- Supermodel Emily Ratajkowski posted a photo Wednesday night expressing her disappointment with the tentative settlement that Harvey Weinstein and his alleged sexual misconduct victims reached.
- The tentative settlement would pay out $25 million to Weinstein’s alleged victims.
- If finalized, Weinstein would not have to pay any of his own money and would not have to admit to any wrongdoing.
Emily Ratajkowski is outraged over Harvey Weinstein’s tentative $25 million settlement with his alleged victims and is not afraid of showing it.
The settlement, announced Wednesday, totals to about $47 million and was agreed upon between Weinstein, his company board members, and dozens of women who have accused the movie producer of sexual misconduct, according to The New York Times.
Of that total sum, about $25 million would be paid out to Weinstein’s alleged victims. If the deal goes through, Weinstein would not have to admit to any of his alleged wrongdoings or pay any of the money out of his own pocket. Instead, insurance companies that represented the former movie mogul’s studio, the Weinstein Co., would cover the costs.
Ratajkowski posted a photo of herself on her Twitter and Instagram accounts on Wednesday with the words “fuck harvey.” written on her left arm. She wore the same message on her body to the “Uncut Gems” movie premiere later that night.
“Today Harvey Weinstein and his former studio made a $25 million deal with his victims,” Ratajkowski wrote online. “Weinstein, accused of offenses ranging from sexual harassment to rape, won’t have to admit wrongdoing or pay his own money. #nojusticenopeace.”
Further Details of the Deal
Weinstein has been in legal battles ever since The New York Times broke a story in 2017 detailing decades of his alleged sexual abuse and misconduct, catapulting the #MeToo movement and carving a path for victims to come forward. The former Hollywood head has maintained his innocence throughout the two years since.
The settlement requires court approval and a final signoff from all involved parties to be finalized, but even if it is, its terms are uncertain. Out of the settlement payout, $6.2 million would be split between 18 of Weinstein’s alleged victims, with no individual receiving more than $500,000.
A separate sum of money, $18.6 million, would be set aside for those involved in a class-action case, the New York attorney general’s suit and any future claimants, according to The New York Times.
The deal also allocates about $12 million of the settlement to legal costs for Weinstein, his brother Robert, and other former members of the company’s board. The remaining funds will go to unsecured creditors and former Weinstein Co. employees, according to The Los Angeles Times.
The deal, if approved, would settle multiple civil claims. However, Weinstein is still scheduled to go to trial in January on criminal charges of sexual assault.
Deal Sparks Backlash
Emily Ratajkowski is not the only one upset by the tentative settlement. Some of Weinstein’s alleged victims are not on board as well, and their lawyers have already publicly rejected it.
Attorneys Douglas Wigdor and Kevin Mintzer represent Wedil David, who alleges that Weinstein raped her in a hotel room in 2015. Earlier this year, when a $44 million settlement was announced, Wigdor and Mintzer rejected it. They reiterated their dissatisfaction with the legal process on Wednesday after the new tentative settlement was reached.
“It is shameful that $12 million of the settlement is going to the lawyers for the directors who we alleged enabled Harvey Weinstein, and it is even more outrageous that the proposed settlement will seek to bind non-participating members by providing a release to the insurance companies and the directors of the Weinstein Co. itself,” Wigdor and Mintzer said in a statement.
“While we don’t begrudge victims who want to settle, we plan to vigorously object to any provision that tries to bind victims who want to proceed with holding Harvey Weinstein accountable for his actions, which is exactly what we intend to do,” they added.
Over 30 actresses and former Weinstein employees agreed to the settlement, according to The New York Times, but even some of those individuals are not very happy with it.
Actress Katherine Kendall, who accused Weinstein of chasing her around a hotel room naked in 1993, expressed her frustration.
“I don’t love it, but I don’t know how to go after him,” she told The Times. “I don’t know what I can really do.”
“Dahmer” Series Breaks Netflix Records Amid Backlash For Exploiting Victims’ Stories
Family members of some of the murderer’s victims say the program is “retraumatizing.”
“Dahmer” Lands Successful Week on Netflix
While criticisms mount against “Dahmer – Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story,” the true crime series broke Netflix’s record as the most-watched first week for a series debut.
According to data provided by the streaming giant, the Evan Peters-led show was watched for over 196 million hours between its release on Sept. 21 and Sept. 25.
“Dahmer” is the newest of several pieces of fiction and media based on the famous serial killer. Created by Ryan Murphy and Ian Brennan, the series quickly generated a lot of attention online, primarily from those concerned the show is exploiting a gruesome true story.
Critics have echoed those fears, giving the show a mixed 50% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. The “Critic’s Consensus” blurb on the site states that while the show is “seemingly self-aware of the peril in glorifying Jeffrey Dahmer” the story still “tilts this horror story into the realm of queasy exploitation.”
Victims’ Families Speak Out
The family of Errol Lindsey, one of Dahmer’s victims, has also spoken out against the series. In a viral tweet, Lindsey’s cousin Eric Perry said his family is “pissed about the show.”
“It’s retraumatizing over and over again, and for what?” he wrote. “How many movies/shows/documentaries do we need?”
In much of the promotion for the series, Netflix claimed it would be told from the perspective of the victims. Perry slammed that narrative, noting that his family was never even contacted by the streamer about the project.
“So when they say they’re doing this ‘with respect to the victims’ or ‘honoring the dignity of the families’, no one contacts them,” he wrote. “My cousins wake up every few months at this point with a bunch of calls and messages and they know there’s another Dahmer show. It’s cruel.”
Lindsey’s sister, Rita Isbell, echoed that claim in an essay she wrote for Insider, noting that Netflix did not notify her of the show, or ask her any questions about her brother.
She said that watching the show “felt like reliving it all over again.”
“It brought back all the emotions I was feeling back then,” she wrote.
“It’s sad that they’re just making money off of this tragedy. That’s just greed,” she continued.
Obsession With Dahmer
Controversy has also grown from some of the responses to the series, as many viewers have posted fan edits of the show that romanticize Dahmer. Some pair clips of Peters’ Dahmer with his victims to love songs or pop ballads, leaving a bad taste in the mouths of those who do not understand why someone would make content glorifying the killer.
Others have responded to the show by calling Dahmer “hot” or posting thirst tweets about his mug shot. This has resulted in a backlash of its own.
“Jeffrey Dahmer molested and murdered people, mostly black men and boys,” one person wrote. “So to see people making edits and thirst traps of him is a little off putting.”
“if I see anyone tweeting thirst tweets about Jeffrey Dahmer I’m immediately unfollowing,” another person said. “That’s so fuckin nasty.”
Concerns that this kind of media results in more people admiring Dahmer are also mounting in Milwaukee, where many of his crimes took place. According to TMZ, the city is considering creating something to honor the victims, but officials fear a physical memorial would turn into a “mecca” for Dahmer’s fans.
YouTube Removes Age Restriction From Nicki Minaj Video After Singer Calls Company a “Bogus Platform”
Even though her video can now be viewed by all YouTuber users, Minaj made it clear she was upset that the age-gate tanked its view count in the first 24 hours.
Nicki Minaj Vs. YouTube
Nicki Minaj called out YouTube on Monday after the platform age-restricted her new music video for “Likkle Miss Remix” featuring Skeng.
By age-restricting a video, YouTube blocks users who are under 18 or not logged into a Google account from viewing the content.
Minaj’s video features close-up shots of people in skimpy outfits twerking, but several videos on YouTube with similar imagery have not been gated. Cardi B and Megan Thee Stallion’s “WAP” video is available for everyone, as is Minaj’s own “Anaconda” video.
In a since-deleted Instagram post, Minaj accused YouTube of being inconsistent and playing favorites.
“They restricted my fucking video but have things a million fucking times worse on their BOGUS FKNG PLATFORM,” she wrote in a post that included a screenshot of YouTube’s age-restriction notice. “This is what they do to keep you from winning while doing ads for another ppl and posting fake fkng stats. Because the same ppl who run YouTube are in bed with a certain record label and mngmnt company.”
Minaj further alleged that YouTube’s actions were done to prevent her from getting a significant number of views in the video’s first 24 hours, which is often the most crucial timeframe for a video’s success. She continued to assert that the Google-owned company has a bias toward certain music labels.
YouTube Walks Back Restriction
“How long have yall been playing the numbers game to lie & pretend ppl r doing ‘good’ when they r not?!?!!” Minaj continued in another post. “How much ad space did these duds purchase to be promoted on my channel in the last 5 years?!??!!!!”
Later on Monday, YouTube removed the restriction from Minaj’s video, per Variety. The company said the content in it did not violate its rules and guidelines.
While Minaj ended up deleting her Instagram posts calling YouTube out, she made it clear she was still frustrated by the debacle.
“FUCK THEM DUDS,” she tweeted. “THEY CANT GIVE US BACK OUR FIRST 24 HOURS CAN THEY?!?!!!”
As of Monday afternoon, her video had been viewed over one million times.
See what others are saying: (Variety) (The Independent) (Billboard)
“Don’t Worry Darling” Tops the Box Office Amid Bad Press
Audiences are already giving the film higher praise than critics did.
Young Women Flock to “Don’t Worry Darling”
Weeks of controversies and rumors did not prevent “Don’t Worry Darling” from finding victory at the box office, with the Olivia Wilde-directed thriller debuting at number one over the weekend and raking in $19.2 million.
Wilde also acted in the mid-century mystery, which starrs Florence Pugh, Harry Styles, Chris Pine, and Gemma Chan.
Women led ticket sales for the picture, comprising 66% of the audience, according to several reports. At least partially due to the appeal of Styles, crowds also skewed young, with over half under the age of 25.
Overseas, the film made over $10 million, bringing its total for the weekend to $30 million. That number is especially impressive since the R-rated drama had a budget of $35 million.
“Don’t Worry Darling” had been plagued with weeks of rumors about behind-the-scenes drama leading up to its release. Among other bouts of gossip, many online speculated that Pugh and Wilde had riffs on set, leading to Pugh’s refusal to promote the project. One report alleged the two got into a screaming match, but sources on set denied it.
Wilde and Shia LeBeouf, who was originally cast in the picture, also got into a public he-said-she-said about whether he quit the film or was fired.
The drama hit a boiling point during its premiere at the Venice Film Festival when Twitter users circulated a video they claimed showed Styles spiting on Pine, though both parties have denied that allegation.
A Film Riddled With Rumors
Furthering the bad press were the bad reviews. Critics largely panned the film, sticking it with a 38% on Rotten Tomatoes. After this first weekend, moviegoers seem to have a more favorable outlook, as it has a 79% audience score as of Monday.
Jeff Goldstein, the distribution chief for Warner Bros., told the Associated Press that “the background noise” caused by these controversies “had a neutral impact” on its box office haul. The studio released a statement saying it was pleased with the movie’s earnings.
Some analysts believe that, if anything, the online gossip and fodder may have aided the film’s box office performance.
In a tweet recapping the weekend’s box office, Paul Dergarabedian, a senior media analyst at Comscore, said the “drama sparked a huge wave of interest.”