Loved what Timothee Chalamet just said at the Critics Choice Awards. "You know, Josh [Safdie], you made a story about a flawed man with a relatable dream. And you didn't preach to the audience about what's right and wrong. And I think we should all be telling stories like that." Change is in the air!
Thank God we have no record of Shakespeare's political takes outside of what you read-between-the-lines in his plays. Yes, let the art speak for itself.
Idiot. RepubliKKkKans in control. so funny looking at this from China. No one to blame but the party in control. You are a moron like most stupid white Republicans
"I feel very strongly that actors haven't any business at all to shoot their faces off about things I know we know very little about."
--Gary Cooper
"Actors shouldn’t campaign because they live in another world from ordinary people. If actors got an ounce of sense with every dollar they made, it would be all right."
--Walter Brennan
"Nothing multiplies the number of fools so much as the example of celebrities."
That was an excellent piece and right on the mark. We live in a time in which holding back, not satisfying the craving to speak or censure or merely belittle is front and center. Many adults were raised by a generation of parents who didn't value their own moral authority and the idea that delayed gratification is a great thing.
I disagree. We all have the right to speak honestly regarding our political views. I especially see the need for women's voices to be heard as they have for far too long been silenced.
“Ms Sweeney please say the thing. You must say the thing. We are all saying the thing and we have a lot of money backing us to say the thing. You’ll say the thing won’t you?”
I see the need for more liberal women to shut their flapping gums. They have been loud, screaming, whining, complaining and raging for too long. And the crap that has been coming out of their mouths is absurd, irrational and insane. They should get some cognitive behavior therapy and calm the f**k down.
That was your takeaway??? Ugh. Of course we all have the right to speak honestly regarding our political views. We also have the right NOT to. No one was silencing these women's voices--THEY decided how to use or NOT use them. You miss the point with the misogyny inference.
Yes that is what I heard In your piece, “After years of loud, opinionated Hollywood stars in interviews, on red carpets, shooting their mouths off, blazing across social media trumpeting their politics to grab up all that delicious liberal street cred, making sure we know that they’re on the right side of history…it appears that a few of them are taking a beat.”
I agree we all have the choice to speak or not to speak; you seem to only approve of that choice when the speaker orates in a manner that you approve.
Reading Keira Knightley's reply is far different from actually HEARING her say it. She essentially said "f*** you" to the interviewer, but it reads like a polished statement.
Her response was so tone deaf. Like how do you work for Harry Potter in 2025 & not know about the outstanding controversy around JK. An easy response is doing a HP project is so far removed from JK at this point that it doesn’t really matter
Yeah, trans people and their families don't take her little giggle and flippant "we all have to get along" as "charming". It's so dismissive of the massive harm one person is doing to an entire group of people. But I digress. She's pretty and so her flipping an opportunity to defend and stand up for marginalized people can be written off as "charming".
I don't think she's a jerk or a transphobe or anything. I just think she chose protecting her career in that moment instead of saying anything in support or defense of the group of people who have become inextricably fixed in JK's crosshairs.
There are ways to say the right thing without being inflammatory or rude. This wasn't it. Cowardice isn't charming.
I for one appreciate her not fanning the “Rowling is sooo controversial” flames. Let the whinny groups continue to complain, and the rest of society can get on with their lives.
What was she supposed to say? She's being interviewed to promote her gig doing audiobooks of Rowling's work. She's representing her employer and fulfilling her contractual obligation to promote the product. For some, she's already a heretic, a traitor, she's aiding and abetting the enemy by even taking the job! As I say in my piece--she's damned if she does, damned if she doesn't. Asking her the question in that interview was manipulative, and clearly intended to call her out in a passive aggressive way, and put her on the spot to defend her choice to do the thing she's there to promote. What actually would have satisfied you? I think I know. She shouldn't have taken the job at all. Well, she did. And I don't think it's cowardly to choose to make a plea that we all learn to get along in these divisive times. An actress voicing a character in the best selling book of all time isn't going to destroy the lives of trans people and their families, and to make her responsible for that is deranged.
Oh no, a fucking millionaire celebrity being more worried about a contract than human rights.
My expectation is high, that's it. My expectation is for human beings to honor other human beings and their essential human rights, and anything less than that I will be critical of. You're not changing my mind, and we clearly do not agree.
My adult son is trans and I will never accept less than full human rights for him, and I will advocate for that unceasingly. JK Rowling has already said, multiple times, that ALL PROCEEDS from every one of her projects going forward is going to her "nonprofit" that exists solely to target and harass trans people. Every dime. She's said it herself. Ergo, any support of any of her projects is directly, unequivocally, without confusion, supporting the assault on trans people led by JKR.
Again, we clearly aren't going to agree so there's no point in back and forth.
Self righteous indignation over celebrity gossip and the performative social justice virtue signaling that it breeds will result in zero real societal change, because it's founded entirely in fiction.. It's anti everything.
I respect your position and wish you well. I will merely say—and this is at the root of why I wrote what I wrote—we should not be looking to “fucking millionaire celebrities” for moral leadership. We should elect better leaders and let actors act.
“Ms Sweeney you must perform the mimetic slogan that we all do. Won’t you say the thing?”
Sweeney’s heretical response was not so much in what she did not say but rather the *GFY* look she gave the low level jacobin priestess interviewing her.
Virtue? Not directly. But definitely heresy. Which is a form of virtue.
That's a projection. Had a male actor done the same thing over the past few weeks I would have included him and praised him as well. This isn't about women being quiet, if anything my admiration is for these strong women whose personal agency allows them to choose what fight they want and what fight they want to walk away from.
That's not actually the definition of agency. I didn't say you were thinking that I just said your words reek of this energy. And I'm not projecting anything. I'm speaking my mind I have agency
Personal agency: An individual's capacity to make choices and take actions that influence their life and environment. Thanks for sharing. It's been swell.
There is no point in trying to argue with people who push out memes every morning, as several of my super-Democrat acquaintances do. Lots and lots of memes with no original thoughts behind them.
Ah! Got it! Considering that my husband and I were at dinner with some of these people one night right after COVID, and they were saying that people who didn't get vaccinated should be denied health care (and all the other tropes with which we have become familiar), my answer would be "Probably."
Loved what Timothee Chalamet just said at the Critics Choice Awards. "You know, Josh [Safdie], you made a story about a flawed man with a relatable dream. And you didn't preach to the audience about what's right and wrong. And I think we should all be telling stories like that." Change is in the air!
The clip: https://x.com/timotheenation/status/2008008766051197074
Thank God we have no record of Shakespeare's political takes outside of what you read-between-the-lines in his plays. Yes, let the art speak for itself.
These women are refreshing.
Sydney Sweeney is the Steve McQueen of the 2020s. Unflappable.
‘her face like Switzerland’…haha love this sentence.
On a bell curve of Heresy:
Sweeney - A+ (daggers of death)
Nightly - B+ (jovial and fun!)
Lawrence - C- (passing grade but barely)
Idiot. RepubliKKkKans in control. so funny looking at this from China. No one to blame but the party in control. You are a moron like most stupid white Republicans
"I feel very strongly that actors haven't any business at all to shoot their faces off about things I know we know very little about."
--Gary Cooper
"Actors shouldn’t campaign because they live in another world from ordinary people. If actors got an ounce of sense with every dollar they made, it would be all right."
--Walter Brennan
"Nothing multiplies the number of fools so much as the example of celebrities."
--Nicolas Gomez Davila
yes, Gomez Davila!
so rarely seen out in the wild.
he was somehow both behind and ahead of his time.
Sydney Sweeney really does,objectively, have good jeans. If you can’t see that you are retodded.
I’ve never understood why what famous people think matters beyond what’s in their job description, nice jeans or not.
That was an excellent piece and right on the mark. We live in a time in which holding back, not satisfying the craving to speak or censure or merely belittle is front and center. Many adults were raised by a generation of parents who didn't value their own moral authority and the idea that delayed gratification is a great thing.
Thank you for a measured and useful article.
I disagree. We all have the right to speak honestly regarding our political views. I especially see the need for women's voices to be heard as they have for far too long been silenced.
“Ms Sweeney please say the thing. You must say the thing. We are all saying the thing and we have a lot of money backing us to say the thing. You’ll say the thing won’t you?”
Sweeney “no”
Heresy.
I see the need for more liberal women to shut their flapping gums. They have been loud, screaming, whining, complaining and raging for too long. And the crap that has been coming out of their mouths is absurd, irrational and insane. They should get some cognitive behavior therapy and calm the f**k down.
I need a “laughing like” emoji too.
I long for a “laughing like” icon.
That was your takeaway??? Ugh. Of course we all have the right to speak honestly regarding our political views. We also have the right NOT to. No one was silencing these women's voices--THEY decided how to use or NOT use them. You miss the point with the misogyny inference.
Yes that is what I heard In your piece, “After years of loud, opinionated Hollywood stars in interviews, on red carpets, shooting their mouths off, blazing across social media trumpeting their politics to grab up all that delicious liberal street cred, making sure we know that they’re on the right side of history…it appears that a few of them are taking a beat.”
I agree we all have the choice to speak or not to speak; you seem to only approve of that choice when the speaker orates in a manner that you approve.
Have you heard Robert DeNiro???
You don't approve?
Okay. We are definitely not communicating. Thanks for playing.
Its about money, specifically the money from people who are engaged in oppression.
Reading Keira Knightley's reply is far different from actually HEARING her say it. She essentially said "f*** you" to the interviewer, but it reads like a polished statement.
Yeah, you can’t capture the lighthearted facetiousness of her “I’m very sorry” on the page. She’s a star for a reason.
Her response was so tone deaf. Like how do you work for Harry Potter in 2025 & not know about the outstanding controversy around JK. An easy response is doing a HP project is so far removed from JK at this point that it doesn’t really matter
Yeah, trans people and their families don't take her little giggle and flippant "we all have to get along" as "charming". It's so dismissive of the massive harm one person is doing to an entire group of people. But I digress. She's pretty and so her flipping an opportunity to defend and stand up for marginalized people can be written off as "charming".
I don't think she's a jerk or a transphobe or anything. I just think she chose protecting her career in that moment instead of saying anything in support or defense of the group of people who have become inextricably fixed in JK's crosshairs.
There are ways to say the right thing without being inflammatory or rude. This wasn't it. Cowardice isn't charming.
I for one appreciate her not fanning the “Rowling is sooo controversial” flames. Let the whinny groups continue to complain, and the rest of society can get on with their lives.
What was she supposed to say? She's being interviewed to promote her gig doing audiobooks of Rowling's work. She's representing her employer and fulfilling her contractual obligation to promote the product. For some, she's already a heretic, a traitor, she's aiding and abetting the enemy by even taking the job! As I say in my piece--she's damned if she does, damned if she doesn't. Asking her the question in that interview was manipulative, and clearly intended to call her out in a passive aggressive way, and put her on the spot to defend her choice to do the thing she's there to promote. What actually would have satisfied you? I think I know. She shouldn't have taken the job at all. Well, she did. And I don't think it's cowardly to choose to make a plea that we all learn to get along in these divisive times. An actress voicing a character in the best selling book of all time isn't going to destroy the lives of trans people and their families, and to make her responsible for that is deranged.
I think not LOLing while also being blissfully unaware of a fairly common knowledge aspect of JK Rowling would have been fine
Oh no, a fucking millionaire celebrity being more worried about a contract than human rights.
My expectation is high, that's it. My expectation is for human beings to honor other human beings and their essential human rights, and anything less than that I will be critical of. You're not changing my mind, and we clearly do not agree.
My adult son is trans and I will never accept less than full human rights for him, and I will advocate for that unceasingly. JK Rowling has already said, multiple times, that ALL PROCEEDS from every one of her projects going forward is going to her "nonprofit" that exists solely to target and harass trans people. Every dime. She's said it herself. Ergo, any support of any of her projects is directly, unequivocally, without confusion, supporting the assault on trans people led by JKR.
Again, we clearly aren't going to agree so there's no point in back and forth.
Self righteous indignation over celebrity gossip and the performative social justice virtue signaling that it breeds will result in zero real societal change, because it's founded entirely in fiction.. It's anti everything.
I respect your position and wish you well. I will merely say—and this is at the root of why I wrote what I wrote—we should not be looking to “fucking millionaire celebrities” for moral leadership. We should elect better leaders and let actors act.
The Sydney interview, the interviewer doesn’t even seem serious. Like she’s in on the joke. That is, she thinks the question is ridiculous.
Interesting. The way I took it was her faking not being serious with all the vocal fry and giggling. But she wanted that moment.
But she knew it was cringey af …
Oh, totally, she was a complete wreck
Yeah I don't think it's as virtuous as you imagine.
This also reeks a little bit of good for those women for keeping their mouth shut
“Ms Sweeney you must perform the mimetic slogan that we all do. Won’t you say the thing?”
Sweeney’s heretical response was not so much in what she did not say but rather the *GFY* look she gave the low level jacobin priestess interviewing her.
Virtue? Not directly. But definitely heresy. Which is a form of virtue.
That's a projection. Had a male actor done the same thing over the past few weeks I would have included him and praised him as well. This isn't about women being quiet, if anything my admiration is for these strong women whose personal agency allows them to choose what fight they want and what fight they want to walk away from.
That's not actually the definition of agency. I didn't say you were thinking that I just said your words reek of this energy. And I'm not projecting anything. I'm speaking my mind I have agency
Personal agency: An individual's capacity to make choices and take actions that influence their life and environment. Thanks for sharing. It's been swell.
Nothing is.
There is no point in trying to argue with people who push out memes every morning, as several of my super-Democrat acquaintances do. Lots and lots of memes with no original thoughts behind them.
And everything is so nasty. Lately it's a lot of “I hope he dies.” Is that who you are? I dunno.
I don't see where in my comment anyone could assume I want anyone to die. So no, that's not who I am.
You misunderstand--sorry, I was figuratively saying to those who do post such sentiments, "Is that who you are?"
Ah! Got it! Considering that my husband and I were at dinner with some of these people one night right after COVID, and they were saying that people who didn't get vaccinated should be denied health care (and all the other tropes with which we have become familiar), my answer would be "Probably."