MovieChat Forums > Bombshell (2019) Discussion > I find it very telling

I find it very telling

posted 5 years ago by TearofLys (2653)
20 replies | jump to latest

that the one character in the movie that experienced explicit sexual harassment (Kayla Pospisill) is fictional. There wasn't enough actual evidence of harassment, so they had to make some up for the movie to have meat. Yes both Kelly and Carlson accused Ailes of demanding a quid pro quo sexual relationship, but since they allegedly refused his advances, how did they still both go on to have very successful careers at Fox? It doesn't add up.

So, is Ailes a sexual predator, or is he the victim of a hit job on par with what was leveled at Justice Kavanaugh? Perhaps his only real crime was using salty language around a person he thought he could trust (Carlson recorded private conversations between her and Ailes).

[–] Information-Police (4890) 5 years ago

It's telling that you defend a racist and sexual harasser.

[–] TearofLys (2653) 5 years ago

Where is your evidence? It certainly wasn't in the movie.

[–] Information-Police (4890) 5 years ago

Gretchen Carlson made recordings of Ailes harassing her. That was prominently in the movie as you pointed out.

[–] QueenFanUSA (3379) 5 years ago

Well of course they made a movie about a Republican offender.

Are there any movies in the pipeline of LIBERAL/DEMOCRAT sacks of shit?

Of course not.

LOL

[–] AssetsonFire (145) 5 years ago

https://filmdaily.co/obsessions/upcoming-movies-on-harvey-weinstein/

Of course not.

LOL

[–] QueenFanUSA (3379) 5 years ago

I wonder how much those movies will touch on his political ideology and ties to the Democrat Party and it's prominent leaders?

Barely, if at all, would be my guess.

[–] AssetsonFire (145) 5 years ago

So your complaint's changed from being that no film about a liberal scumbag could get made to being those films that are being made won't make a sufficiently big deal of his politics? Where I come from that's called shifting the goalposts.

Why would these films touch on Weinstein's political ideology? Unlike Weinstein, Ailes' (along with Kelly's et al.) political leanings are front and centre in his career and the environment in which his alleged crimes and the film took place. Fox News' very existence revolves around its strident political perspectives. It would have been absurd to have made a biopic about Ailes at his workplace and ignore his and Fox's political standings. On the other hand, to shoehorn Weinstein, a film producer's, political leanings into a biopic of him would make far less sense.

Furthermore, the film is privately-produced. If you don't like it, don't buy it. It's ironic how so many right wingers seem to want Hollywood to be some sort of state-regulated entity.

[–] Redsfan001 (6152) 5 years ago

I have trouble defining or labeling people only by negative traits.

Ailes is really quite a genius in news media. His tarnished end should not be his epitaph.

After working with the Republicans at the Watergate hearings, Ailes became obsessed that the media was too liberal and made it his mission to create a news department that gave voice to the conservative viewpoint.

He was successful in this mission. Fox news,love it or loth it,is the most watched news program in the USA

[–] Information-Police (4890) 5 years ago

Yes, he was not just a predatory pig, he also destroyed news and replaced it with alternate facts. Quite a legacy...

[–] Redsfan001 (6152) 5 years ago

You should always be open to different points of view.

Like a dinner plate with only potatoes, you don't get the full diet if you limit the news with just stories that appeal to you politically.

While FOX is not my go-to source for news, to dismiss it entirely is a mistake, they will run stories that other news agencies will ignore.

[–] Information-Police (4890) 5 years ago

Yeah, I'm just not open to lies and distortions.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

A dipshit like you has CNN written all over them. Let me guess, Maddow is your fav.

[–] Information-Police (4890) 5 years ago

I never watch CNN. Maddow isn't on CNN.

HAPPY NEW YEAR!

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

LOL!!!

Ya' got me my pink-hatted friend.

In my defense, I haven't owned a TeeVee in 25 years . . . well, 26.5 if my wife were to answer.

But still, getting owned is getting owned.

At least we might be able to agree on one thing, 'Orange Man Bad!'.

In my opinion he's a Crypto, but nonetheless, 'Happy New Year!'.

:o)

[–] QueenFanUSA (3379) 5 years ago

All the other networks have done a fine job at "destroying news" all by themselves for decades now.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Your right and I hear Hitler was really good on the piano so we should focus on his good parts.

[–] Redsfan001 (6152) 5 years ago

Ailes = Hitler exemplifies the hysterics of some of the left

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Goodwin's Law:
"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1";

[–] Redsfan001 (6152) 5 years ago

😄

[–] Information-Police (4890) 5 years ago

According to Jay Roach, they interviewed several women at Fox who have not gone public and the only way to include their stories was through a fictional composite.