by Nathaniel R
Ashley Judd in her blockbuster breakout "Double Jeopardy" in 1999I keep getting into trouble when I tweet out semantic arguments on the internet as if I'm missing the point of very serious topics. So let me assure you that I'm not missing the point. I am filled with rage when I read these stories about the toxic treatment of actresses in Hollywood but the only way I can cope (I live for actresses, duh) is to nerd out and take deep dives into thinking about their filmographies, or looking at Oscar stats, or other less fraught things to rage less. Lashing out in all directions with rage or feeding my rage by continually sharing it is just not my way and has never helped me cope with pain. So, in other words, I'll save my little semantics quibble until the end of the post.
Anyway the reveals of what Harvey Weinstein was up to in his most powerful days keep getting worse. To stay within the confines of Weinsten adjacent imagery, let's just say it makes me want to watch an Inglorious Basterds ahistorical style rewrite in which some Ashley Judd gets the Brad Pitt role and her team of merciless female soldiers gives Weinstein what he deserved back then...
To make a very long story short, what we've recently learned is that Jackon wanted Ashley Judd for The Lord of The Rings and he implied she could have her pick of either part. It's easy to deduce we're talking about Galadriel or Arwen here since they are the only three female characters (and it probably wouldn't have been Eowyn with Judd a newly minted star at the time!). Judd never heard from him again. Jackson, now, is letting the world know that Weinstein is lying about his denials of Judd's claims. Jackson says that Weinstein personally warned him off of casting Judd or Sorvino in this epic because they were impossible to work with.
Just seeing this after I awoke, I burst out crying. There it is, confirmation that Harvey Weinstein derailed my career, something I suspected but was unsure. Thank you Peter Jackson for being honest. I’m just heartsick https://t.co/ljK9NqICbm
— Mira Sorvino (@MiraSorvino) December 15, 2017
Peter & Fran had me in - showed me all the creative, the boards, costumes, everything. They asked which if the two roles I preferred, and then I abruptly never heard from hem again. I appreciate the truth coming out. Thank you, Peter. https://t.co/iXKuK6Xqtx
— ashley judd (@AshleyJudd) December 15, 2017
It's all so horribly sad. If you think back to Ashley Judd in 1999, hot off her surprise sleeper hit Double Jeopardy which theoretically should have made her a hot commodity (and did briefly if not to the extent it would have if Harvey hadn't been trying to sabotage her) it's actually easy to picture her acing either of those now iconic roles, though Liv Tyler and Cate Blanchett were both wonderful.
The semantics part.
I've always believed that words matter so I can't help but be frustrated with the round of headlines with this particular story. There are, as I type, dozens of them blaring things like "Peter Jackson blacklisted" or was "forced into blacklisting" Ashley Judd or Mira Sorvino in the late 90s. Sometimes it's presented to look like a quote or obeying an order but then the actual quotes say something different. They still paint a very damaging account of Weinstein's smearing but in no way suggest that Jackson was "forced" into anything or that he prevented the actresses from getting further work outside of his movie which is what blacklisting implies. Rewording it this way makes Peter Jackson sound like an awful person and that he himself was the one derailng their careers! Or that he was Weinstein's lackey (he was not and, in fact, never made a movie with him after Heavenly Creatures which was a buy-and-release situation rather than an actual collaboration). Weinstein's name is only on the Lord of the Rings movies due to contractual reasons since Jackson was able to take the project away from Miramax and over to New Line.
Peter Jackson had no power to make Judd unemployable, he merely believed Weinstein and didn't hire her for his fantasy trilogy. Why he believed him is a more troubling question that none of the articles address. He apparently didn't like him much already at that point in time, so why take his word so readily on an actress?). But let's not be ungenerous to Jackson. The blame is Weinstein's who was, after all, orchestrating a smear campaign to try and virtually blacklist actresses like Sorvino and Judd. I say virtually because he had no control over what happened at other studios, just his own "mini-major". A smear campaign was the pettiest and sadly most effective way to do damage.
Ashley Judd and Mira Sorvino in their "Norma Jean and Marilyn" collaboration on TV in 1996
Nevertheless Judd's initial claims are now vindicated from a highly respected industry veteran. Weinstein was, in fact, wreaking havoc on her career and now Judd has Jackson as a witness. Good on Jackson for speaking out and all power to Judd for being such a smart tough women all these years and not taking this toxic shit. And for her political moxie. If you didn't grow up watching her, please seek out Smoke (1995) in which she has one of those once-every-few-years "WHO IS THIS?" camera seizing arrival, and Bug (2006) in which she proves that she can throw down with the best of the brave 'I'll ace any tricky material' actresses. Afterwards you'll totally want to see some savvy writer/director hand her a plum part immediately and cause a Judd-assaince. Same goes for Mira Sorvino of course who we were just recently praising.