agreements exist is a great example; so damn natural, and subtly scored), it plays out at a slow enough pace that we feel the time it took for the victims to decide to come forward, and then the time the reporters gave them to tell their stories rather than rushing through what was a painful slog for women who had no reason to believe sticking their necks out there would result in anything other than maybe getting their heads chopped off.

Hearing how the Miramax assistants tried to help each other, suggesting ways to minimize the danger when forced to be alone with Harvey, despite still being young and powerless themselves is important, because that goes on a lot -- women trying to navigate a predatory system as best they can, because their only recourse is to quit, risking their entire career.  And we also see the flip side, where young women didn’t know it happened to anyone else, and assumed he tried it with others, but they were stronger and smarter than her and said no.  "It's like he took my voice that day, just when I was about to start finding it" was heartbreaking.

I appreciate that the flashbacks never show the violence, so there's no chance of a scene meant to convey the horror instead playing as gratuitous or exploitative.  We don't even see Weinstein other than the back of  his head, and occasionally hear his voice.  This is a thoughtfully made film, and it's not a coincidence it was written and directed by women (based, of course, on the book written by the two women who broke the story in the NYT).

And I deeply appreciate that, just like in any film about male reporters working long and odd hours on a big story, they are not presented as failed spouses and parents.  They're still involved, and loving, and the husbands and kids adjust fine.

There's not as much room for it in a film as in the book, but how Jodi Kantor being Jewish played into her investigation is nicely woven in -- how it gave her an in with the accountant who hated Harvey, but how others in Weinstein's circle would use it to try and "hey, we're all together in the tribe here" move her away from the story.  They also didn't delve into Weinstein having his spies follow them beyond one brief scene, but that's effective enough.

I like the scene where the reporters and editor are trying to discuss the investigation while getting something to eat, and some guy keeps trying to do the "my friend wants to talk to you" routine despite being asked to leave them alone, and that when Megan finally snaps, it gets laughed off as "frigid bitches".  It's a nice nod to the spectrum of behavior for which women are the ones punished when they object to it.

I also - as a women's rights lawyer who's indeed had most sexual harassment cases end in settlement, I agree this needs to be talked about a lot more - appreciate the inclusion of a scene explicitly addressing how those settlements routinely include non-disclosure clauses, so if cash for silence is as good as it gets, how much of a victory is that if nothing changes?  I especially like going into the details of one early settlement agreement, where the victims demanded conditions such as him going to counseling, and that if he wound up settling with someone else within two years, it had to be reported and he had to be fired - focusing on preventing future harm, not just providing themselves some small measure of redress - while the company demanded outrageous conditions such as their not being able to tell a doctor and that they not even be given their own copies of the agreement.

I initially wished they’d included why Weinstein kept desperately asking, during those "we're going to print, how do you want to respond?" calls at the end, whether they'd talked to Gwyneth Paltrow – because he’d used her as an example to so many other young female actors, implying she had slept with him and that’s why he gave her such a career and would do the same for them; if she had told the reporters that never happened, that was going to bring a lot of women forward with his lies if nothing else – but I understand that ending it with publication means that can’t be included, as they didn’t cotton to the reason behind that obsession until later.

The facts on screen after the end present an overly optimistic picture in terms of the policy changes enacted as a result of the flood of revelations this resulted in, as most of them are lip service, and omitting the Pulitzer award seems done to avoid having to mention they shared it with Farrow.  But it's a good film.  And contains great performances throughout, not just from the leads but the supporting cast -- particularly Samantha Morton, Jennifer Ehle, and the always-wonderful Patricia Clarkson.

Edited May 29, 2023 by Bastet

[EtheltoTillie]

Excellent review, @Bastet.  I finally got to watch this today.   I had so many of the same thoughts and no mental bandwidth to write it up so cogently.  At the beginning of the movie, I thought it was a bit stilted/stagey, but then I became very engrossed.  Weinstein, along with Cosby and Epstein, are such monsters.  Their entire lives revolve around making sure they can be sexual predators.  Think of how much this goes on everywhere in non-glamour industries, where victims are even less likely to be noticed.  Weinstein was always a hideous-looking boor but he managed to secure enough power to overcome his likely lack of appeal to any women.

I too wondered why Weinstein kept becoming unhinged over Gwyneth Paltrow.  She had no settlement or NDA, as far as we know.  As you suggest, he was afraid she would be an example for others.

They did skimp on the revelations that he had hired those ex-Mossad agents to spy on everyone. 

I don't know if they used an actor for Weinstein or was it recordings of him?  They didn't credit the actor whose back of the head was shown. 

Lisa Bloom, what a piece of work.  And Linda Fairstein too!  She still defends the convictions of the Central Park Five.  (I used that Prime feature where you can pause and see the names of all the actors in the scene--Linda Fairstein was a character in that last scene with Weinstein's head.)

I have been involved in NDAs also, but I don't practice in that area anymore.  It's been going on a long time and it has always been frustrating.  Only now is it finally being examined as a corporate governance problem. 

After this movie I watched the Boston Strangler movie, another investigative journalism adventure with two groundbreaking women reporters.  I recommend as a great companion piece.

I was tickled to see that each movie featured an actress who played Elizbeth Bennet in a top Pride and Prejudice adaptation.  Keira Knightly and Jennifer Ehle.  I favor the Ehle version. 

 

Edited June 4, 2023 by EtheltoTillie

[Bastet]

56 minutes ago, EtheltoTillie said:

Lisa Bloom, what a piece of work.  And Linda Fairstein too! 

I love that the film took the time to call both of them out.  Briefly, as they're not the biggest part of the problem, but their roles in enabling him were named, and I appreciate that.

 

[Anela]

I watched this in February, on Peacock. I don't understand why Weinstein would push the idea that Gwyneth slept with him, when her parents were a famous actress and director, and Steven Spielberg is her godfather. She didn't need him to get roles.

Edited June 5, 2023 by Anela

[EtheltoTillie]

5 minutes ago, Anela said:

I watched this in February, on Peacock. I don't understand why Weinstein would push the idea that Gwyneth slept with him, when her parents were a famous actress and director, and Steven Spielberg is her godfather. She didn't need him to get roles.

He truly is a monster, though.

[Anela]

7 minutes ago, EtheltoTillie said:

He truly is a monster, though.

Oh, definitely. 

[EtheltoTillie]

9 hours ago, Anela said:

Oh, definitely. 

What I meant was he's such a monster he'd do something just because . . .  Sorry if unclear. 

[Anela]

14 hours ago, EtheltoTillie said:

What I meant was he's such a monster he'd do something just because . . .  Sorry if unclear. 

It's okay. :) But, thanks, I do worry about being misunderstood.

He also got away with it for decades, so he must have thought that nobody would really question it. 

[SunnyBeBe]

I saw this a while back and loved it!  Omg, it’s so well done and perfectly cast.  It’s tough subject matter, but I think I’ll rewatch it soon. 

[slowpoked]

I just saw this movie last night, and it was so well done! Like @Bastet said, I’m surprised it didn’t get the same mileage as Spotlight - another movie I enjoyed - seeing as it has the same structure and tone. I wonder if it’s because, while he has been banished from the industry forever, that Hollywood isn’t yet ready to confront its own systemic failures that allowed Weinstein and others to flourish, so in that sense, this movie got “shadowbanned” somehow from the awards circuit, so it gets less attention. It only made a soft landing in BAFTA. Which is quite funny in the sense that it was the assistants in the London Miramax office who broke the story wide open for Megan and Jodi.

I really like watching how the two women worked together, how they went to interviews as a pair, how they divided the work, without ever resorting to “that’s my scoop, or that’s my source!” catfights. When Jodi cried in the end when Ashley Judd finally agreed to go on record, I loved how Megan was so happy for Jody. Zoe and Carey had great chemistry together. Patricia Clarkson as their very calm and “voice of reason” boss also did very well.

On 5/28/2023 at 10:29 PM, Bastet said:

while it leaves out how The New York Times squashed Harvey Weinstein stories for years,

They actually did touch on this briefly at the beginning, when Jodi was talking to Rose McGowan. Rose admonished Jodi that NYT didn’t do anything about her story, despite telling a lot of people about it, and that when she even spoke at a rally about women being harrased by powerful men, the story and event ended up on the NYT Style Section instead. Dean also mentioned being contacted by Harvey a lot of times previously (alluding to the the past incidents of being able to squash the story).

Edited July 23, 2023 by slowpoked

[DanaK]

I saw this a few weeks ago and thought it was pretty good given it was mostly a lot of people talking. There were so many moving scenes, particularly from women characters. The scenes with I think lawyer Lanny Davis were pretty striking. First, that he would continue to defend Weinstein (or just be his lawyer) and then him talking around NDA agreements and somewhat confirming a range. It is too bad it basically disappeared at the box office and awards circuits.

[slowpoked]

On 5/28/2023 at 10:29 PM, Bastet said:

I appreciate that the flashbacks never show the violence, so there's no chance of a scene meant to convey the horror instead playing as gratuitous or exploitative.  We don't even see Weinstein other than the back of  his head, and occasionally hear his voice.  This is a thoughtfully made film, and it's not a coincidence it was written and directed by women (based, of course, on the book written by the two women who broke the story in the NYT).

 

This is one of the shining moments of the film. For a story that tackles an issue that can easily be sensationalized and even be exploitative, they went with a quieter but more impactful approach. That scene where it shows different hotel hallways while it plays the voice recording of one of the women that Harvey harrassed was more powerful had they actually shown what happened in the room. It signifies that it wasn’t just one incident, with one hotel, with one woman.

And the recounting of the assistants without having the simultaneous flashbacks of what actually happened in the room was also very well done. Focusing on the words of the assistants gave what happened to them more gravitas than if the actual visuals were provided. And it gave the actresses themselves a chance to shine, without relegating their voices in the background.

As you said, it’s no surprise that the film handled very sensitive topics like this more delicately and thoughtfully since women are in-charge of both the script and direction. I want to think that that was also a very conscious choice of everyone involved, since one of the major complaints against Weinstein that came out later was that he would order to have more gratuitous sex scenes that have no importance in the film (Salma Hayek and Frida).

[Bastet]

On 6/4/2023 at 6:45 PM, Anela said:

I watched this in February, on Peacock. I don't understand why Weinstein would push the idea that Gwyneth slept with him, when her parents were a famous actress and director, and Steven Spielberg is her godfather. She didn't need him to get roles.

Her parents could get her roles, but the narrative was that Weinstein got her the Oscar many people felt she didn't deserve.  So he used her as an example to a bunch of other young female actors -- I have so much power in this town I was able to make sure she won, and I can drive your career, too, if you sleep with me.