KATE WINSLET'S NAÏVETY.

Is it just me or has Kate Winslet really been consistently enthusiastic about asking for exclusion from a certain narrative for some while? Not long ago, whilst defending in an interview her decision to marry a man who had willingly changed his birth name to Ned Rock-n-Roll (I can’t), and demanding she not be judged by anyone (fair enough), she felt completely free to under the same breath question Miley Cyrus’s parents’ approach to raising their children (this was at the time of Miley’s “twerking”/tongue-sticking-out wild days) and why "aren’t they looking after her?". She literally fought against judgement while slapping a pile of it on people she never met. And it just seems to be the thing about her recently: "don't voice. your opinions but it's ok if I voice mine".

She felt that the gender pay-gap conversation was too “vulgar”, the Harvey Weinstein rumours (when they were still rumours) – so unbelievable that she used the word “naïve” when asked about whether she knew (at the time I wrote in my FB post about when the naïvety expiration age should be because Kate Winslet is actually 43 years old). Shooting with Roman Polanski, a legit rapist, was “incredible” because, after “having thought it all through, you put [the problems] to one side and just work with the person”. And now, in reply about working with Woody Allen on Wonder Wheel, it feels like another, by now familiar, bail-out: “It’s a difficult discussion… I’d rather respectfully not enter it today”. That is a lot of privilege, non? To be able to “respectfully not enter” the discussion of sexual abuse in the industry that’s just been cracked open with stories upon stories upon stories told by its victims.

That is some majorly shady avoidance.

I wonder though if Kate’s biggest justification – "Woody Allen is an incredible director" blah blah – is worth it. Apart from Blue Jasmine, I personally won’t name a single Woody Allen film that has brought me any joy or, indeed, invoked any feeling or a flicker of interest. I have given his films a few chances – they were all whack and weak. Therefore, I can't fathom why so many dream of being in his movies – what is the big deal, can someone please tell me? Hilariously, my impressions were legitimised in this Christopher Orr’s article which posits that the secret behind Woody Allen’s success is merely in his showing up. He barely bothers to give clear directorial instructions or, God forbid, strive for perfection. All he does is make a movie a year. Any movie. Is this also why actors are lining up to work with him? Because of the reduced effort required? Yeah.

Back to Kate Winslet and her privilege. How long can she keep riding the “We’re always as actors going to say the wrong thing” self-delusion? Um, no, Kate, actually actors do say the right thing, they are just willing to head-butt the consequences. And while we’re at it, how much longer does Kate Winslet get to name-drop Leonardo DiCaprio and their friendship like it’s still cute – surely by now standing next to him is akin to an actual STD?   

PS. Because I am currently in a deep emotional dive into everything related to Call Me By Your Name, I am f-cking distraught and torn to pieces that the next film this creep makes will star the love of my month Timothee Chalamet. I will now have to figure out how to deal with this. 

PPS. please bare with me while I learn, baby step by an even babi-er step, from my amazingly patient friend Jorge how to manage an actual website and present it exactly the way I want. My final words for this post were supposed to pop up as a proper tweet but I haven't learnt how to do this and for now I can only make a link.