Untouchable

This documentary explains the story behind the New York Times article as well as Ronan Farrow's The New Yorker article detailing the abuse, harassment, threats and rape that Harvey Weinstein allegedly committed for decades. Decades! It goes way back to his school years with interviews, photos and videos piecing his rise and then his fall. I thought it was going to be too slow when the documentary began but then it wraps you up and takes you on a ride telling a heartbreaking, appalling story. Using interviews from actual women who were attacked, as well as former employees, it bolsters its case perfectly. Most likely Harvey will either plead or be imprisoned or both ( innocent until proven guilty) but in the meantime this story made me know what wrath he caused and know that women are safer with this 'man' gone. My heart breaks for the damage he caused so many. Thank you for telling your stories.

Any "backlash" against #MeToo is difficult because unlike chasing Soviet spies among Hollywood's greatest talents during McCarthyism or burning witches the purpose of it is surely not absurd and wrong. But this film shows quite a few problematic things with the movement born as a hashtag. The biggest problem I see is the conscious choice of bypassing the official justice system. I mean Weinstein is awaiting a trial now and he surely hopes for a fair one. Only Paz de la Huerta seemed to understand that if you were ready to go on Twitter or before cameras with your accusations, you should make at least a symbolic attempt at approaching the prosecutors to simply maintain some credibility. Other big problems are gossips and inside jokes treated as evidences of guilt. I think the film is premature to put it gently and quite morally questionable despite its noble intentions. "Leaving Neverland" comes to mind, although surely not a premature film - quite the opposite.

Harvey Weinstein was an excellent cinematographic producer with an extraordinary intuition. He was a workaholic and became then a geek without any real friend. He was also a boss as merciless as tyrannical who wouldn't take a « no » for an answer. Until then, it is objectively the public and well-known portrait of Harvey Weinstein before the media emergence of the scandal. Thus, this excellent documentary completes his curriculum vitae with an avalanche of testimonies as poignant as sorrowful. Personally, I was particularly moved by that of Hope Exiner D'Amore.

Harvey Weinstein was an unscrupulous and pathetic predator who shamefully abused his power. The description of his cv is now finished, as is his career.

It's a decent enough documentary but I didn't learn anything new from what's already been reported. This film kind of consolidates most of that reporting. A good point toward the end that it makes is that there are certainly others like him out there not only in Hollywood but other industry segments, more as a warning to potential victims than a preview of any upcoming prosecutions. Currently, Harvey is awaiting criminal trial in 2020, even as he just settled more lawsuits without admitting fault or otherwise being held accountable.

I am certainly no apologist for Weinstein, he has been despicable in a dozen ways, and even before the revelations about his predation on young women came out. Those predations against young women were criminal and I give high level of credibility to his accusers. But this film does not honestly explore how broadly this was known and accepted in Hollywood and how prevalent the casting couch culture has been -- and remains -- and how it fit into so well into the media and entertainment business and why. We have Ken Auletta pontificating, when Auletta was perhaps the closest of journalists to Charlie Rose, a friend and professional collaborator, appearing on the Charlie Rose show 96 times, when Charlie Rose's predations were an open secret. Indeed Rose's production company had been pushed out of PBS offices and moved to the media offices most well known to be toxic toward women -- the offices of Michael Bloomberg. Why no Rose and Bloomberg in the context?