Scott Rudin takedown - Page 2
Scott Rudin takedown
#25Scott Rudin takedown
Posted: 4/7/21 at 11:21am
I think that’s a question better suited to Sutton Foster, Hugh Jackman, Denzel Washington, Bette Midler, Viola Davis and the list goes on.
He doesn’t sign my paycheck so my hands are clean!
#26Scott Rudin takedown
Posted: 4/7/21 at 11:21am
I think that’s a question better suited to Sutton Foster, Hugh Jackman, Denzel Washington, Bette Midler, Viola Davis and the list goes on.
He doesn’t sign my paycheck so my hands are clean!
#27Scott Rudin takedown
Posted: 4/7/21 at 11:23am
castlestreet said: "I think that’s a question better suited to Sutton Foster, Hugh Jackman, Denzel Washington, Bette Midler, Viola Davis and the list goes on.
He doesn’t sign my paycheck so my hands are clean!"
You’re here defending someone who is a documented abuser and trying to frame it as being anti-cancel culture, so, maybe not so much, hot shot.
"...everyone finally shut up, and the audience could enjoy the beginning of the Anatevka Pogram in peace."
leefowler
Broadway Star Joined: 7/13/04
#28Scott Rudin takedown
Posted: 4/7/21 at 11:26am
If there was a sexual component to this, he'd be finished. If he made a pass at someone who was unwilling, he'd be cancelled. But all he did was exhibit unspeakable mental cruelty. So he'll be fine.
Behind the fake tinsel of Broadway is real tinsel.
#29Scott Rudin takedown
Posted: 4/7/21 at 11:26amThe reason why Bette or Hugh Jackman don't say anything bad about Rudin is because these types of sociopaths are very good at hiding their abusive side for the big stars.
BdwyFan
Featured Actor Joined: 3/1/10
#30Scott Rudin takedown
Posted: 4/7/21 at 11:28am
I think this calls for a revamping of the upcoming musical
devil wears Prada. Act 1 Miranda and then she gets canned and act 2 is a boss named Seth. And it gets even worse.
#31Scott Rudin takedown
Posted: 4/7/21 at 11:32am
Owen22 said: "KFC1991 said: ""It's about time"?
I read a similar article about a decade ago. If a nobody like me knows how awful he is to his staff it is pretty common knowledge by this point."
Yes, but during this time, when people-- awful, evil people like Rudin are being held accountable, it needs to be stated again. And again and again!
But we are part of the problem. I wish I had the strength, after reading this THR article, to trash my tickets to "The Music Man" and boycott his productions from now on. But, unfortunately....I know I won't...."
Yeah, an important thing that people should keep in mind when watching any project he produces is "Why should everyone else involved with Rudin's productions be punished for his actions when they literally did nothing wrong?". Sure, they agreed to take part in his projects, but that doesn't mean they did so just to work with him. They probably did just to work on the material, everyone else involved who isn't Scott Rudin, or both.
#32Scott Rudin takedown
Posted: 4/7/21 at 11:33am
I’ve never attended one of his shows Kad-not one. I don’t watch his movies either bc I know someone who worked with him, not even for him, just with him. And just based on what was shared with me many years ago - I was a hard pass. He also did something personally damaging to this friend that had nothing to do with abuse. I stopped watching Woody Allen movies back in the mid-90’s way before it was the “in” thing to do. I’m one person and that’s my right.
I can’t stand the guy-literally can’t stand Rudin.
But it’s possible to hold two thoughts in your head at the same time. You want to make the distinction between abuse and demanding - that’s totally fair. Apparently the stars of the entertainment industry don’t feel the same way, and all I’m pointing out is that maybe you should turn your distaste and ire at them instead of me.
You think I’m defending him when all I’m saying is that until someone uncovers something much more sinister - he’s who he is and doesn’t even try to hide it.
Yes- I despise cancel culture as a movement. I believe in making those decisions personally. I don’t like the guy - so I don’t give him my hard earned dollar.
#33Scott Rudin takedown
Posted: 4/7/21 at 11:33am
I’ve never attended one of his shows Kad-not one. I don’t watch his movies either bc I know someone who worked with him, not even for him, just with him. And just based on what was shared with me many years ago - I was a hard pass. He also did something personally damaging to this friend that had nothing to do with abuse. I stopped watching Woody Allen movies back in the mid-90’s way before it was the “in” thing to do. I’m one person and that’s my right.
I can’t stand the guy-literally can’t stand Rudin.
But it’s possible to hold two thoughts in your head at the same time. You want to make the distinction between abuse and demanding - that’s totally fair. Apparently the stars of the entertainment industry don’t feel the same way, and all I’m pointing out is that maybe you should turn your distaste and ire at them instead of me.
You think I’m defending him when all I’m saying is that until someone uncovers something much more sinister - he’s who he is and doesn’t even try to hide it.
Yes- I despise cancel culture as a movement. I believe in making those decisions personally. I don’t like the guy - so I don’t give him my hard earned dollar.
#34Scott Rudin takedown
Posted: 4/7/21 at 12:38pm
Apparently the stars of the entertainment industry don’t feel the same way, and all I’m pointing out is that maybe you should turn your distaste and ire at them instead of me.
You think I’m defending him when all I’m saying is that until someone uncovers something much more sinister - he’s who he is and doesn’t even try to hide it.
He's sent multiple assistants to the hospital in what could easily be determined as multiple cases of physical, verbal, and psychological abuse - how much more sinister does it need to get?
I know people who have worked under folks like Rudin and its high time that arts and entertainment stop enabling such abusive trash monsters. People in power are learning (albeit slowly) that this kind of behavior is no longer being tolerated - no matter who you are or what you've produced, directed, acted in, etc.
To answer your second point - that the major stars don't seem to have a problem with Rudin and others of his ilk - I can't totally speak to that, but I can tell you that anyone who has worked at a major Hollywood talent agency has likely witnessed the Jekyll and Hyde-like behavior of these bully personalities in positions of major power. They can be kind, gracious, and charming to those A-lister actors, writers, and directors and then turn around become abject terrors when dealing with their own staffers and the people who work under them.
I seriously doubt that Rudin deals with Hugh Jackman and Sutton Foster in the same manner that he does with his office staff.
"You drank a charm to kill John Proctor's wife! You drank a charm to kill Goody Proctor!" - Betty Parris to Abigail Williams in Arthur Miller's The Crucible
Updated On: 4/7/21 at 12:38 PM
#35Scott Rudin takedown
Posted: 4/7/21 at 12:47pm
Of course he doesn’t deal with the talent the same way! But when are all of you going to stop giving THEM a pass. I didn’t want to hear it from Meryl when she said she had no idea about the rumors about Harvey either. The entertainment industry despite being a global business is a very small community. They all know about it. Most of us have never worked a day in the biz - but we all heard the whispers - and so do they.
So don’t tell me because he doesn’t do it to them, they are oblivious to it. Just like Meryl, as long as he’s casting them in first rate productions and extremely well written films that get them nominations and critical praise-they will continue to work with him.
Working with him is the same as being ok with the behavior in my book. Stop asking me what I’m willing to be ok with and start attacking the folks that are literally enabling his behavior.
#36Scott Rudin takedown
Posted: 4/7/21 at 12:55pm
I completely agree! We should be holding the talent that decide to continually collaborate with Rudin and bullies like him 100% accountable. There's no way that Bette, or Hugh or Sutton didn't previously know about Rudin's reputation. I think for many of them it's a mentality of 'he may be a terror to other people but as long as it's not me, it's okay'.
"You drank a charm to kill John Proctor's wife! You drank a charm to kill Goody Proctor!" - Betty Parris to Abigail Williams in Arthur Miller's The Crucible
#37Scott Rudin takedown
Posted: 4/7/21 at 1:00pm
Okay folks - If it’s over why are the likes of Sutton and Hugh still working with him. “
Psych 101. He doesn’t treat them they way he treats others. It’s called privilege. Celebrities lean into it all the time. Like when celebrities stood up for Ellen when her employees called her out for her inappropriate behavior. Celebs have NO IDEA what it is like to be line staff for these individuals. It’s truly shameful and shows their blind spots.
Also, it’s clear he is open to abusing newer talents as shared by Jeremy O Harris. God only knows what he has done to newer talents without power.
It actually speaks more to the lack of integrity of the A-listers who kiss his butt. If they truly know what he is doing and refuse to work with him or at the least call him on, that’s on them.
"The sexual energy between the mother and son really concerns me!"-random woman behind me at Next to Normal
"I want to meet him after and bang him!"-random woman who exposed her breasts at Rock of Ages, referring to James Carpinello
#38Scott Rudin takedown
Posted: 4/7/21 at 1:07pmBette Midler is very outspoken on Twitter about a variety of issues. Disappointing that she's silent about this. She doesn't need Scott Rudin.
#39Scott Rudin takedown
Posted: 4/7/21 at 1:14pm
poisonivy2 said: "Bette Midler is very outspoken on Twitter about a variety of issues. Disappointing that she's silent about this. She doesn't need Scott Rudin."
Thank you! He helped her get her Tony so it’s “ok”...
Sutton Ross
Broadway Legend Joined: 7/20/13
#40Scott Rudin takedown
Posted: 4/7/21 at 1:17pm
poisonivy2 said: "The reason why Bette or Hugh Jackman don't say anything bad about Rudin is because these types of sociopaths are very good at hiding their abusive side for the big stars. "
100%. He is the living worst.
#41Scott Rudin takedown
Posted: 4/7/21 at 1:20pm
LOL "We need to cancel him--but I'm not giving up my tickets to The Music Man!" Essentially the position of many people here. Giving up your tickets to The Music Man is how you cancel him. That's literally the only thing that will work: not giving his work your money, so he doesn't have to money (or make the money that lures investors) for his next project. That's it. That's the one thing you can do. But no, you're "doing something" by posting outraged posts and demanding "something be done" while eagerly awaiting his next show--and helping him make millions, able to employ all those people you claim he abuses.
Don't know whether that's hypocritical or just plain stupid.
#42Scott Rudin takedown
Posted: 4/7/21 at 1:21pm
While I disagree with castlestreet's implication that this is just something to accept, I think he brings up some worthwhile points about how we, as audience members, and how stars are complicit. I personally have been a dedicated audience member of Rudin's work for years, and I've defended some of his controversial business decisions, because I believe he adds so much value to the theatre community. But until recently, I've mostly been under the impression (possibly self-deluded) that he fell under the "difficult" category, not the "abusive" category. With this recent incident, I'm seeing that this isn't the case.
And yes, there's some hypocrisy to all this. Can I honestly say that I won't ever see another Scott Rudin production? Will I try to rationalize it by reminding myself that I only ever pay rush prices, which barely make a dent in his grosses? Will I continue to support the artists who repeatedly work closely with him, and make him his money? These are things that I, and many of us, have to think about going forward. Where will each of us draw that line, and how much are each of us willing to compromise our morals for great art? Preferably not at all, but it can be difficult to reconcile with that when, we, as dedicated theatre people, are so deeply entrenched in this world of seeing/discussing everything that comes to Broadway. But yes, if we're going to indulge in that hypocritical behavior, the least we can do is acknowledge our own hypocrisy.
As for the artists - it's a tough one, because I think castlestreet is right to point out that believing their claims of ignorance may be a bit naive. And yes, they should be held accountable for enabling him. But I also think that trying to boycott/cancel artists because of their associations with problematic figures is a game of rapidly diminishing returns. There may be a lot of social value in robbing Rudin of his outlet for abuse, but the social value of cancelling Laurie Metcalf for working with him is limited, to the point of maybe not being worth it.
But then, the question becomes, how does one practically bring down a man at the top, without de-incentivizing others to continue giving him power? And how does one de-incentivize artists to continue working with him, without presenting them with the risk of tainting their own public image?
I don't know. It's very complicated. And it's something I wrestle with constantly as someone who consumes art in the way that I (and many of us on this board) do.
#43Scott Rudin takedown
Posted: 4/7/21 at 1:29pm
JBroadway said: "While I disagree withcastlestreet's implication that this is just something to accept, I think he brings up some worthwhilepoints about how we, as audience members, and how stars are complicit. I personally have been a dedicated audience member of Rudin's work for years, and I've defended some ofhis controversial business decisions, because I believe he adds so much value to the theatre community. But until recently, I've mostly been under the impression (possibly self-deluded)that he fellunder the "difficult" category, not the "abusive" category. With this recent incident, I'm seeing that this isn't the case.
And yes, there's some hypocrisy to all this. Can I honestly say that I won't ever see another Scott Rudin production? Will I try to rationalize it by reminding myself that I only ever pay rush prices, which barely make a dent in his grosses? Will I continue to support the artists who repeatedly work closely with him, and make him his money? These are things that I, and many of us, have to think about going forward. Where will each of us draw that line, and how much are each of us willing to compromise our morals for great art? Preferably not at all, but it can be difficult when, we, as dedicated theatre people, are so deeply entrenched in this world of seeing/discussing everything that comes to Broadway.
As for the artists - it's a tough one, because I thinkcastlestreet is right to point out that believing their claims of ignorance may be a bit naive. And yes, they should be held accountable for enabling him. But I also think that trying to boycott/cancel artists because of their associations with problematicfigures is a game of rapidly diminishing returns. There may be a lot of social value in robbing Rudin of his outlet for abuse, but the social value of cancelling Laurie Metcalf for working with him is limited, to the point of maybe not being worth it.
But then, the question becomes, how does one practically bring down a man at the top, without de-incentivizing others to continue giving him power? And how does one de-incentivize artists to continue working with him, without presenting them with the risk of tainting their own public image?
I don't know. It's very complicated. And it's something I wrestle with constantly as someone who consumes art in the way that I (and many of us on this board) do."
Thoughtful post. I think the issue of holding someone accountable doesn't really work in most of adult life. It works for children because adults control them. It works for lawbreakers because the law controls them. But for the most part, you can't hold someone accountable--you can complain, but that isn't the same thing--and you're right that the web of interconnections makes "canceling" every person who willingly associates with a terrible person essentially a cancellation of the arts--actually of all businesses.
What I'm objecting to here are the preening "We won't stand for it!" posts by people who are...apparently quite willingly standing for it by supporting his shows. It's "internet activism" at its worst.
#44Scott Rudin takedown
Posted: 4/7/21 at 1:32pm
Ok I laughed at this page.
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0748784/bio
Look at what his "trademark" is.
Fosse76
Broadway Legend Joined: 3/21/05
#45Scott Rudin takedown
Posted: 4/7/21 at 1:44pm
For every person who has heard of Rudin and is aware if his abuses, there's probably 10 that haven't. So the idea that boycotting his productions would somehow be a deterrent without some sort of massive public exposé and outcry is naive at best and disingenuous at worst.
And while I agree that it's unlikely Midler and Jackman were unaware of his behavior, personal experience will color one's perception over "rumors." They wouldn't have experienced or witnessed his abusive behavior, so could easily believe that the "rumors" are exaggerated.
singerunlimited
Understudy Joined: 3/19/06
#46Scott Rudin takedown
Posted: 4/7/21 at 1:54pm
Anyone privy to what happened between Rudin, Nathan Lane, and George C. Wolfe during the Broadway run of GARY?
#47Scott Rudin takedown
Posted: 4/7/21 at 2:01pm
Fosse76 said: "without some sort of massive public exposé and outcry"
You say that like it's out of the realm of possibility, but maybe that's exactly what needs to happen. Clearly there are already journalists who are trying to do that work. As for most people not having heard of him - I agree that makes it more difficult. It's easy when it's a public-facing figure like an actor or comedian, or even a director or writer, to make people aware of artists who shouldn't be patronized. Much harder with a producer. Weinstein was an extreme example, and not to mention he had his name clearly displayed in the opening logos of all his movies.
With Rudin, I think it helps that his audience consists largely of New York theatre-goers, especially for his plays. And NY theatre-goers are much more likely to know Rudin by name, and by the signposts of his productions: the black-and-white Playbills, the strict audience policies, etc. plus the types of productions he's known for putting on, and the artists he's known to work with. But his big musicals generally attract more tourists, and at the end of the day, that's where he's probably making most of his money. So yes, that's definitely a challenge. But "it's a challenge" isn't necessarily an excuse to say "oh well, then there's no point in trying to do anything about this problem."
And while I agree that it's unlikely Midler and Jackman were unaware of his behavior, personal experience will color one's perception over "rumors." They wouldn't have experienced or witnessed his abusive behavior, so could easily believe that the "rumors" are exaggerated."
Possibly, yes. And even more likely, they might have even witnessed him being "difficult," "stubborn," "strong-willed," "demanding," etc. - so when people say he's abusive, they might think to themselves, "oh, sure, I saw him being demanding and difficult. That must be what they're talking about, and from what I saw it isn't so bad."
But if it becomes an ongoing pattern, to the point of being an "open secret" like Weinstein, you have to wonder who might be willfully burying their heads in the sand.
#48Scott Rudin takedown
Posted: 4/7/21 at 2:11pm
Fosse76 said: "For every person who has heard of Rudin and is aware if his abuses, there's probably 10 that haven't. So the idea that boycotting his productions would somehow be a deterrent without some sort of massive public exposé and outcry is naive at best and disingenuous at worst."
Nonsense. People don't refuse to boycott Chick-fil-A because not everyone knows about its homophobic owner. Not everyone needed to know about Harvey Weinstein for the people who did know to boycott his work. If anyone really wants to stop Rudin's abuse, the one thing they can do to help stop it is to put their money where their mouth is. If they keep giving him money, they are continuing to enable him.
#49Scott Rudin takedown
Posted: 4/7/21 at 2:15pm
You can't boycott things you already saw. Like you can't boycott Hello Dolly! or Three Tall Women or BoM.
But you can boycott his future projects. Rudin is banking big on The Music Man and the weekly nut will probably be astronomical. (It's sort of like how Hello Dolly! was making great money but with an $800,000 weekly nut just barely recouped.)
Because these assholes really only care about one thing: their wallet.
Videos