The article reads like ole Mr. Woods is a bit pervy and among other things wanted to take some 16-year-olds to Vegas....
https://www.thedailybeast.com/natasha-lyonne-joins-chorus-of-women-calling-out-james-woods?ref=home
Yeah, he's basically scum.
shareYou are acting like we haven't seen this tactic 1million times before. Send in the floozies with accusations.
shareExactly. The idea that random allegations against a right-winger should be taken seriously anymore is hilarious. The Left have cried wolf so many times it must be assumed that any smear story against an enemy of theirs is just more mendacious bullshit.
shareLOL....as indicated by Trump, the Mom's for Liberty, Falwell, Schlapp and so many others seem to indicate the deviancy is more common on the right, than left. Oh, and let's not leave out the Catholic Church.
shareHarvey Weinstein is a Democrat. Bill Clinton also likes them young. Just sayin'.
shareThe allegations against Trump are exactly the kind of mendacious Leftist bullshit I’m talking about.
shareNatasha the drug addict, hmm.
shareEvidently, you stop reading when the article states a "chorus of women"..... and I don't think Perkins is a floozie or a druggie.
shareActually, I read the entire "article" and it doesn't change Natasha being an addict who doesn't even remember how old she was when she filmed with Woods.
As for wannabe activist Perkins, she held a sign with Woods' name on it and nothing to back it up. Are you freaking kidding me???
Don't confuse The Daily Beast with actual journalism.
Ah, clearly a James Woods fanboy.
All I'll add is that too often people think they know of reasons why when they clearly have no clue.
James Woods has lost roles because of one person: James Woods.
And for all you folks who believe Hollywood conservatives get no work, I offer this: Clint Eastwood has had a career for what more than seventy years now. And there is Tom Selleck, too, as well as many others. What the people complain about this leave out is that many times rather than political views, it is the performer's behavior that does more harm than ideology.
Lol, you don't have to be a fan (which I'm absolutely not) to understand this is just nonsense coming from folks with limited talent jumping on a bandwagon for some attention.
Again, Lyonne forgot she was in her 20s when Woods supposedly made a pass and Perkins just held some sign and admitted it was on the behalf of others. It's absolutely meaningless and it's ridiculous to want anyone to take this seriously.
Eastwood and Selleck are Libertarians and even they hardly ever, ever express their views. It's dangerous to open your mouth if you're a conservative, while liberals can pretty much trashtalk anyone they want.
Oh, horseshit....if I had more time I'd run down a list of outspoken conservatives that are still working. There are plenty of them. And calling Eastwood and Selleck "libertarians" is a far stretch from how they really are.
I think what really causes these Conservatives to make this complaint are those that are really to the extreme - like Voight and Woods, though Voight seems to be having little trouble getting roles if he wants.
You just dislike outspoken right wingers and their outspokenness is what makes them EXTREME to you.
shareOutspoken conservatives in Hollywood get way more backlash than outspoken liberals. Voight and Woods aren't any worse than Hollywood libs who are constantly lecturing us on social media.
Eastwood is a registered Libretarian after having been a Republican who also supported Democrats and Selleck has described himself as an independent with libretarian leanings. I can see I should take you as seriously as the article you posted...that is, not at all.
I posted that to ponder if maybe there was something to Woods losing roles because of something other than of his political views.
Never did I suggest that TheDailyBeast is the best source of information. Your claim would be like me assuming your news source is Fox News and that because that is true, you also support rapists like Trump.
You certainly extrapolate the thoughts of others and are mostly wrong.
Never did I suggest conservatives don't receive more backlash. What I suggested is that the far-extreme wackos are the ones who mostly can't get work, but if you run down the list, there are more working conservatives in Hollywood than people realize.
Also, I would suggest that Hollywood and the arts probably aren't the best places to locate tons of conservatives. I'm not suggesting those on the right are not artistic or lack the skills, but probably that more of them enter into other areas of commerce than that of entertainment (and now throw in your horseshit complaint that I'm saying Conservatives aren't talented, which is not correct).
Well, I suggest if you think Eastwood and Selleck are not conservatives, then I see how I should take you as seriously as your claim of what they are not. I have followed those two for decades and they are conservative, regardless of what they register as. Maybe you should try reading a few interviews of those two.
I'll take Eastwood and Selleck's word over yours in regard to their political views, thank you very much.
shareOkay, then explain the continued tolerance, if not outright embrace of Roman Polanski, who fled the United States to escape incarceration for the rape of a thirteen year-old girl, and hasn't set foot in the country since. It wasn't until Harvey Weinstein and the Me Too movement that Hollywood celebs who had defended Polanski for decades even started to reevaluate the man's behavior.
If you're "in the club" (i.e. espouse the "correct" opinions) you're protected.
Apples and oranges. And I believe you are incorrect about MeToo resulting in a re-look at Polanski. He has resoundingly been disliked by many people since the case became known.
I can't answer for those who support Polanski (and will admit, I refuse to watch his movies), but come up with a better comparison next time.
Apples and oranges? If it is, it's one that makes Woods look better not worse. Woods isn't accused of anything so despicable as child rape.
I am not incorrect about Polanski. There were loads of celebrities who publicly defended him. When he was arrested in Zurich in 2009 on the outstanding US warrant, 43 celebrities from the movie industry signed a petition demanding he be freed.
Oh, by the way, one of them was Harvey Weinstein.
Shocker.
https://www.imdb.com/list/ls090808434/
Don't fucking tell me "come up with a better comparison." I don't have to. This is a perfect comparison. If a man not just accused, but facing the near certainty of conviction for child rape -- he fled the US because the judge was about to reject the plea agreement as too lenient -- is embraced and defended by a huge number of celebrities, then don't even try to tell me those very same people (many of whom also knew what Weinstein had been doing for years) only blackballed Woods because of a few unsubstantiated sexual harassment allegations. Only someone who is willfully blind could believe such a thing.
He didn't have to audition for the role of moLester Diamond in "Casino".
Also remember how he messed with Sean Young in The Boost?
He sued Sean Young for rejecting his advances.
shareLikes young pretty women. Just like every other man that ever lived. Besides, he was just a little flirty with two girls quoted (if what they say is true). He didn't abscond with them and lock them in a dungeon.
shareis this the amber tamblyn story? james woods rocks though.
share