More than two weeks after Rose McGowan accused him of past sexual misconduct, Election director Alexander Payne has denied all allegations in a statement written for Deadline.
On August 17, McGowan went to Twitter with some detailed accusations stemming from alleged encounters in the late ‘80s, when she was only 15 years old. “Alexander Payne. You sat me down & played a soft-core porn movie you directed for Showtime under a different name,” the tweet read. “I still remember your apartment in Silverlake. You are very well-endowed. You left me on a street corner afterwards. I was 15.” She went on to say that she was only looking for acknowledgement and an apology, not to “destroy” his career.
On Friday afternoon, Deadline posted Payne’s statement via the platform’s guest column. “Rose McGowan and I have always had very cordial interactions, and I have admired her commitment to activism and her voice in an important, historic movement. However, what she has said about me in recent social media posts is simply untrue.” Payne goes on to refute McGowan’s timeline of events, claiming that he was studying film at UCLA and that their paths would not have crossed during that time. He also denies ever directing anything for Showtime: “She claims that I showed her a ‘soft-core porn movie’ I had directed for Showtime ‘under a different name.’ This would have been impossible, since I had never directed anything professionally, lurid or otherwise. I have also never worked for Showtime or directed under any name other than my own.”
While he does acknowledge that they met during an audition for a Playboy Channel program in 1991 (which, if they had met on or after September 7, would have made McGowan 18 years old and Payne 27), he claims that McGowan pursued him, which led to “a couple of dates.” When Variety asked McGowan to comment on Payne’s statement, she simply responsed, “F— him and his lies is my comment.”
129 Comments
Genuinely wondering if she has confused him with someone else. 30+ years is a hell of a long time to remember something perfectly. I don’t remember my life in my teens with great detail and I had some unusual stuff happen including a friend getting murdered and someone threatening to molest me and another kid (before he was arrested). Just saying, frailty of memory is a normal thing – could be his or hers, but he might have more easily corroborated facts on his narrative’s side.
Rose has gone cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs the last few years, so that’s entirely possible.
I wonder if the same fog of memory could apply to the very specific details Rose provided. As others have pointed out, Payne directed some soft-core stuff for Playboy (not Showtime) around the time McGowan would have been 17 or 18. It seems plausible that “the guy who molested me went on to direct soft-core” could, over 30 years, eventually turn into “the guy showed me soft-core he directed before he molested me.” But this whole thing raises the question: how many details of her story can be proved wrong before the larger accusation is no longer viable? I don’t know what the right answer to that is.
The same qualities that made her vulnerable to sexual predators then probably make her vulnerable now to people who want to use her against sexual predators.
Ah, the Kavanaugh defense.
The defense is not necessarily wrong, mind you. Seriously, how well do you remember events from almost forty years ago?
You remember being raped
I was thinking the same thing. I remember parties, hookups, etc. from my high school years but couldn’t for the life of me tell you what year, never mind what month, they happened.
What I don’t understand is why this is being presented as a guest column instead of a reported piece. It’s not a he-said-she-said encounter in some private hotel room or something; the parties are asserting a different series of verifiable or falsifiable facts. Shouldn’t Deadline assign a reporter to determine, for instance, whether Payne ever directed softcore porn for Showtime? That’s either true or it isn’t, so it’s silly to present it as a a situation where you have to hear both sides and decide for yourself which one to believe. Framing it that way does a disservice to whichever side is actually telling the truth.
According to IMDB, he directed segments of soft core anthologies for Playboy Channel.
Yeah, and according to IMDb, that was released in 1991. So it was likely shot earlier in the year, or the year prior. If Rose’s birthday was in September, she probably would have been 17 at the audition. As he says in his post, he probably assumed she was 18 if she attended the audition. So – it seems like it’s a grey mix of both stories.
I agree. Looks like he also did another one for Playboy in 1992, as well.
This is a believable mix-up by McGowan. Memory is fickle at best, so even if she got the channel wrong, that shouldn’t cast doubt on her claims.The first segment directed by Payne was released in 1991, the second in 1992. Presumably the latter is the one whose 1991 auditions he’s referring to, since even a softcore film takes a while to cast, stage, film, and edit.If it was that film (“Inside Out III”), she was most likely 18 at the time. If it was the earlier film (“Inside Out”), she was most likely 17.I don’t think anyone could conclusively prove which film it was and when they supposedly watched it together. But a journalist could investigate whether he was living in Silver Lake when she claimed, whether he had directed anything professional when she was 15, etc.
“a believable mix-up”Absolutely not. She accused him of grooming and statutory rape. Not the time to be lackadaisical about how old she was and what she was auditioning for when she met him.
if you’d read my post, and the post I was responding to, you’d see the “believable mix up” is the specific channel the porn film was shot for: whether Showtime or Playboy.
But she is accusing someone of very serious and specific crimes involving a minor. That is not the time to be lackadaisical about how old she was and what she was auditioning for when she met him.
Indeed, I’m not being lackadaisical about her age or what she was auditioning for. A good journalist should investigate both of their claims and try to nail down as close to an accurate timeline of their relationship as possible.The channel which aired the porno that he supposedly showed her, however, is not a controlling detail of this story. A controlling detail is something like “did Alexander Payne ever direct a porno?” or “was Payne living in L.A. at the time Rose McGowan said he was?” or “how old was McGowan when she met Payne?”Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable, which is why we try to corroborate it with as many objective facts as possible.
I think more important details, when accusing someone of serious crimes such as statutory rape and grooming a minor (after talking about making an official accusation against this person for years so there was plenty of time to get her ducks in a row on this) are.. like… say … how she was an adult at the time, not a minor and …like …how she was auditioning for a role for the Playboy Channel when she was, in context of that, shown something from the Playboy Channel.That’s not the ‘eye-witness testimony isn’t reliable’ or the ‘oops! silly brain fart!’ bullshit you’re trying to push it as. That is McGowan inventing crimes that never existed.She also straight-up lied about quitting acting from 15-21:“I feel very badly for my 15 year-old self. I had auditioned for him. He took me home afterwards. I quit acting after that and then was discovered by Ilene Staple (a friend of Gregg Araki) 6 years later. It wasn’t until after the HW [Harvey Weinstein] stories came out that I reframed the Payne of it all. I had for years looked at it as a sexual encounter, not understanding what it really was. It was a grooming situation. The first time I’d been shown a straight porn.”I mean, her IMDB is right there. We can all see that it is a straight-up lie just from that.
It’s the first one according to Payne. He’s specific in his column that they met in 1991 when she auditioned for his first directing job which was for Playboy. Those soft core straight to video anthologies actually take no time to shoot. Playboy put out 3 movies in that series in about a year and a half. That said, it does take a few months so I’d guess she was 17 at the time. That said, even if her recollection is wrong about the year, their statements still don’t line up because she claims he showed her a soft core segment he had shot already and he claims they met during the audition for the very segment she claims he had shown her. Payne claims they went on a few dates after the audition so he could well have shown her the segment then and she’s misremembering the sequence of events. That would make more sense regarding the dates that are easily confirmed.
So according to Payne: he meets her when she’s 17, auditioning for a softcore porno. She’s not legally allowed to act in the film because she’s still a minor. (Payne acknowledges as much in his statement.) She didn’t get the part, but she did get into the audition room, which means she either had a fake ID or someone wasn’t doing their job very well. He operates under the assumption that she’s at least 18 because she’s auditioning for porn.At best he’s a 30-year old man who thinks he’s going on a date with an 18 or 19 year old girl. Ah Hollywood.
Yeah, even Payne’s own account is him admitting that he went on “dates” with a girl that he knew was young. It’s not even the age difference by years. Add 10 years to both their ages and I wouldn’t scoff at the age difference, but when the age difference is between late teens and 30, than that’s manipulative as hell. Particularly when the aspiring actor/director power dynamic is added on top of the age power dynamic.
Payne’s own account is:Rose and I did meet years later, in 1991, during my first directing job, when she auditioned for a comic short I was making for a Playboy Channel series. Although she did not get the part, she left a note for me at the casting desk asking that I call her. I had no reason to question how old she was, since the role she read for required an actor who was of age. We later went out on a couple of dates and remained on friendly terms for years.He met a person who had been living in Hollywood on her own for several years as an adult (McGowan was emancipated at 15 and moved to Hollywood in 1988) and had already racked up several film and TV credits as an actress. There’s no reason to think just from the circumstance that he would have known how young she was since normally that person would have been in her 20s.Whether you think it was wrong, in the early 90s, for a recent film school grad to be dating actresses younger than him is up to you.
1
I don’t know what your reply means. Help?
I agree it’s gross and pathetic on his part. But an adult is an adult. If we want to acknowledge agency over women’s own lives then we have to accept that some are going to make bad choices with that agency.
“She’s not legally allowed to act in the film because she’s still a minor.”Softcore porn is basically steamy dramas. There are characters who don’t get naked or have sex.
I think the “Ah Hollywood” point is spot-on. It’s a sleazy place with a LOT of people trying to break in, and a lot of other people taking advantage of that.
“she claims he showed her a soft core segment he had shot already and he claims they met during the audition for the very segment she claims he had shown her”He may have been hired to make several shorts for the series so he considers all of the shorts his first job, rather than counting each short as a separate job, like how McGowan would count Charmed as one job rather than each episode of Charmed as a separate job.
Maybe she auditioned for the latter film and he showed her the former?
Hold on a second are we not accusing men of sexual misconduct in the eighties. (Where were you at the high school party in 1984) and get all flustered when they can’t recall…(Or honestly get weirded out when they bring out calenders from that year like an episode of hoarders) Yet we are supposed to give Rose a pass because she mixed up being 15 with being an adult?
I didn’t say that! The “believable mixup” is the channel the porno aired on. That’s it.I was responding to BastardOfToledo who posted “According to IMDB, he directed segments of soft core anthologies for Playboy Channel.”And I said “This is a believable mix-up by McGowan. Memory is fickle at best, so even if she got the channel wrong, that shouldn’t cast doubt on her claims.” (emphasis added to demonstrate that I was clearly talking about the channel and the channel alone.)
From the sound of things, she got the decade wrong. She is stating they hooked up when she was fifteen. It seems apparent she was not. Based both on her age when he actually made these movies.
Plus the incident would have to take place some time after, if he was able to show her the finished film.
Under his own name, which he fully acknowledges. If she was auditioning for a Playboy channel role then she would have had to at least present herself as being 18. 27 / 18 is kind of gross, but not illegal.
I agree. I was just presenting a fact that wasn’t made very clear. He did direct some soft core stuff, but not while she was 15. Still icky to date someone as young as she was, though.
This is clearly your first visit to Internet Court. You must choose one side or the other and defend it to the death. Facts are admissible, but not necessary.
He doesn’t use social media so he had to call in some favors to get his side out maybe? Her accusations also weren’t subjected to a reporter since she put it on her social media. But at least one reporter did look into it a little at the time and came to the conclusion that her claims weren’t accurate: https://www.newsday.com/entertainment/celebrities/rose-mcgowan-alexander-payne-1.48228172It would have been better if this entire thing would have been subjected to some journalistic integrity from the start, rather than the ‘some people on Twitter are saying…’ bullshit we have to sift through now in the age of social media standing in for journalism.
Damn you real mad lol
The dates Payne gives in his statement are easily confirmed. He graduated film school in 1990 and his first directing gig was for a segment in a soft core Playboy video anthology in 1991. There’s really nothing that requires a journalist to ascertain these facts. McGowan’s recollection of the dates, and hence her own age, are wrong. That doesn’t mean her feelings of being taken advantage of or being violated aren’t genuine, Payne was almost ten years older than her and she was a teenager, but the date of the events in her account simply can’t be correct.
Unless he was straight-up lying about his career and showing her a movie directed by someone else and claiming it was made by him under a fake name.
Payne was in his second year of film school when McGowan was 15 and how would’ve they even met? He did actually direct a couple of soft core segments for Playboy in 1991 and 92, after he graduated, and that’s where both accounts coincide. That doesn’t stop Payne from a being a 30 year old creep who took advantage of a teenager.
“creep who took advantage of a teenager”Did he know she was a teenager? People are acting like he was her JV basketball coach and definitely knew exactly how old she was at the time.
That’s a very fair point. But even so, he’d have still been in film school when the allegations occurred so it’s highly unlikely Playboy would have hired him to direct a film for them at that point.
Presence or non-presence of Shannon Tweed?
So which is it, someone is 1000% completely lying, and it seems like it’d be pretty easy to figure out who.
I like how Payne refuted every point except the part about his being well-endowed.
That seems like the easiest detail to verify.
“BASICALLY A MICROPENIS HERE!” he screams, waving 8 inches of limp flesh around in a desperate attempt to clear his name.
That was kind of a weird thing to include in the accusation.
Reminds me of Bill Clinton’s supposed penis mole.
I imagined his current wife releasing a statement to the effect that while she was not around to personally witness the alleged events at the time, she can attest to her husband’s anatomy being best described as “adequate”. And yes, that particular word choice was inspired by Sonia Greene.
Remember when there was a news story about Paula Patton confirming that Robin Thicke’s boasts about his own endowment in the Blurred Lines video were “accurate”? A more innocent time
She was talking about his inheritance?
“Election” is a really important film for me, but this seems like a still developing story and I think it’s really important to remember to take the accuser’s words seriously, even when the work of someone is incredibly important.
That film has not aged well for me, considering it casts as its antagonist a student who was raped by her teacher.
Is it taboo to write a film where a rape victim can go on to be the antagonist?
I always considered Matthew Broderick the antagonist?
I always considered Matthew Broderick the antagonist? He should have been, but unfortunately, he’s not. That’s what made it edgy white-boy cinema. ‘HaHaHa Look how awful this guy is! Let’s root for him! HaHaHa’
They’re all antagonists. Except possibly Chris Klein, who’s more like a Labrador Retriever that wandered on set.
And his sister isn’t an antagonist either really. She just wants to be gay with her crush.
He’s a POV character who takes it upon himself to be the antagonist (to someone unaware of his antagonism).
In the mid 2000s one of my oldest friends got a job in Omaha. She was told when she was living there that Alexander Payne had the reputation of cruising college aged woman whenever he was visiting Omaha. Her friend said Payn was pretty skeevy. I really love his movies so I was fairly disappointed to hear this bit of news.
“
I had never directed anything professionally, lurid or otherwise”May be good to rephrase that sentence.
Yeah, that was some head-scratching phraseology on his part. Had to read it couple of extra times as a kind of a double-take.
It’s referring to the late 80s. He’s explaining that in that specific timeframe, when McGowan was underage in Hollywood, he was a film student who had not yet directed anything
How so? He was addressing a softcore film he supposedly made, which qualifies as ‘lurid.’ His point is he was still a student and hadn’t directed anything professionally.
One of the ugly paradoxes of sexual intimidation and abuse is:a) Sometimes you’ll have an accuser with a history of instablity, and whose assertions about most things even the most fair-minded person can’t really afford to take on faith. At the same time…b) Sexual predators seem to have an uncanny nose for victims of exactly this sort. They’re often more vulnerable to such abuse in the first place, and the abuser counts on their unreliability should they ever speak up later.So it ends up being really hard to decide what fairness demands in such a case. Sometimes, you just have to hope & pray for additional evidence that’ll make it possible to know what to think.
That’s what makes them effective as predators, and difficult to catch, because they target and groom individuals who are less likely to be believed. To use an extreme example, it’s why killers like Gary Ridgeway got away with their crimes for so long, by targeting prostitutes and runaways who were already marginalized, and for whom there would be less interest. And if you need further proof, just look at how popular culture regards Ridgeway (with 70 plus victims) versus Ted Bundy, who killed half as many, but gets far greater attention, in part, because he went after white women of college age, who far from marginalized, were mainstream and provoked greater societal interest.
Besides being the first modern serial killer brought to our attention, a large part of the attention placed on Bundy was/is due to the brazen nature of his crimes. He disappeared a number women in broad daylight, in crowded areas. He also murdered many of them within a very small window of opportunity. Then there’s the fact that he escaped custody in Colorado twice, once from the jail and once from the courthouse. In many ways Bundy is still unlike any other known serial killer.
Also, wasn’t Bundy’s trial one of the first televised in the age of TV spectacle journalism, and he did a fairly good job acting as his own lawyer in it?
Absolutely true about the televised trial, and the entire coverage of Bundy during that period was a media circus. To be fair it was absolutely driven by the fascination of the general public. As for how good a job Bundy did as his own lawyer, well he did better than someone without any law background — Bundy did go to law school although he didn’t finish. Bundy was extremely smart and extremely charming, and he really knew how to use that to his advantage. If you’re really interested in learning more, I suggest Ann Rule’s book, The Stranger Beside Me. She was an excellent true crime writer and she knew Ted Bundy personally. She worked with him at a suicide hotline center in 1971 and was his friend for several years afterwards. It’s a fascinating book and Rule’s involvement with Bundy is equally fascinating (she was a former police officer who tipped off the police to Bundy because he matched with an eye witness’s description. The police dropped the ball on the tip).
I didn’t mean to imply he was a good lawyer; I didn’t phrase that well. I meant more that he appeared “normal” person who had some knowledge of law and was possibly capable of acting as his own lawyer. Not like, for example, that one guy that just cursed out the judge the whole time he was ‘acting as his own lawyer’. More the point I was attempting to make was that he fed into the whole spectacle which made it easy for the tabloid press to make it into an even bigger spectacle. While most serial killers don’t tend to play it up once they are caught – that’s game over for them. It wasn’t just the crimes that made one case more of a spectacle than another, it was the eagerness of that guy to parade himself because that was also part of his game.Also, I could be totally off about all that. I don’t really know that much about serial killers and don’t really care to, I was just making a passing observation because I did know his trial was a big media circus due in large part to him making it that way.
I want to apologize for linking that video. I had never watched it, just heard about it being a funny clip of a guy non-stop cursing out a judge instead of actually acting as his own lawyer and I didn’t realize it more than that. I just watched it and it is too late to remove it. So very sorry about that and fair warning to others: it’s not funny or fun; don’t bother watching it.
Don’t worry about it. I didn’t watch it.
Yes, it was one of the first televised/spectacle trials, but NO, he did NOT do a good job as his own lawyer, he basically got himself sentenced to death when a halfway decent lawyer would have spared him. He showboated and tried to ham up the trial, smartly making himself a star and playing up his charisma and charm (if you want to call it that) to try to mock the process so bad he’d get a mistrial.spoiler alert: It didn’t work
Very true, but given how long ago this was I’d expect there to be a bigger pattern in Payne’s case. This may open flood gates, but given the revelations of the last couple of years I would think we’d hear his name by now.
I still have conflicting feelings about Tara Reid. On one hand, it sounds like she has problems with honesty and has delusions of grandeur, but that doesn’t mean nothing happened. Or it could even mean that abuse contributed to her problems with honesty or ability to discern fantasy from reality.
The fact that there was a call from her mother to Larry King Live that was contemporaneous seemed pretty damning to me.
How is it damning? In the call she says that her daughter had problems while working for a senator but did not want to publicize them out of respect for him. She doesn’t even say that the issue was with the senator.
The current evidence confirms that the date, and thus her own age, that McGowan claimed is wrong. Payne graduated college in 1990 and his first directing gig was a segment in soft core video anthology for Playboy in 1991. So McGowan’s recollection of the timeline can’t be right. She would’ve been 17 or 18 in 1991. That of course doesn’t mean that Payne didn’t take advantage of a teenager, even if it was legal, and doesn’t nullify her feelings about the experience.
Feelings are important, but how much of a scumbag he is does depend on if she was an upset 15yo or an upset 18yo.
In one he’s a statutory rapist and a predator and a criminal. In another, he’s someone who gave a terrible, terrible date. We don’t know if he raped her, or if she gave her consent but later regretted doing so. (An unfortunately too common situation.)
Or you can just believe women
Believing women means taking their claims seriously, it doesn’t literally mean anyone accused of a crime by a woman is automatically guilty so we don’t need to look into it.
No it means believing women
x
Why you mad tho
Because obliterating nuance like this is exactly what the bastards want.
Nah. They just want to rape women and get away with it.
Yes, exactly. Attacking a straw man version of “believe all women” to discredit it is one thing they do to get away with it.
But that wouldn’t work if people actually believed women. So your argument makes no sense.
Just believing everything any woman ever says isn’t a practical solution, sorry.
That’s a cool strawman that nobody said
You started this argument by saying that.
This post is specifically about rape and sexual assault, try and keep up
Ok, goodbye troll.
Aw, don’t be embarrassed. You got all excited and forgot the context of the argument. It happens.
Goodbye troll.
So we should always believe women in every possible situation because of their biology and/or the fact that they identify as such?Your extreme, zero sum take can go fuck itself.
I like the weird transphobic dogwhistle you threw in halfway through
Seven-deuce was saying that women include both people who are biologically female and who those identify as a woman. Please explain how that’s transphobic. Really, go ahead and give it a shot.
Yeah that’s not actually something that needed to be pointed out
It didn’t need to be pointed out, but it’s not remotely transphobic to clarify that you are being inclusive when you say women.So in other words I guess you can’t explain why it’s transphobic, and are just showing for the 1000th time how little you actually understand the concepts you comment about.
Or, you don’t understand how weird it is to specifically designate trans women when literally nobody mentioned anything to the contrary. But you’re spoiling for a fight for some odd reason in defense of our resident MRA
He was literally saying that women who identify as women are women. That’s the opposite of a “transphobic dog whistle”.It’s legitimately hilarious how often your attempts to call others out just end up highlighting how little you understand any of these topics.
So you’re so hell-bent on defending our resident right-winger that you’re just going to ignore every point I made, huh. Like, not even acknowledging how weird it is to make a point of underlining how trans women are women despite nobody saying anything to the contrary? It’s like a country club saying “yes, we totally accept black people!” when no one asked. It’s weird. Of course, understanding that involves taking context into consideration and the way that trans people are routinely othered in various microaggressive ways. But you’d rather be mad on the internet and talk shit about something you clearly know nothing about.
You are correct. I am a trans dog and I immediately perked up.
You’re so-called “Bye-Oh-Lo-Gee” and other sorcery are FORBIDDEN ! ! !
Just don’t with this guy.
Exactly right. I put Rose McGowen in the same category as Corey Feldman. I 100% believe/know they were victimized, but I also know they have contradicted themselves, have been aggressive in their self-promotion and are mentally unstable. In this particular case, if McGowen accidentally mixed up the dates that’s understandable, but the difference between 15 and 18 years of age is the difference between Payne committing a crime and just being sleazy. A responsible accuser who knows how important it is to get the details right would do their best to verify their age and what film was at the center of the accusation. However, I don’t 100% trust that McGowen was just misremembering.
I’m 100% into believe/knowing. It’s awesome.
“if McGowen accidentally mixed up the dates that’s understandable”As part of her accusation, she also claimed to have been so traumatized by this alleged statutory rape that she quit acting for 6 years, until she was ‘discovered’ in 1994. But she has consistent film and TV acting credits through that whole time. This really sounds like a mythology she’s invented about herself that she convinced herself was true.
It seems to me like Rose probably misremembered some details/perhaps combined it with some other experiences – but that her trauma came from a truthful place. The playboy channel piece Payne directed was released in 1991 – which means it was filmed earlier in the year, or the year prior. Rose didn’t turn 18 until September of 1991, so she was probably 17 (not 15) during their interaction.If she was required to be 18 to audition, it’s fair enough for Payne to have assumed she was of age. But it’s likely that no one actually checked. And it’s fair for Rose to feel that his behavior was still predatory, since she probably looked incredibly young, and there was still a significant age/power difference.
The fact that he actually tried to flip things and claim she was pursuing him, that he is actually using the trope of the “woman scorned” as an excuse, just makes him seem like an even bigger pile of shit.
In the statement on Deadline he doesn’t say that she pursued him. That was Shannon Miller’s interpretation of it.
He didn’t do any of that. Read his statement instead of going by this weird AVC summary (which is longer than the statement it supposedly summarizes) then slam him all you want. https://deadline.com/2020/09/alexander-payne-denies-rose-mcgowan-underage-allegation-guest-column-1234570984
I’ve been saying this all along: https://news.avclub.com/1844779155I don’t like Payne and I think here he’s using his position as a man of influence in Hollywood in a way that many others can’t (like how Woody Allen was able to get his NYT editorial printed rather than facing due diligence from a responsible and unbiased journalist when refuting his daughter’s credible accusations) and that kinda sucks but I am still glad he’s spoken up. I don’t like McGowan but I think she’s been through some shit that has really fucked her up and, unfortunately, I think she does things that hurt rather than help because of that.I hope at the very least, this whole thing will get the conversation about the damage of abuse of power and sexual misconduct going again.
Well it took well it took him way too long to deny the charges, so I don’t believe him.See what I did there?
no? i’m confused, froot loop
Damn it sure took him a minute to get this out
something . . . she might’ve been heard to say?
Please don’t reply to me any more
She went on to say that she was only looking for acknowledgement and an apology, not to “destroy” his career.
Seems doing this publicly via Twitter might undermine her intentions.
Alexander, BE REASONABLE ! ! !
I’m sure someone mentioned this, it bares repeating. What kind of idiot lies about something that can easily looked up on IMDB? Or does he consider Inside Out III high art? Granted, she may have got the network wrong, but I might too if I were too busy being 15 and shown old man cock.
Also
Rose has some issues. I think we all know it.
I still believe her.
I recall an unfortunately timed episode of the CW series ‘Crazy Ex-Girlfriend’ that aired mere days before the #MeToo movement came into being. The mentally ill heroine of the series takes revenge on her ex-fiance by posting lurid salacious lies on social media about him. The ex-fiance then loses his job and his friends all turn against him. I don’t think that episode would be written today.
Who’d have guessed? When the series started, I was struck by how fresh, how up-to-date it felt — no surprise that Bloom had cut her teeth on YouTube. (Incidentally, if it does feel dated after only these few years, I wonder if that won’t just add to its curious charm. It operated on its own plane to begin with — why shouldn’t it exist out of time?)
Great discussion here! This isn’t the first time she’s been less than honest about her age.“Last night at Anthology Film Archives, after a screening of the 1995 cult classic (it came out just a few months after Kids), Rose McGowan revealed that she was just 16 when she appeared in the film, but she lied and said she was 18 in order to snag the part of Amy Blue.“ – Bedford and Bowery July 24, 2015“An article last Sunday about the actress Rose McGowan referred incompletely to Ms. McGowan’s age. While she initially said she was 35, as the article reported, she later said in an email: “My age, truthfully, is something nebulous. I was born in a commune with no record of my birth. I approximate.” (Several sources give her age as 41.) And because the article did not explain the discrepancy over her age, it should not have stated as fact that she was 15 years old in 1995.” – New York Times, Aug 16, 2015so…Her birthdate indicates she turned 15 in 1988.But she was 15 when she met Alexander Payne in 1991.But she said at Anthology Film Archives that she was 16 when she shot Doom Generation in 1994, making her 15 in 1993.But she also told the New York Times she was 35 in 2015, which makes her 15 in 1995…