Earlier this week, The Atlantic published their exposé on Bryan Singer. I know it’s my job to read these kinds of articles, but there isn’t a drink big enough to allow me to get through this piece. Suffice to say, the article contains statements from Singer’s many victims over the years, including one man who said Singer sexually assaulted him when he (the victim) was just 13 years old. You can read the piece here:
The “Bohemian Rhapsody” director Bryan Singer has been trailed by accusations of sexual misconduct for 20 years. Here, his alleged victims tell their stories. @MisterAlexFren1 and @maxapotter report: https://t.co/PeKrnUEqRu
— The Atlantic (@TheAtlantic) January 23, 2019
Many hoped/believed that a significant Singer exposé would have dropped in the middle of the #MeToo/sex-predator-gate moment in late 2017. There were widespread rumors that this kind of Atlantic-style exposé was about to drop, and suggestions that Singer was going AWOL from the set of Bohemian Rhapsody because he was trying to get his sh-t in order for when he was outed as a serial predator. What happened was that Singer was sued (in civil court) for rape. He denied it all and claimed it was all homophobia or something. His reaction to this Atlantic piece has been the same, calling it a “homophobic smear piece [which] has been conveniently timed to take advantage of” the success of Bohemian Rhapsody. Interestingly enough, some people aren’t caping for Singer anymore. GLAAD has apparently rejected Bohemian Rhapsody from contention at their GLAAD Media Awards:
“Bohemian Rhapsody” has been removed as a best original film nominee at this year’s GLAAD Media Awards, following new accusations of sexual assault and misconduct against director Bryan Singer. The media watchdog told Variety exclusively it has pulled the film from contention for the prize, in a weighted decision that takes a stand for sexual assault victims. Singer has consistently denied misconduct, and called the Atlantic story “a homophobic smear piece.”
“In light of the latest allegations against director Bryan Singer, GLAAD has made the difficult decision to remove ‘Bohemian Rhapsody’ from contention for a GLAAD Media Award in the Outstanding Film – Wide Release category this year. This week’s story in The Atlantic documenting unspeakable harms endured by young men and teenage boys brought to light a reality that cannot be ignored or even tacitly rewarded,” GLAAD said in a statement to Variety.
“Singer’s response to The Atlantic story wrongfully used ‘homophobia’ to deflect from sexual assault allegations and GLAAD urges the media and the industry at large to not gloss over the fact that survivors of sexual assault should be put first,” the statement continued.
This feels like the Kevin Spacey thing, where a sexual predator uses the guise of being a “private” or closeted gay man as a shield from criticism in the LGBTQ community. Singer wants to claim that it’s mere homophobia which has led to all of these lurid and disturbing accounts of his disgusting behavior. And GLAAD isn’t going to play that.
In any case, did you know that Bryan Singer is still attached to the Red Sonja film? He got the directing gig last year, and even with the Atlantic piece and GLAAD canceling him, Millennium Films is still sticking by Singer. The chairman of Millennium Avi Lerner told Variety: “The over $800 million ‘Bohemian Rhapsody’ has grossed, making it the highest grossing drama in film history, is testament to his remarkable vision and acumen. I know the difference between agenda driven fake news and reality, and I am very comfortable with this decision. In America people are innocent until proven otherwise.” Translation: Avi Lerner doesn’t understand the difference between canceling someone’s career and criminal law, and Bryan Singer has made a lot of people a lot of money, so he can stay.
Photos courtesy of WENN.
People need to loudly boycott the Red Sonja film. It appears money is the only thing that will get the attention of these greedy moviemakers.
Anthony Rapp already made a statement about it, that any actor that agrees to appear in Red Sonja will be seen as complicit in keeping a predator in power.
Who will blink first, the studio or the actors?
Annabella Sciorra (a Weinstein survivor) has retweeted Rapp and agreed with him. The silence right now from the rest of Hollywood? DEAFENING. What a cesspool.
Totally agree with sending a message that this movie won’t be supported as long as Singer is attached to it, and isn’t the movie about surviving sexual assault?
If Red Sonja fails film makers will just use it as an excuse for why women lead movies don’t work and will be even more hesitant to give women leading roles. Nobody can win at this point as long as Singer is involved.
And @Zee there is now (finally) a pushback for that.
Them: Women led movies don’t make money!
Us: Well Wonder Woman, Captain Marvel, Rogue One, Beauty and the Beast, and Hidden Figures to give a few examples all made big money so it can’t be that. Maybe it’s because you let a child rapist direct it when literally everyone told you not too?
Them: …
I think with Red Sonja, the people going “women films don’t make money” will be in minority, because it’s a remake of a film many misogynists gave as an example of “what do you mean there are too few women heroes in film? Ripley! Red Sonja!”.
The more likely route they’ll take is “look how social justice warriors tanked a woman-fronted film to fit their victim agenda” or something like that.
Also, I’m worried for Captain Marvel. It looks dull. Not because of the heroine, just generally it doesn’t look that good (like Antman, that one is IMO bad too). But if it’s the first Marvel film that either gets a rotten tomato or makes less money than other Marvel films, you can bet then these dudes will go “women led films ruin cinema”. But that’s a whole different topic.
Honestly start before Red Sonja. That awful looking Hellboy reboot that’s coming? That’s Avi Lerner and Millennium Films. Don’t see Hellboy. (I like David Harbour and look forward to him in Stranger Things 3 this summer. But don’t see Hellboy).
The gloves need to come off. And some people need a smack upside the head. The number of twitter accounts angry at GLAAD for pulling Bohemian Rhapsody is sickening. They’re against a strong and definitive pushback against a child rapist because “Rami and the cast worked really hard!”. They’re more worried about Malek getting a shiny piece of metal that won’t matter in six months than pushing back against serial sex abuse. F**k Bohemian Rhapsody and everyone and everything associated with it.
In these Days of Deplorable-ness I have little faith in the success of a moral boycott… I think the better strategy would be to support and enable the victims to sue, so that the perpetrators have to deal with mounting legal fees and might lose clout and support from the establishment.
Good for GLAAD. I’m so mad at May, Taylor and all the managers of the Queen estate for not caring about Singer and the allegations against him.
May, Taylor & co. don’t care about anything but ensuring this film was a mainstream success. They are the reason that this film is a garbage whitewash of Mercury’s life and the reason a predator’s name is attached. We won’t get an honest portrayal until they are dead.
This. Thank you for saying this. I do not honestly understand the love for this film. It is a parody of Mercury’s life and so whitewashed.
I was disgusted that Queen, et al. let Singer Direct, despite knowing all the details.
May snapped yesterday at somebody who suggested he should unfollow Singer on social media.
He just published an apology for that. Has anyone seen it?
It sounds off to me, like he’s being sarcastic, passive-aggressive.
I saw that, it was unreal. Screw Brian May.
Why am I not surprised that Avi Lerner is an old white man? This is truly disgusting. Why would so many people make all of this up, even keeping their stories consistent over the course of 20 freaking years?!
It’s not surprising. He’s the guy who threatened Terry Crews after he came out with his assault story tellling him to drop it or there would be “trouble” with Terry’s career.
https://ew.com/movies/2018/06/26/terry-crews-testimony-senate-expendables-4/
He’s also been accused of sexual harassment himself several times-the most recent back in 2017. So garbage protects garbage
Probably speaks to his own history of sexual assault, honestly.
Yes. Anyone who immediately gets defensive like that definitely gets the side eye from me.
Meanwhile Rami Malek is like: “But I totally didn’t know about Bryan Singer cause Freddie’s spirit was protecting me from knowing or smh. Freddie’s spirit! Give me an Oscar already!”
His spirit just left the house.
And Rami’s brain left with it, apparently. Why do people think saying something ignorant is better than keeping their damn mouths shut? STFU Rami, until you can think of something intelligent to say.
For real! Malek has lost me as a fan for his faux-ignorance. What a disappointment.
THIS. Malek has shown his true colors with this lie and his repeated dodging of answering questions about Bryan Singer during press and award season campaigning – and to invoke Freddie Mercury as a deflection! He knew going in and decided his chance at oscar glory was more important, full stop.
I know some are skeptical of blinds, but BG has a good track record – this one is obviously about Malek & it’s pretty damning:
https://blindgossip.com/will-lie-for-oscar/
I do not want Malek to win. This dishonesty all for protecting his award chances! I knew he was thirsty for awards & would do anything when he started the showmance Fox mandated w/his costar. That aside, the Academy should send a message by not giving him the oscar. Work for a predator? Expect questions and consequences. What GLAAD did was strong and meaningful.
His answer wasn’t good, but blind gossip culture is very much a part of the problem when it comes to people being skeptical about these kinds of rumors in the first place. Plus, of course any blind gossip site is going to automatically lean into the ‘they all always know’ angle. Taking any other position would require people who benefit from or enjoy those kinds of sites to admit that a lot of sleazy, dishonest, and unethical stuff goes down in the name of ‘dirt’.
This man is disgusting. He was so methodical in his abuse of theses boys. The part about Brad Renfro made me so angry. He should work again. Ever.
*never
It’s always been alluded to that his abuse of Brad was one of the reasons Brad turn to drugs and later died. Just like Corey Haim. It’s absolutely tragic that Singer is still getting jobs.
Well of course he can stay .
Hollywood is the biggest Good Old Boys club after Washington. I believe the sexual predators are going to protect each other and money will always rule. These predators are feeling they can wait out the #metoo movement as they feel it will die down , no one will care after a few years.
Something we all must do is keep on shouting out for all victims of sexual harassment and assault. Keep the momentum going strong.
The statement from Millennium Films was disgusting. It’s basically “Bohemian Rhapsody made a lot of money. We would also like to make a lot of money, and we couldn’t care less about the victims that he has left in his wake.”
Not surprising. Avi Lerner was the guy who told terry crews to back off his accusations so it wouldn’t effect the next expendable a movie, plus he’s been accused of things as well I think
Studios will only stop hiring predators when films attached to them stop making money. Making them lose money is the key. They don’t have morals.
It’s not just money. I feel they’re protecting the necks of predators higher up the food chain. The higher up the abuses go and the longer the timeline the more chance there is of the fallout alarming the public so profoundly (imagine every single favourite film you have being in some way sullied by association) it reshapes the entire industry – which can only mean the problem of abuse and abusers is in every area of the business.
Maybe they’re kidding themselves into believing they’re saving the industry creatively caping for their own abuses and other predators (when they’re really preventing an industry-wide changing of the guards and creative revolution but okay).
Just looking at pictures of this creep is unsettling for me. I read the Atlantic article partway and stopped because it was so long not to mention very disturbing.
Right? He totally looks like a serial killer.
I posted the other day that Chris Brown would be found dead from an overdose before he see any prison time for the awful things he has done. I feel the same way about Bryan Singer, but in his case I think he will commit suicide. There might be a court case and he will name others in order to maybe escape a long time behind bars. But, will still face a long sentence and will not be able to handle it. He is truly a evil man for what he did to those young men
@ RBC
He won’t commit suicide, he’s too vain, self-interested, and confident of his being protected. Did his associate Rector-Collins (and he was convicted) commit suicide?
If need be, I could see his death being played as a suicide. But he and his protectors will scapegoat and bluster it out because they’re pretty safe right now and too many others are likely to get implicated way before them, just weeding them out will make the public tired and inattentive.
This is a mess, and the public likes to forget that this has come up at least five times before now. So he’ll be staying smug af.
I hope Marvel comics kill off half the X-Men and retool the mutant character set entirely – and when asked blame this predator.
F*** Singer and Fox.
Bohemian Rhapsody made money because of Freddie Mercury, not Singer. Nobody watched the movie because of him.
Sexual assault asíde, this film shouldnt be nominated for anything because it’s bad. Rami Malek was the best thing about it and his performance is incredibly overrated.
It is remarkable to me how many levels this films fails Freddie Mercury as a historical figure. Not just in the terrible and horrific casting and production decisions, but in the way the film utterly sanitizes the tragedy of his life, making the AIDS epidemic a palatable blip in the United States history of LGBT+ treatment. I know a shocking amounts of LGBT+ people who think it’s fine because they want their “happy ending” in a gay movie, and that infuriates me, because Mercury’s life is not a happy ending. The AIDS epidemic was not a happy ending. Millions have died – and are still dying – from it across the world, and a huge part of why it spread so rapidly was misinformation and apathy from government bodies because it affected “degenerates.” It terrifies me how quickly the horror of the HIV epidemic has been covered up in America. When I was a kid in the 90s, people were still dying horribly from this shit. Freddie died in ’91! And now it’s 2019, and we’re destroying transgender rights and having arguments about gay marriage and women’s autonomy, and a big part of that is the way the media has been complicit in erasing the truth of America’s history of destroying minority lives.
A good Freddie Mercury film should force you to confront the horror of what he experienced, the shame and unhappiness, the misery of HIV’s stigma and the terror and pain of dying from advanced AIDS. It should be a social statement about the inherent cruelty of a society that turned its backs on a minority community and allowed them to suffer, at the cost of brilliant, beautiful, and talented people like him. It should make you reflect on what the true cost of a lost human life is. If there’s triumph in it, it’s that he existed so defiantly and wonderfully in the face of adversity and suffering, not that he fronted a really cool band with a lasting music legacy for two decades or so.
Sure, but Singer IS THE REASON the film even got made. As per the Atlantic’s article:
“According to three sources who know what happened on and off the set, both Stacey Snider, the chairman and CEO of 20th Century Fox, and Emma Watts, Fox’s vice chair and president of production, had had concerns when the project came their way with Singer already attached. But Singer had the support of the surviving members of Queen. The choice for Fox was to do the film with him or to not do it at all. According to the three sources, it wasn’t an easy decision.”
If May and Taylor backed off, there may have been another director
I am so done with May. Cohen would have been the right person for that movie. I really would like to know what exactly happened with Cohen and Queen. And why May was not ok with Cohen making a Queen movie. As goofy as Cohen is, he is an underrated actor and director, and would have one of the few persons to do Mercurys life justice.
All it tells me is that Brian May and the surviving members of Queen don’t want to admit that Freddie Mercury IS Queen for a lot of people. It’s entirely possible to speculate that they would never have reached the heights that they did without him. Take a look at the discography and see how many of their top hits he penned – including the legendary “Bohemian Rhapsody.” That’s not to downplay May’s writing contributions or the rest, but that voice! That showmanship! That colorful and complicated life! That’s what people want to see in a movie about Queen, whether that’s fair to the rest of the band or not. Some people just have that iconic spark, the kind that can compel an audience. The rest of us are just here for the ride.
Cohen said that May and Taylor wanted Mercury’s death to happen halfway through the film, and the second half be about how Queen carried on/ reacted to his death. Cohen said that was a load of crap.
I enjoyed the movie, and loved Malik in it, but I still had problems with the portrayal of Freddie as a somewhat sad and lonely figure. Freddie had a lot of fun and joy in his life and he was surrounded by people who loved him, particularly his group of friends who lived with him at Garden Lodge. The movie doesn’t show that. And Brian May in the movie comes across as a saintly puritanical scold. I wanted to slap him. In real life they all argued, but both May and Taylor said that they were were the ones who were often at odds and that Freddie was a peacemaker. Roger Taylor’s character was a bit more multi-dimensional but May came across as a boring prig.
Wonder if this was the real reason Sacha Baron Cohen dropped out.
Wasnt Cohen supposed to direct a Mercury movie as well as play Mercury? If it was Singer from the beginning i can imagine Cohen wanting to get out.
This is sickening in so many ways and I cannot believe Millenium is standing by him. Utterly appalling.
It’s not surprising really. The founder and CEO of millennium is avi Lerner, he has his own history of sexual harassment allegations, and he was the one who told terry crews that he wouldn’t be in the next expendables movie if kept talking about his own assault
People should ensure that this movie fails BIG TIME. I’m going to put myself out there and say shame on anyone who gives a dime to this movie or any future project that has Bryan Singer attached to it. Invoking money to justify supporting a predator? SMH.
I tried to read the Atlantic article and made it partway before I felt sick. I honestly think that I might have killed anyone like Singer if one of my three sons had become a victim. I’m not a violent person, but could be if my boys had been hurt.
I think if there’s any act that justifies violence, it’s the abuse and rape of children.
I have watched “An open secret”, and anything of this unfortunately is not new to me.
I wonder if this time is the good one.
Also: Corey Feldman has been talking about this for ages, I believe him, I believe he is survivor.
The Academy should learn from this. They f–ked up so bad.
Rami Malek needs to decline the nomination. It sucks, but it would be the right thing to do.
Ugh, wishful thinking. Malek is WAY too thirsty for that Oscar to do that.
I feel so fooled by his nice guy persona. I used to be a fan. He’s looking out for his career first. As for the victims, in his words, “it is what it is” – ugh.
Your move Oscars…..
Honestly, that Red Sonja news made me write a long thinkpiece on my facebook this morning. Im so angry.
I legit teared up and then got nauseated reading this article and haven’t finished it yet. It was very much like the R. Kelly docuseries in my mind – years of open bad and criminal behavior ignored because the victims weren’t considered important enough by society.
And there are SO MANY other men implicated in that article beyond Singer. I hope he is not the only domino to fall.
TWENTY YEARS of allegations before there is FINALLY some semblance of consequences?? The system is the problem.
And has Ian McKellen ever commented on these allegations? I was disappointed to see how often his name came up in that article and I know you can’t hold everyone who ever worked with someone responsible for their bad behavior but…
Ian McKellen is a senior scion of the LGBTQ community – it would mean a lot if he would speak out against this behavior and express regret that he was (ambivalent/ignorant/whatever….)
I think it’s ridiculous what GLAAD is doing, honestly. Singer is the gross criminal but it doesn’t mean that the movie itself–with the exception of his role–should be barred from recognition. Malek is incredible in it and it’s disappointing that because of this SOB he can’t get the appreciation he deserves for his performance. It’s the classic debate of: can an artist’s work be appreciated and respected even if the artist himself is a slimeball?
@Ivy
Malek signing up to work with Bryan Singer despite his long history and open secret of being a predator doesn’t bother you? Or that his feigned ignorance was so blatantly a lie? And this is all because you think Malek was good?
People who work with predators should NOT be rewarded. No matter how much you liked the movie or Malek.
It bothers me but what bothers me more is that these stories have been circulating about Singer for years over a period of two decades. There have been other young men who committed his behaviour with them to record. So why are we only dragging Malek.
What about all the people clambering onto the X-Men projects? And frankly, what the hell about Fox films in general? He was wasting production time on set from way back with X2 and Superman Returns so why is Fox being let off the hook given that they have an established history of settling sexual harassment suits to protect predators?
Going after people who protect Singer and his ilk seems more important than dragging one actor alone. I get that BR was his latest film but… why drag just one actor.
Nevermind that the members of Queen insisted the director be Singer.
You have to look at the whole body of work from the artist. What does it represent? Art and the person who create it are the whole of it. Not separate. So yeah, their work and what they stand for can be looked at as a whole. I side eye those artists if they are scums never mind their wonderful creations and whatnots.
“Translation: Avi Lerner doesn’t understand the difference between canceling someone’s career and criminal law…”
Well said. I like this translation. This happens a lot when people defend famous sex abusers. They claim it’s not right to protest or boycott the abuser because he or she doesn’t have a criminal conviction yet. I’ve had conversations with people about this where I’ve tried to explain that boycotts of their work is free speech and we have a right to do this even if the person has not been convicted yet. However, I wasn’t getting my point accross. I’m going to use your translation as an example.
Any decent made film about queen iwas going to do well it had nothing to do with this loser Singer and I didn’t go see the movie anyway because I heard they didn’t handle the HUV issue properly and Even after it was done by someone from the community and I thought eff that Who needs an ally like that or a film that doesn’t portray Friday right
I think it’s unfair to slam the film and the actors. It’s the studio behind the film who hires the director and that is who is at fault. I don’t blame the actors who are trying to get good jobs that will help their careers and they did good work as actors, which is what they are paid to do and what their work is about. I don’t blame them and I don’t think they should be punished or expected to turn down what might a career making role because of a director. That might be something a mega-actor can do, but for someone still coming up the ranks, things are hard enough. As long as they aren’t out there defending him or minimizing what he did, they should be judged on their work and a lot of people put a lot of hard work into this film and shouldn’t be dragged down by the horrible behaviour of one person that was hired by a studio… that they have no control over. Plus the film itself and the message it’s about and sends is an important one. Singer is the one who behaved badly and should be boycotted, not the film or the actors. HIM. If I work at a company that has an asshole who is sexually harassing people, I may report him to HR, but should I quit my job because the company hired him? I know people who used to work on films as the little people behind the scenes and they work hard and have to pay bills etc. and there is a lot of competition to find good work. I don’t blame them for grabbing a good job when they can get it. The rest of it has nothing to do with them. They have, I’m sure, their opinions on it as people… but if an actor is hired to portray a character,. he or she should be judged on that.