Scott Rudin takedown - Page 9

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 4/9/21 at 11:07pm

Did any of these men do anything illegal?

I guess reading isn't your thing. To clarify: HE COMMITTED ASSAULT. 

[Dolly80]

Posted: 4/9/21 at 11:17pm

I’m genuinely shocked that anyone here would even begin to say his behaviour is basically “just par for the course”.

I think re The Music Man, if the story gathers pace from this point on, I think that either Hugh or Scott Rudin will have to leave the show. Sutton Foster isn’t gonna sell this alone, and very quickly (if it hasn’t happened already), Rudins attachment to this show will taint it beyond repair.

Even if the majority of people, those who have bought tickets to it to see HJ couldn’t care less about Rudin, or even be aware of this situation , those who are against him will have the loudest voice where it hurts- social media.

There’s also the very real situation that now his abusive behaviour has become news and more widely reported on, and any association with him will be seen as endorsing his behaviour. Hugh Jackman will not want to be doing that. And his management certainly won’t be.

[poisonivy2]

Posted: 4/10/21 at 12:27am

There's some tea being spilled in this twitter thread:

https://twitter.com/dgrahamcaso/status/1380000780053139457

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 4/10/21 at 12:43am

Holy God. That poor man.

[blaxx]

Posted: 4/10/21 at 12:50am

massofmen said: "so he is mean...is this illegal? Did he do anything illegal?
Did everyone know he was a poop face when they signed on to work with him? Yes.
he is a poop face who has employed hundreds of thousands of people, created hundreds of thousands of jobs, given life to creatives, and has produced some of the most successful pieces of art in media and theater over the past 40 years.
Steve Jobs was a poop face as well. Edison was also a poop face, as was jp morgan, and rockefeller.
Mark Zuckerberg is a poop face too. As is Jeff Bezos.

Did any of these men do anything illegal? Or are people's feelings hurt?

who is John Galt?"

I'd say that pushing someone off of a moving car should be illegal?  Or you think that to be illegal it should be off a skyscraper?  Just curious.

[unclevictor]

Posted: 4/10/21 at 1:22am

poisonivy2 said: "There's some tea being spilled in this twitter thread:

https://twitter.com/dgrahamcaso/status/1380000780053139457"

Wow wow wow. Unbelievable. That poor man. Scott Rudin is a monster and I look forward to his day of reckoning.

[JSquared2]

Posted: 4/10/21 at 3:46pm

massofmen said: "so he is mean...is this illegal? Did he do anything illegal?
Did everyone know he was a poop face when they signed on to work with him? Yes.
he is a poop face who has employed hundreds of thousands of people, created hundreds of thousands of jobs, given life to creatives, and has produced some of the most successful pieces of art in media and theater over the past 40 years.
Steve Jobs was a poop face as well. Edison was also a poop face, as was jp morgan, and rockefeller.
Mark Zuckerberg is a poop face too. As is Jeff Bezos.

Did any of these men do anything illegal? Or are people's feelings hurt?

who is John Galt?"

And what the fluck is a "poop face"??

[Fosse76]

Posted: 4/10/21 at 4:07pm

massofmen said: "so he is mean...is this illegal? Did he do anything illegal?

Yes. He committed assault and battery against at least one assistant,  which required medical attention. 

Throwing a glass bowl at another assistant is also assault in many jurisdictions.

The fact that there are numerous settlements between him and former staff indicates a pattern of illegal behavior. 

Did everyone know he was a poop face when they signed on to work with him? Yes.

In no uncertain terms did that justify his behavior. 

he is a poop face who has employed hundreds of thousands of people, created hundreds of thousands of jobs, given life to creatives, and has produced some of the most successful pieces of art in media and theater over the past 40 years.

Again, none of that justifies his behavior.  We can say the same thing about Roman Polanski. Should we allow him to continue to rape underage girls?

Steve Jobs was a poop face as well. Edison was also a poop face, as was jp morgan, and rockefeller.
Mark Zuckerberg is a poop face too. As is Jeff Bezos.

Did any of these men do anything illegal? Or are people's feelings hurt?

They very likely have, on some level. Ethically, all of these people have behaved abominably.

Updated On: 4/10/21 at 04:07 PM

[massofmen]

Posted: 4/10/21 at 4:33pm

i love when folk equate one thing to something thats incredibly different. 
throwing a computer at someone (rudin) and raping underage girls (polanski) is a tad different penalties under the american justice system. 
dunno if you knew that. 

 He did stupid awful things to people and if those people want to press charges, they should rightfully do so. 
I think they are minor misdemeanor offenses and the correct punishments under the justice system need be applied if found guilty and if charges are brought against him. 

or would you rather...some other punishment happen? Maybe a lynch mob?

Updated On: 4/10/21 at 04:33 PM

[massofmen]

Posted: 4/10/21 at 4:40pm

Great Whats the misdemeanor penalty for low grade assault?
community service and a $1000 fine? Or do you think we should stone him in times square?


Or should he have to quit the media industry, close down TKAL,  The Book of Mormon, not open Music man, Stop all  future film and tv productions and then go to rehab for a year? Will that silence the angry online mob?
What would satisfy your rage towards a man you have never met?

 

[iluvtheatertrash]

Posted: 4/10/21 at 4:41pm

No one is equating the two. But non-sexual violent assault is ALSO illegal, dumdum.

[HogansHero]

Posted: 4/10/21 at 4:43pm

Aside from being truly offensive, a lot of the trolling in this thread is irrelevant. A few points:

1. Many things are not crimes but are nonetheless illegal. Almost everything that has been reported on this subject in THR and collaterally is illegal.

2. Harassment is illegal in New York, and does not need to be severe or pervasive. The only defense available to the employer (other than denial obviously) is that the complained about action(s) were "petty slights or trivial inconveniences.”

3. Confidentiality agreements do not apply to communications with an attorney or any governmental entity that has jurisdiction. Also, settlements can only be confidential if the employee (or contractor, etc) wants it to be. 

[massofmen]

Posted: 4/10/21 at 4:45pm

um the person above is. He brought up roman polanski in regards to scott rudin!! lol. 
the absolute infantile discussion concerning this mans possible repercussions (by the theeater message board posse) is truly extraordinary.


 

[poisonivy2]

Posted: 4/10/21 at 4:50pm

massofmen said: "i love whenfolk equate one thing to something thats incredibly different.
throwing a computer at someone (rudin) and raping underage girls (polanski) is a tad different penalties under the american justice system.
dunno if you knew that.

He did stupid awful things to people and if those people want to press charges, they should rightfully do so.
I think they are minor misdemeanor offenses and the correct punishments under the justice system need be applied if found guilty and if charges are brought against him.

or would you rather...some other punishment happen? Maybe a lynch mob?"

Minor misdemeanor is walking down the street with an open bottle or jumping the turnstile.

Assault and battery (which his behavior is) is a felony.

[JBroadway]

Posted: 4/10/21 at 5:15pm

@massofmen

And to re-iterate what I said last night:

Most of the discussion in this thread has actually been about Rudin losing his JOB - not going to prison, or any other extreme punishment. Regardless of what’s illegal, what’s punishable by fines, what’s settled in court, etc. the point is that he’s guilty of what would otherwise be FIREABLE offenses. So we want him to lose his job as a result. It just so happens that it takes a lot of public outcry for someone like him to lose his job, so that’s what we’re engaging in.

Now, as others have rightfully pointed out, his behavior is ALSO illegal, and I hope he fades consequences for it. But that was actually not the primary focus of this thread until you came along.

[HogansHero]

Posted: 4/10/21 at 5:23pm

poisonivy2 said: "Assault and battery (which his behavior is) is a felony."

What Rudin did is horrible, and the reaction to which you respond is also horrible. But let's get the law right. It doesn't help your point to get it wrong. 

1. There is no such thing as assault and battery under NY law. 

2. Assault comes in several degrees, and the one likely applicable here (3rd Degree) is charged as a misdemeanor. That includes an intentional act that causes injury.

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 4/10/21 at 8:18pm

massofmen said: "Great Whats the misdemeanor penaltyfor low grade assault?
community service and a $1000 fine? Or do you think we should stone him in times square?


Or should he have to quit the media industry,close down TKAL, The Book of Mormon, not open Music man, Stop all future film and tv productions and then go to rehab for a year? Will that silence the angry online mob?
What would satisfy your rage towards a man you have never met?

"

Despicable, Scottie. 

[troynow]

Posted: 4/10/21 at 8:49pm

Petition started to Cancel Rudin

https://www.change.org/CancelRudin

[JBroadway]

Posted: 4/10/21 at 10:52pm

Harry Shearer has retweeted some anti-Rudin tweets. He’s not exactly an A-list star (and even less so now than he was a couple decades ago) but so far he’s the most high-profile actor I've seen publicly take a stance.

https://twitter.com/theharryshearer?s=20

[bk]

Posted: 4/11/21 at 3:58am

JBroadway said: "@massofmen

And to re-iterate what I said last night:

Most of the discussion in this thread has actually been about Rudin losing his JOB - not going to prison, or any other extreme punishment. Regardless of what’s illegal, what’s punishable by fines, what’s settled in court, etc. the point is that he’s guilty of what would otherwise be FIREABLE offenses. So we want him to lose his job as a result. It just so happens that it takes a lot of public outcry for someone like him to lose his job, so that’s what we’re engaging in.

Now, as others have rightfully pointed out, his behavior is ALSO illegal, and I hope he fades consequences for it. But that was actually not the primary focus of this thread until you came along."

Losing his job??? What job is that? Making a movie deal? Producing a huge B'way show? 

[Fosse76]

Posted: 4/11/21 at 5:58am

bk said: "JBroadway said: "@massofmen

And to re-iterate what I said last night:

Most of the discussion in this thread has actually been about Rudin losing his JOB - not going to prison, or any other extreme punishment. Regardless of what’s illegal, what’s punishable by fines, what’s settled in court, etc. the point is that he’s guilty of what would otherwise be FIREABLE offenses. So we want him to lose his job as a result. It just so happens that it takes a lot of public outcry for someone like him to lose his job, so that’s what we’re engaging in.

Now, as others have rightfully pointed out, his behavior is ALSO illegal, and I hope he fades consequences for it. But that was actually not the primary focus of this thread until you came along."

Losing his job??? What job is that? Making a movie deal? Producing a huge B'way show?"

He's essentially self-employed, so "livelihood" would probably be a better term.  But he needs the cooperation of third parties, including studios/distributers and on/off-screen talent to succeed. Without more high-profile articles that would essentially force these additional parties to step-back, there will probably be little impact.

[HogansHero]

Posted: 4/11/21 at 11:20am

Fosse76 said: "He's essentially self-employed, so "livelihood" would probably be a better term. But he needs the cooperation of third parties, including studios/distributers and on/off-screen talent to succeed. Without more high-profile articles that would essentially force these additional parties to step-back, there will probably be little impact."

I agree (although I would focus on Broadway not Hollywood to make the point). It would take a lot to force a landlord that he has been feeding with shows to turn off that faucet but if there were to be a critical mass of public objection, I think it might give investors pause, both because of the prospect of making less money and also because of the association. Rudin is dependent on their financing and is not going to self-finance his shows. (Could he find alternate investors? Probably. If Trump could, why not?) "Job" was a weird word choice here, but the reaction to it is not substantive. Will anything happen? As of now, probably not. Maybe a short term workaround. But we all know that a petition is just silly. 

[JBroadway]

Posted: 4/11/21 at 11:40am

I know that words like “livelihood” and “profession” might come closer to describing how Rudin makes his living. But I used the term “job” to illustrate a point. Rudin presumably has an office, along with other workspaces (physical or digital), and in those workspaces he has created a toxic work environment, and abuses the other people in that working environment. If a traditional employee at a company (someone with a “job” in the usual sense) were to be behave like Rudin, they would be deemed unfit to continue working in that job.

By being at the top, he has found a way to evade that accountability. Good for him! But not good for the other people at his “job.” The fact that he isn’t held to the same standards as someone with a “job” - even though it’s functionally the same thing in the sense that he has to be an in an environment and perform tasks with other people in order to make money - is unjust.

[HogansHero]

Posted: 4/11/21 at 11:59am

I agree the distinction is not meaningful. In reality Rudin is an employee of his own company but that, too, is meaningless since he is the only "boss" who could fire him. The same situation can and does exist between bosses and some non-boss employees. It is not a news flash that actors who can create a blockbuster for a producer (the boss) get a lot more leeway than the wardrobe person who does the laundry. (Dressers, on the other hand, can be a difficult situation sometimes, especially when they are hired at the behest of a star.) What Rudin has done is illegal, so it is not true that there is no accountability. But someone has to step forward. Maybe, going forward, that is how this is resolved, because the one thing we know about Rudin is that he knows how to turn his pathologies off when he needs to. (And that's exactly what we want laws to accomplish.)

[Call_me_jorge]

Posted: 4/11/21 at 12:32pm

Wasn’t Harvey Weinstein technically his own boss too? Sure, Scott Rudin Production may not have a board. What we should hope for are investors pulling out of Rudin shows. Then that way he can be toppled.