Idiot box thread

[O Really]

OK, IMNVHO, this is a ridiculous example of the often misused term "cancel culture" running amok.
Headline:
"Despite Danny Masterson Sentencing, ‘That ’70s Show’ Reruns Still Airing
Peacock and digital network Laff currently run the comedy, and it's available for purchase on Amazon."

And why TF would it not be? The show was on for 8 years, gone now for 18, had a lot of featured actors who have since gone on to their own career success and who ostensibly had nothing to do with Masterson's crimes.

The authors of the article apparently actually tried to contact Peacock, et. al., I guess to ask if they were going to take the show off air and were properly and appropriately ignored. But then, "Hollywood Reporter"

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv ... 235585847/

Some people will be offended that Masterson collects residuals. Why shouldn't he? He did the work, which was not related to the crime.
Some people will be unable to watch the "comedy" without thinking about rape. Laura Prepon or Mila would probably fight back.
Have you tried finding Cosby Show reruns lately? No
'Me too' protests are possible, potentially harming other Peacock/Laff/Amazon programming. I really can't see a significant number of people dropping Peacock because they run an 18 year old show with one of the characters having later turned criminal.
Sitcom reruns are a dime a dozen and it doesn't take much of a drop in viewership for a broadcaster/streamer to look elsewhere.

I was never a fan so none of this applies to me, but I can see why it might be an issue.

[O Really]

Feel the same way about The Cosby Show?

The Cosby Show is a little different in that it's totally all about Bill even down to the name. And when he's the main character, it might be more difficult to watch the show and see Dr Huxtable instead of serial rapist.

But if you want to watch it, it's on Amazon Prime

[Vrede too]

Some people will be offended that Masterson collects residuals.
Why shouldn't he? He did the work, which was not related to the crime.
He should, but not everyone is comfortable funding a rapist. Netflix fired Masterson from its comedy series The Ranch. Was that wrong?
Some people will be unable to watch the "comedy" without thinking about rape.
Laura Prepon or Mila would probably fight back.
Against Masterson or against these viewers? If the latter, they can't help the associations people make. I surfed away from a movie with Kevin Spacey in it a couple of days ago.
Have you tried finding Cosby Show reruns lately?
No
Would you enjoy watching if you found it? I wouldn't. Masterson was a key ensemble member, almost Cosby-level.
'Me too' protests are possible, potentially harming other Peacock/Laff/Amazon programming.
I really can't see a significant number of people dropping Peacock because they run an 18 year old show with one of the characters having later turned criminal.
There are plenty of streaming options out there, if protests are even organized. Besides, the rapes occurred while the show was still on, between 2001 and 2003.
Sitcom reruns are a dime a dozen and it doesn't take much of a drop in viewership for a broadcaster/streamer to look elsewhere.

I was never a fan so none of this applies to me, but I can see why it might be an issue.

[O Really]

If somebody does the crime, let 'em do the time. But spreading guilt through proximity is a dangerous slope.

[billy.pilgrim]

Seems strange to me that Michael Jackson gets a pass from most people.

[Vrede too]

If somebody does the crime, let 'em do the time. But spreading guilt through proximity is a dangerous slope.

Who is "spreading guilt"? Personal boycotts represent what decent people can stomach. If others are affected, that's on the slimy rapist, 100%.

[O Really]

Seems strange to me that Michael Jackson gets a pass from most people.

Might be because he was acquitted in the one allegation that went to trial, and everybody knew he was weird for years.

[O Really]

If somebody does the crime, let 'em do the time. But spreading guilt through proximity is a dangerous slope.

Who is "spreading guilt"? Personal boycotts represent what decent people can stomach. If others are affected, that's on the slimy rapist, 100%.

The slimy rapist may be at the root of the problem, but it's not their decision to deprive other actors of their lawful earnings when they had nothing to do with the crime. Your logic works fine for me where the criminal is the primary draw or irreplaceable to the show, but if the show is "That 70's show" or "Friends" or even "Seinfeld" (as long as Jerry Seinfeld isn't the criminal) then the other actors and writers shouldn't be collateral damage.

If the show is still in production, you kill the slimy rapist off and move on. If the show is long out of production, viewers can say "that guy was really good - too bad he totally effed up his life."

[billy.pilgrim]

Seems strange to me that Michael Jackson gets a pass from most people.

Might be because he was acquitted in the one allegation that went to trial, and everybody knew he was weird for years.

The public acceptance of what i saw as pedophilia always bothered me. I never could listen to his music after learning about his neverland child attraction

[O Really]

Seems strange to me that Michael Jackson gets a pass from most people.

Might be because he was acquitted in the one allegation that went to trial, and everybody knew he was weird for years.

The public acceptance of what i saw as pedophilia always bothered me. I never could listen to his music after learning about his neverland child attraction

I wonder if it would have been different if he'd been convicted and hadn't died.

[billy.pilgrim]

Seems strange to me that Michael Jackson gets a pass from most people.

Might be because he was acquitted in the one allegation that went to trial, and everybody knew he was weird for years.

The public acceptance of what i saw as pedophilia always bothered me. I never could listen to his music after learning about his neverland child attraction

I wonder if it would have been different if he'd been convicted and hadn't died.

Who knows about people these days. We do know for certain that nearly half of the 330+ million of us will believe obvious lies, so, He Was Framed, could be a popular bumper sticker.
It was obvious before he died.

I do share some of the ? Hypocrisy, or is it more Not Hypocrisy or maybe Hypocrisy Lite toward people more removed by time from our current values, like Hitchcock. I love Hitchcock, but can no longer watch Woody Allen without thinking, Asshole, every time he was in front of the camera. It's distracting in the same way that I imagine a listening to a Michael song would be.

[Vrede too]

Who knows about people these days. We do know for certain that nearly half of the 330+ million of us will believe obvious lies, so, He Was Framed, could be a popular bumper sticker.
It was obvious before he died.

I do share some of the ? Hypocrisy, or is it more Not Hypocrisy or maybe Hypocrisy Lite toward people more removed by time from our current values, like Hitchcock. I love Hitchcock, but can no longer watch Woody Allen without thinking, Asshole, every time he was in front of the camera. It's distracting in the same way that I imagine a listening to a Michael song would be.

Ditto, I mostly shun Woody Allen films. Knowing his personal life is just too distracting. Same with MJ's music.

Hitchcock? His Representation of women was debatable, but he did create more memorable female characters than most of his era (and one of the all time great drag queens ). Is there something worse?

[O Really]

There were undoubtedly a lot of assholes in film and music over the years that we didn't know were assholes. I've always found it interesting that people thought Milli Vanilli music was great until they found out the guys were just the face of a fictional band and then suddenly the music wasn't any good anymore. I guess they had forgotten about the Monkees or believed nobody had ever lip-synched in a performance before.

[Vrede too]

PBS: American Experience
The Busing Battleground
Episode (first) aired Sep 11, 2023

Court-mandated social integration unleashes racial unrest throughout Boston in the 1970s as Black and White students are bused together.

Storyline

On June 21, 1974, in response to decades of racial segregation and evidence of educational disparities, the U.S. District Court Judge W. Arthur Garrity ordered the Boston Public Schools to integrate through a court-mandated busing plan. Despite the city's self-proclaimed reputation as the "cradle of liberty" and the "birthplace of abolition," it had always been, as historian Zebulon Miletsky writes, a deeply racially divided city. Forced busing would catalyze racial violence and class tensions across the city, and media coverage of the unrest would shape Boston's reputation and attitudes towards school desegregation across the country for decades to come. Drawing upon eyewitness accounts of participants, oral histories, and rare news archives, The Busing Battleground examines the 1974 effort to end segregation in Boston's public schools, detailing the decade's long struggle for educational equity that preceded the busing crisis.

Trailer

Excellent program, but now I'm thoroughly depressed and hopeless. It is streaming.

[billy.pilgrim]

Who knows about people these days. We do know for certain that nearly half of the 330+ million of us will believe obvious lies, so, He Was Framed, could be a popular bumper sticker.
It was obvious before he died.

I do share some of the ? Hypocrisy, or is it more Not Hypocrisy or maybe Hypocrisy Lite toward people more removed by time from our current values, like Hitchcock. I love Hitchcock, but can no longer watch Woody Allen without thinking, Asshole, every time he was in front of the camera. It's distracting in the same way that I imagine a listening to a Michael song would be.

Ditto, I mostly shun Woody Allen films. Knowing his personal life is just too distracting. Same with MJ's music.

Hitchcock? His Representation of women was debatable, but he did create more memorable female characters than most of his era (and one of the all time great drag queens ). Is there something worse?

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-ente ... 57101.html

This is all I know about Hitchcock. I tend to look at it as more "the times" when some women were directed to the Director's couch and others requested the couch as a path toward Stardom.
It's not like the couch wasn't well known.

[Vrede too]

Ditto, I mostly shun Woody Allen films. Knowing his personal life is just too distracting. Same with MJ's music.

Hitchcock? His Representation of women was debatable, but he did create more memorable female characters than most of his era (and one of the all time great drag queens ). Is there something worse?

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-ente ... 57101.html

This is all I know about Hitchcock. I tend to look at it as more "the times" when some women were directed to the Director's couch and others requested the couch as a path toward Stardom.
It's not like the couch wasn't well known.

Yeah, the Director's couch was there and actresses that shunned it might be out of work, but sexual assault and stalking were never okay. I'll have a hard time watching Hitchcock without being distracted by this knowledge.

[billy.pilgrim]

Ditto, I mostly shun Woody Allen films. Knowing his personal life is just too distracting. Same with MJ's music.

Hitchcock? His Representation of women was debatable, but he did create more memorable female characters than most of his era (and one of the all time great drag queens ). Is there something worse?

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-ente ... 57101.html

This is all I know about Hitchcock. I tend to look at it as more "the times" when some women were directed to the Director's couch and others requested the couch as a path toward Stardom.
It's not like the couch wasn't well known.

Yeah, the Director's couch was there and actresses that shunned it might be out of work, but sexual assault and stalking were never okay. I'll have a hard time watching Hitchcock without being distracted by this knowledge.

How do you feel about the woman who went out to sleep their way into the movies, or into any other great job they couldn't have made on their own?

[Vrede too]

How do you feel about the woman who went out to sleep their way into the movies, or into any other great job they couldn't have made on their own?

Not something I respect, but not as bad as using physical force or threats IMO. Who do you have in mind?

[billy.pilgrim]

How do you feel about the woman who went out to sleep their way into the movies, or into any other great job they couldn't have made on their own?

Not something I respect, but not as bad as using physical force or threats IMO. Who do you have in mind?

Nothing specific.
Of course physical force and retaliation threats (if true about Hitchcock) can't be tolerated today or looking back 75 years.

[O Really]

I don't think anybody ever said that "casting couch" selection or absolute power of movie moguls who could make or break a career on a whim was a good thing. But I do think we have a tendency to want to punish people today for acts that weren't crimes at the time. Despicable, maybe, but not crimes. It's as if they change the standards and want to punish retroactively. The studios and those who ran them, had enormous power because of money and that they had the ability to offer what many people craved - stardom or something close to it. The powerful men could get away with anything because nobody reported - nobody wanted to get on the bad side. The studios owned the performers and if Hitchcock (for example) didn't want you to get work, you weren't getting work. Again, nobody thought this was a good thing, but hundreds of thousands of people were willing to put up with it to get their chance at the golden ring.