June 21, 2025 • 37 mins
Joe Escalante's weekly expedition into the treacherous business end of showbiz. This week: news from the Box Office... Disney/Pixar's Elio (finally! a new IP, and not another live action knock off!), 28 Years Later is the new prequel to 28 Decades Later, and Joe discusses with fascination with The Materialist. Also, the latest from Celebs Behaving Badly... Diddy's case may be wrapping up after showing videos of freak off's in court. Baldini Baldinis. And the latest from professor emeritus of bad celebs Harvey Weinstein's retrial. Breaking news: he's still of douchebag.
Liquid Death released 10 limited edition cans of soda with Ozzy Osbourne's DNA in it...
I swear, our section of the multiverse is getting weirder by the day...
Liquid Death released 10 limited edition cans of soda with Ozzy Osbourne's DNA in it...
I swear, our section of the multiverse is getting weirder by the day...
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:07):
Joe Escalante live from Hollywood by Hollywood, I mean Burbank
this weekend. Sorry about all the traveling, not that you care,
but I am once again somewhere. Last weekend I was
in Washington, D C. For the Van's Warped Tour with Sublime,
the band that I manage, and then this week the
band that I'm in. We are in New York City
(00:29):
where we have a show at Irving Plaza, and then
we had one at the Punk Sylvania Festival with hundreds
of bands. This festival is so small. The Vandals are headlining.
So let's get to it the box office. This show
is actually recorded prior to the weekend. But the predictions
(00:52):
for the weekend, let's see if they came true. We
got twenty eight years later from Sony. This one's expected
to be number one highly anticipated horror sequel from Danny
Boyle and Alex Garland, and predictions generally ranged in the
(01:12):
forty to fifty million range for the opening weekend. And
you know, horror sequels with a strong pedigree like this
one does, they can often overperform. So maybe it did.
Maybe you didn't. What about L e O L E
oh from Disney Pixar it's an original animated film also
(01:33):
debuting this weekend, and Pixar is seeing mixed results with
original content lately so compared to the sequels, so we'll
see how it does. Predictions are like twenty five million
to thirty five million. That Disney has a problem because
they have so much IP in their vaults and it's
so easy to just make another version of something, make
(01:56):
a live action version of The Lion King, make a
live action Leelo and Stitch and the original stuff. If
they don't do well, then someone says, hey, stop you
who at the last meeting said we should do something original.
You You're fired. Stock went down five percent? You know,
(02:16):
do you want to be that guy? No? So you say, okay,
what have we got? Swis Family Robinson's Let's do it?
And I know people who work there and they have
quit because they just they they find their lack of
creativity in the constant reimagining of IP rather than coming
(02:39):
up with something new. But you know what, I think
there's things you could come up with that are new
but are old. Let's take a movie like Song of
the Self band all over the world because of the
joyful slaves that play a big part in the movie.
If you've ever seen this, you know what I'm talking about.
(02:59):
They're pretty joyful and they sing some amazing songs. And
at some point people said, uh, that's not a good look.
You know, Uh, let's not depict them slaves as happy.
We don't want to whitewash it. So they just got
rid of the movie. What you could reimagine that movie
and you could just say, in a world where where
(03:20):
white people are slaves, and uh, I don't know, that's
what That's all I got. So maybe I'll feed it
into my Google Gemini and see what comes out. Let's
see the Song of the South. What about song of
the Middle East? Now I see, Now I'm things just
(03:41):
starting to trigger. I was in Egypt last year, and uh,
you know that, you know how people tell you that,
you know, you know, actually there are more slaves today
and then there were during the Civil War on the earth.
That's how they talked to Okay, I don't know if
that's true or not, and uh, it's probably different degrees
of slavery. But then there's countries in the Middle East
(04:04):
that people tell me slavery is either legal or at
least just not prosecuted, and then I was in Egypt,
and then I was staying at the Four Seasons Nile.
And if you ever get a chance to stay at
the Four Seasons on the Nile, you gotta do it.
It's exactly what you think would be. It's insane. So
(04:24):
four Seasons at the Nile. I'm down at the pool.
There's like wealthy Arab families. Clearly slaves. Clearly slaves are
taking care of their kids. And I mean they're not
even allowed to sit on chairs. One was allowed to
(04:45):
sit on a nice chest. And when I say clearly
they are slaves, I'm like, I'm absolutely twenty percent certain
that these are slaves. I don't know. They say, there's
all these slaves. I'm looking at them right in front
of me. And then they busted it out into song
and I stopped him. I threw him all into the pool.
I said, that's offensive. Do not be happy, do not
(05:06):
What was that song you were just singing, ma'am zippity
doo doo. Never sing that again. Okay, don't make me
come back here. Okay. I don't know how we got
on that tangent, but back to the box office, yeah, Ilio,
I don't know. Maybe it'll do well. How to Train
Your Dragon Stronghold over from last weekend probably be doing
(05:28):
big business this weekend. And this is a live action
adaptation that had a strong opening last weekend, and it's
you know, competition, isn't that great? It's gonna be big again.
Leelo and Stitch still probably do eight to ten million
this weekend. Mission Impossible, unlike the episode that we put
(05:50):
out last week, which we called Listen Impossible, the Final
Reckoning still be floating around The Materialists. Now this one
will probably bump up a little bit. Is this the wait?
Is this the yeah? This is the first weekend of
The Materialist because I saw at a preview. Now, I
(06:11):
sat at a preview, so last weekend it did something,
but I start at a preview before that, and then
this weekend there and estimating five to seven million. What
do you need to know about The Materialists? It's kind
of an exciting movie. I was happy I saw it.
I could have seen Mission Impossible or Lelo and Stitch,
(06:32):
and then I just took a left turn and said
I'm gonna go see this. It's directed by Selene's Song
and you might remember her from the film Past Lives,
which was critically acclaimed, Oscar nominated, and this is her
sophomore effort, and I got to say, it's even better
(06:54):
the Past Lives. Now. I don't know if you remember
Past Lives. It was basically a really deep kind of
movie about these two kids, Nora and High Song, and
they're super tight growing up in Korea. But then Nora's
family dips to America. Fast forward like twenty years, and
they reconnect online and eventually meet up in New York.
(07:15):
They you know, check out each other's lives, and then
what happens. I mean, it was a while since I've
seen it, but Nora, who's actually married. Now that's a problem,
and it's all about, Hey, these old you know, connections
stick with you even if you've moved on, and then
(07:36):
you contemplate the different lives you could have lived. Who
hasn't done that. I contemplate that all the time, and
I always come back to wow, I think I better off.
So anyway, so back to the Materialists, materialist movie, I
recommend it. She goes see it. Star studied cast if
(07:57):
you call Dakota Johnson, Chris Evans, and Pedro Pascal as
star studied, pretty star study, but Pedro Pascal is in
every movie. Have you noticed. You go see a movie,
he's in the trailers and you come out and he's
in another poster. So here's a plot. Lucy is a
successful matchmaker in New York City. She doesn't make a
(08:17):
lot of money herself, but she's only doing high end
relationships and you know it, they're all transactional to her.
It's a merger of assets and lifestyles. But her own
romantic life gets complicated when she finds herself torn between
two very different men. Harry, who embodies her materialistic philosophy
with his wealth and stability. And of course there's John,
(08:39):
her ex with whom she shares a deep emotional history
but lacks financial security. He's like, you know, a waiter
slash caterer. He's a waiterer. The film explores the tension
between love and money. I mean, this is an old theme,
but she does it really well, asking whether a genuine
(09:00):
connection can survive in a world where material concerns heavily influenced.
Romantic choices delves into the math of modern love. She's
always doing math. It's just just do the math. Is
this a match or not? And a key plot point
involves Lucy's disillusionment with her job after a client she
matched experiences with some other guy had a very negative outcome,
(09:27):
and then she questions her cynical view of relationships and
this influences where she's going to end up in the
end of the movie. And it has an amazing other
plot twist of what she what she finds. There's mister
Wright and then there's mister Cool. Now mister Wright has
a secret too, of course he does. Nobody's a ten
(09:47):
out of a ten, but at first she thinks he's
a ten out of a ten and his secret is.
So I just love that this was a plot point
in a movie, his secret, And you got to see
the movie of I know what his secret is? What
is Pedro Pascal's secret? What nobody could be that perfect?
What's wrong with him? You would never guess it in
(10:08):
a million years, although there are some hints dropped along
the way in the film. All Right, we're going to
take a break and come back. I'll talk a little
bit more about this movie and some others and some
other business on Joe Escalante Live from Hollywood. Joe Escalante
Live from Hollywood. We are back, coming to you from
New York City this weekend and next weekend. Coming to
(10:32):
you from Utah, Salt Lake City at the X Games.
Live from the X Games. How do you like that? Okay,
we get around, We're all over the place. Let's go
back to The Materialist. Did you see it during the break?
Did you push pause on your podcast? Go see it
and then come back. That would have been a good
(10:53):
idea too, but now it's too late. Okay. So another
thing about this movie. It's from A twenty four, so
obviously it's art house, you know, art house that push
the boundaries. Now people are calling it a rom com,
but there's no jokes. Okay, rom drama, I don't know.
(11:19):
And most people like it. They call it, you know,
smart and witty and honest. But I'll tell you this
is it's another movie that where like a lot of
these movies, like I was listening to the podcast of
Brett Easton Ellis the other day and he's talking to
another writer and they were discussing how they can't they
(11:45):
don't want to write stories that take place in a
world with cell phones, so they write stories from the
eighties or earlier because a cell phone complicates everything, Like
you have some drama. You have some conflict, but you
could you just call use the phone, look up Google anything.
Characters can't get lost in these movies about today's people
(12:10):
because of Google maps. So people just don't want to
write in that world this movie. I like many movies,
they instead of the phone, the phone is there. But
what is not there is religion. And I usually come
(12:31):
from the view of Catholicism. Now, if these people were Catholic,
they couldn't do any of this stuff. They wouldn't be
obsessed with premarital sex. They wouldn't be living together and
trying people out to see if they're a good match,
and be sleeping with each other to see if they're compatible.
They wouldn't be doing any of that. They'd be saving
themselves and they would have a spiritual connection. Then when
(12:53):
they would make this solemn religious problem promise to God
and the just unbreakable and they would never break it.
So the matchmaker be out. I mean, you could have
a matchmaker. I think is a big role for a matchmaker.
Of course in religions, like in the movie what is
that Fiddler on the roof? Is that the matchmaker? One? Yeah?
Matchmaker or is it gental I didn't see ental suf
(13:17):
Fiddler on the roof. Yeah, matchmaker. So it can be done.
But you have to assume that all these people have
no religion. They're pagans, or they're atheists or Satanists or what.
I don't know what they are, but they're they're worshiping
material goods, which you can have Catholic people that are
(13:39):
very materialistic. There's a lot of rich religious people. There's
the whole what do you call that prosperity ministry. Yeah,
those people are materialistic. They believe in like speaking things
into existence and what do they call it, positive confession,
speaking things into existence? And financial giving, making money so
(14:04):
you can give more, and this is the key to
unlocking God's blessings of wealth and health in this life,
in this life. So that does exist. I guess you could,
but in this movie it doesn't work. If anyone's got
I have so many movies I watching them on I
could solve this problem. This movie be over. I could
be on the freeway. If I just converted these people
(14:24):
instantly into Catholics, all their problems will be solved. But
that's not the world we live in. We don't want
to see only films about cell phones, worlds with cell
phone without without cell phones, and we don't want to
see only movies where everybody's capfulic I get it. Okay,
what if you wanted to see The Materialists? It's into
(14:45):
theaters right now, So of course I recommend always go
to the theaters because one day you'll wake up and
there will be no theaters and you will feel like
you didn't do enough to support them. So it makes
you go get over whatever phobias you have. I don't
want to sit in a room with a bunch of people.
I just watch it at home on my big TV.
Get over it. Go see The Materialists where you're like,
(15:09):
where can you see it? I think it's coming to HBO.
If you're a loser, you can wait, and but that's
not until around October. So you got to go to
the theater. Yes you do, because A twenty four doesn't
play around. There's a long time between now and in October.
(15:30):
Right next up on the Big Show, P Diddy, I
know we're sick of it, but what's he I'm just
going to give you a recap. This might wrap up,
this might have wrapped up on Friday, but what do
we got? We got Here's what happened this week. Jurors
(15:58):
were shown explicit freak off of it. If you don't
know what a freak off is, it's a drug fueled
sexual encounter central to the prosecution's case. They showed him
for the first time on Monday and Tuesday, and they've
had previously only been seen as still images or heard
as audio. But they got to see actual videos of
freak offs because all freae COFs are filmed. A special
(16:19):
agent testified about evidence related to these freak COFs, including
tax flight records and hotel bills, and did He's legal
team has indicated that he is unlikely to testify. Oh,
so the big man is not going to take the stand.
M probably a wise move. I think a wise move
because I think it's going to be hard to prove
(16:40):
all their charges and a lot of stuff is going
to be not guilty. Maybe he'll get charged on something,
but not. I don't think he's but he has a
chance to just do very little time or maybe none
at all. The Judge I issued a stern warning this
week to both the prosecution and Evince about information after
(17:01):
information about a sealed proceeding allegedly leaked to the media
and he threatened criminal contempt for future violations. That's about
it for P Diddy, But it might have been the
prosecution may have rested its case. Okay, Now what happens
when the prosecution rests its case. Other then the defense
(17:24):
comes up and they make their case. So let's go
with Uh, we'll find out, you know, we'll find out
next week. How about the Justin Baldini case. I know
you're sick of that and you don't like it, and
I don't talk about it a lot because it's just
like lame. So here's what's new though. You know how
(17:47):
Blake Lively sued Justin Baldini for all the stuff you
ruined me, you sexually harassed me, all this stuff, and
then Baldini filed the countersuit. He su Blake Lively and
her husband for allegedly attempting to destroy his reputation and career.
Handy sue the New York Times sort of defamation related
to articles about the onset conflict, but it got dismissed,
(18:12):
so his arguments were rejected by the court. Wow, so
now he's just defending a big, expensive lawsuit. But his
lot he was like suing her for like four hundred
million dollars. It's just like, what are you doing? Where
does that number come from? So now just the broader
(18:35):
underlying dispute about sexual harassment and hostile workplace environment, this
kind of stuff still ongoing. All right, let's take a
break and come back with more. I got some Disney news,
I got some you never know what I got up
my sleeve kind of news after this. Joe Scalante Live
(18:56):
from Hollywood. Joe Scalante Live from Hollywood. If by Hollywood
need a burbank. This is two hours of the business
end of show business. We do it every Sunday on
KiB eleven to fifteen your AM dial. And there's a
podcast version. They turn the show into a podcast miraculously,
(19:17):
and then you get it on iTunes or Spotify or
wherever you get your podcasts. Okay, all right, let's go
to a Supreme Court case on intellectual property. Can you
imagine this week? June seventeenth, the US Supreme Court officially
(19:39):
rejected a bid to revive the copyright claim against Ed
Sheeran over his twenty fourteen hit song Thinking Out Loud.
This decision brings an end to the decade long legal battle.
This is a sub total bum out. Poor guy. The
villain here is a company called Structured Asset Sales, which
holds copyright into st interests in Marvin Gay's Let's Get
(20:02):
It On, And they alleged that Cheeran copied the melody,
harmonies and rhythm of this Marvin Gate nineteen seventy three classic.
Now you can see how since here this is the
family and Marvin Gay family has sold the rights to
this song to a bunch of fill in the ranks,
and they are suing everybody inside because of the terrible
(20:23):
decision that was made years ago, claiming that Pharrell Williams
and Robin Thick, Robin Thick or it's this kid. Yeah,
Robin think his dad is Alan. His dad's from my generation.
Alan think he was famous. So Robin think Pharrell Williams
(20:44):
said that they stole the song from Marvin Gay and
they didn't. And I'll I'll go over it again. The
copyrighted material that was protected something. If you copyright something,
it's protected. What was partet in that case was the copyright.
The copyright had sheet music in it, and the judge
(21:05):
let the jury hear the finished recording with piles and
piles and piles and piles of unprotected material on it,
and then the protected material that's in the copyright is
the only thing the should been played. They should have
had a string cortet come out there and play that
protected version and then we compare that to the melodies
and the expressions in the Robin Thick Farrell Williams song.
(21:29):
But instead they compared something that is where like the
final version of the Marvin gay song. So they could
go take the final versions and say, oh, okay, you
stole that. Well, it's just you know, they're inspired by that.
And then they did what everybody else does, listen to
a song, get inspired a bit. They'd like the feel
(21:49):
of this song, and that jury said, well, you can't
take the feel. Oh my gosh, yeah you can. You
can take the feel. So in this case, the same
company comes after. Maybe it's after that that the Marvin
Gaye family sold it to these people, but I don't know.
So these people are running around suing people since they
got a bad decision, and finally a court said no,
(22:11):
you're not getting another bad decision, and then went to
the Supreme Court and they said, yeah, you're not getting
a bad decision. Go away. So that's why I call
them the villains. Whoever this company has structured asset sales. Yeah,
he already won the case in twenty twenty three. So
Supreme Court confirms the lower court it's findings in favor
(22:33):
of she Ran and saying that these similarities were mere
common musical building blocks. So go pound sand. And this
goes back to something I always say is do we
want to live in a world where these musicians are
(22:56):
afraid to create because some terrible jury instructions were given
in the Robin Thick Pharrell Marvin Gay case. No, it's
not the world you want to live. You want people
to be taking genres and being influenced by it and
taking it to the next level. You can't pick apart
(23:18):
their work and sue them for taking chances and being
creative and pushing boundaries and saluting the original artists. It's
like if you took that Marvin Gay song that they
used r any of these songs, you could reverse engineer
(23:42):
the lawsuit to find who that person took their influences
from and wake that person up out of the grave
and get their estate together and sue the plaintiff in
the new lawsuit So do we want to live in
this world where that's how artists are shackled? I don't
(24:07):
think we do. Okay, let's go to the phones. Just kidding,
taping this, Okay? Anyway, what's going on in the Harvey
Weinstein trial. I knew that's what you were going to ask,
and you did, and I have it for you. You know,
as you know, he had some of his charges thrown out,
(24:32):
and he had a retrial, he had a new trial.
Good news for Harvey. A lot of good news in
this trial. Doesn't mean he's not going to die in prison,
which I believe he is. But a jury in New
York reached a split verdict in his retrial, and he
was found guilty on just one count of criminal of
(24:52):
a criminal sexual act in the first degree related to
the accusations by Miriam Hayley. Now, let's let's remind everybody
who Miriam Haley is, because this is the big one,
the one that two times he was convicted of a
sexual act in the first degree. Miriam Haley was a
(25:14):
production assistant briefly worked on Project Runway, the show that
was actually produced by the Weinstein Company. Now, production assistant
is the lowest level person on a set the most vulnerable,
if you will. Often they are very good looking young
(25:35):
girls that are like this girl's hot. She doesn't have
any skills, but to be a production assistant, you don't
need any skills, and you end up just kind of
fitting in. Wherever you excel, you either get fired or
someone notices that you're good at something, and you know,
and just concentrate on whatever skills you have. She's in
(26:01):
the Weinstein world. She testified that she was seeking professional
opportunities in the industry and viewed Weinstein as a guy
could help her, and she described a series of interactions
with him that were sometimes professional and polite, but other
times inappropriate and suggestive. So he's kind of grooming her
and he pushed the boundaries. She maintained that she was
(26:21):
never interested in sexual or romantic relationship with him, only impressional,
only professional advancement. Okay, she's allowed to do that. She
testified that in July of two thousand and six, remember
this is you know, years ago, Weinstein invited her to
his Manhattan apartment, where she expected to be him to
(26:43):
be professional and have a friendly meeting, and during the meeting,
he lunged at her to kiss her. She said no, thanks,
but then he forcibly grabbed her and pushed her into
the bedroom. Once in the bedroom, he pinned her down
and performed oral sex on her against her will, despite
her pleas to stop, saying no, no, no, it's not
(27:04):
going to happen. Okay, So she feels humiliated afterwards. Then
she says she did not immediately report the assault to
the police and continue to have contact with Weinstein for
some time afterwards, even sending cordial emails, signed lots of
love and seeking professional favors. So yeah, she's milking it.
(27:27):
That hurts her testimony, but she ultimately prevailed in this claim.
She explained that her continued contact was because she was
trying to and this is in quotes, navigate the whole situation.
So that's her excuse. I'm trying to navigate the whole situation, okay.
She wanted to preserve any potential professional opportunities and cope
(27:49):
with the trauma by suppressing a lot of things. She
also testified about another sexual encounter a few weeks later
at a hotel that she described as unwanted but which
she didn't physically resist. Basically had sex with them and
then she felt stupid. She said she did it. She
agreed to it because she felt stupid for having agreed
to meet him. You know, maybe she was afraid. Okay,
(28:11):
but you know what, We're gonna explore this att flirt
further since this is, you know, almost done kind of.
But first we shall go to traffic. Joe Scalante live
from Hollywood.
Speaker 2 (28:31):
Yeah, Joe Ascalanti, here's my lawyer. You don't want money.
Speaker 1 (28:49):
Joe Scalante live from Hollywood. If by Hollywood you mean Burbank.
Two hours of the business, end of show business right
here on k e IB eleven fifty, your am dial. Okay. So,
in the Weinstein retrial, guilty criminal sexual act in the
first degree with Miriam Haley, we just told you who
Miriam Haley was. In the last break, she was found
(29:12):
not guilty of another criminal sexual act involving Kaja Socola. Now,
who is Kadja Socola. Let's read, Let's let's go down
memory lane with that one. Who is Kaja Sokolaw? Now,
if you remember, Kaja Sokola is the Polish born former
model and aspiring actress who became an accuser in the
(29:33):
Harvey Weinstein sex crimes original trial, and she was just
used in that trial as an example of prior bad acts,
and she wasn't a it wasn't a separate charge. But
in the retrial, looks like she became a new charge.
And if you remember and which which he was, he
was found not guilty of Okay, So what did she say.
(29:57):
It's pretty much the same old stuff. She met Weinstein
in two thousand and two. That's why it was so
long ago. It wasn't really a part of the original claim.
When she was about sixteen years old, she was on
a modeling trip to New York and she met him
and was invited to his apartment to discuss her acting career,
(30:18):
but once there, she was told to take off her
clothes and rub his naughty bits. She described feeling scared, confused.
If you want to be an actress, that's what actors
do in films, you should get used to it. That's
what she said that he said, so not guilty, And
(30:42):
a juror actually spoke out and said they didn't find
her credible because of her continuing relationship and just her testimony,
and she said she couldn't come to terms with the
alleged abuse at the time, you know, and so she
you know, they found diary entries. She didn't talk about this,
like it wasn't that big a deal. She didn't even
(31:02):
talk about her her diary. But she said she couldn't
trying to like just kind of rewrite her life and
career and her career choices. Now, the jury also couldn't
reach a verdict in a third case brought by a
woman named Jessica Man. Now, let's go down memory lane
(31:24):
and remember who Jessica Man is. Jessica Man was an
aspiring actress and cosmetologist in her late twenties when she
met Harvey Weinstein around twenty twelve or twenty thirteen in LA.
Like the other accusers, she testified that Weinstein initially showed
interest in her career, leading her to believe that he
could help her. She described a complex and often degrading
(31:45):
relationship that lasted about five years. So this guy, I mean,
he was accused of sexually assaulting these women who he thought,
I mean, I think he's a perv and he shouldn't
do this, and he was married. On top of all this,
that he was these girls had him believe at least
that they they thought they were getting something out of it.
(32:06):
So I believe that he didn't think he was raping them.
He's just disgusting, you know. He just thinks, ah, this
is you know, I'm gonna help him, and this is
how it works in Hollywood. So and again, she said
it alternated between him being charming and being like aggressive
and abusive. She called him a doctor Jekylo and mister Hyde.
And the word no was a trigger. How do you
(32:28):
like that one? Whoever came up to that one should
get a bonus? No was a trigger, Ladies and gentleman
of the jury, She said no, and then it was on.
So the core accusation of Jessica Mand's case revolved around
an incident at a hotel in Midtown Manhattan in March
of twenty thirteen. I cannot tell you which hotel it is,
(32:50):
but there were two trees involved. Okay, you get it.
She testified that she was in New York with a
friend who was supposed to meet Weinstein for breakfast. Instead,
she found him checking into the hotel. Can you imagine
Harvey Weinstein checking into a hotel with two trees involved?
My camp? But he did it because he's a perf.
(33:12):
She said he became angry with him with her and
told her he demanded she come up to his room,
and of course she went up to the room, tried
to leave, he grabbed her, demanded she undressed. She recounted
a moment there where she just gave up due to
the aggression and her fear. And there's what she said,
He raped her. This is Jessica, man, This one didn't stick.
(33:36):
This is where they found the erection inducing syringe in
the bathroom, or she said she found it. You gotta
take pictures of stuff like that. That's what I see.
But anyway, this is all I mean. It's hard to
judge these people. She also testified about a previous instant
before that in La where he forced himself on her
during their first private meeting in a hotel room. This
(33:58):
guy loves hotel rooms, and then he invited her up
there of course to you know, talk about careers. She
said that one was a real battle, but despite these assaults,
she still maintained a relationship. Said she was trying to
buy time. She believed that maintaining contact might take the
pain away or create a path for her career. This
(34:20):
just shows you how hard it is to be an
actress and to be in the entertainment industry. So I
don't know anyway, I know you're wondering, how often does
this happen to your host? Almost never? But I did
have one situation where a film was offered to me
to direct. All I had to do was bad stuff
(34:47):
and that film was never made. Just leave it there, okay, Now, okay,
So these these Jessica man Kaja Sokola and and Miriam Haley,
those things, those are the three charges, the main ones.
(35:08):
Miriam Haley, this one sticks. And then okay, so what's
going on with the guy?
Speaker 2 (35:15):
Now?
Speaker 1 (35:18):
I think you're sick of this and you just want
to He remains incarcerated despite the overturned twenty twenty New
York conviction. Weinstein has been serving a sixteen year sentence
from his separate twenty twenty two California conviction and the
New York conviction which was thrown out. You know, actually
the one that's now been affirmed twice is a potential
(35:43):
twenty five year sentence. So in July second there will
be sentencing on this new conviction for Miriam Haley, but
he's still serving time for the other one. So he's dying.
He's dying in prison. That's all we can say. Even
though he's appealing that California thing. Actually, he could win
his appeal in the California one and you could feel
this and you could be set free. Is it gonna happen?
(36:05):
Probably not. Am I gonna talk about this ever again?
Probably not. Okay, thank you for indulging me for me.
I just want I wanted to get the party straight too,
and so in this report I was able to get
the parties straight again. Okay, I got one more thing
for you. Kind of interesting. There's a liquid death beverage
coming out that has evidently contains DNA of Ozzy Osbourne
(36:31):
in it, so recent marketing initiative featuring a some juice
from his DNA. Just I mean, what does DNA taste
like anyway? Are you gonna notice it? Probably not? Is
it poisonous? I hope not, But it's open to peculiar
discussion on the intersection of like celebrity branding and future
(36:53):
bio legal considerations that we never thought would happen. Ten
limit edition Infinite Ozzie iced tea cans were sold, each
containing purportedly trace amounts of mister Osborne saliva, DNA, so
Ozzy spit. The explicit premise of the campaign was to
future potential was for future potential fans to clone mister Osborne,
(37:17):
should technology and federal law permit. While human reproductive cloning
from such samples remains outside current scientific capability and is
widely prohibited or restricted by existing state law and international laws,
this promotion raises interesting hypotheticals, you know, regarding the ownership
and the intended use of genetic material in a commercial context.
(37:42):
And let's just be glad nobody's proposed yet to clone
share in Osbourne. All right, that does it for this one,
And I now leave you with a taste of the
greatest song ever written.
Joe Escalante live from Hollywood by Hollywood, I mean Burbank
this weekend. Sorry about all the traveling, not that you care,
but I am once again somewhere. Last weekend I was
in Washington, D C. For the Van's Warped Tour with Sublime,
the band that I manage, and then this week the
band that I'm in. We are in New York City
(00:29):
where we have a show at Irving Plaza, and then
we had one at the Punk Sylvania Festival with hundreds
of bands. This festival is so small. The Vandals are headlining.
So let's get to it the box office. This show
is actually recorded prior to the weekend. But the predictions
(00:52):
for the weekend, let's see if they came true. We
got twenty eight years later from Sony. This one's expected
to be number one highly anticipated horror sequel from Danny
Boyle and Alex Garland, and predictions generally ranged in the
(01:12):
forty to fifty million range for the opening weekend. And
you know, horror sequels with a strong pedigree like this
one does, they can often overperform. So maybe it did.
Maybe you didn't. What about L e O L E
oh from Disney Pixar it's an original animated film also
(01:33):
debuting this weekend, and Pixar is seeing mixed results with
original content lately so compared to the sequels, so we'll
see how it does. Predictions are like twenty five million
to thirty five million. That Disney has a problem because
they have so much IP in their vaults and it's
so easy to just make another version of something, make
(01:56):
a live action version of The Lion King, make a
live action Leelo and Stitch and the original stuff. If
they don't do well, then someone says, hey, stop you
who at the last meeting said we should do something original.
You You're fired. Stock went down five percent? You know,
(02:16):
do you want to be that guy? No? So you say, okay,
what have we got? Swis Family Robinson's Let's do it?
And I know people who work there and they have
quit because they just they they find their lack of
creativity in the constant reimagining of IP rather than coming
(02:39):
up with something new. But you know what, I think
there's things you could come up with that are new
but are old. Let's take a movie like Song of
the Self band all over the world because of the
joyful slaves that play a big part in the movie.
If you've ever seen this, you know what I'm talking about.
(02:59):
They're pretty joyful and they sing some amazing songs. And
at some point people said, uh, that's not a good look.
You know, Uh, let's not depict them slaves as happy.
We don't want to whitewash it. So they just got
rid of the movie. What you could reimagine that movie
and you could just say, in a world where where
(03:20):
white people are slaves, and uh, I don't know, that's
what That's all I got. So maybe I'll feed it
into my Google Gemini and see what comes out. Let's
see the Song of the South. What about song of
the Middle East? Now I see, Now I'm things just
(03:41):
starting to trigger. I was in Egypt last year, and uh,
you know that, you know how people tell you that,
you know, you know, actually there are more slaves today
and then there were during the Civil War on the earth.
That's how they talked to Okay, I don't know if
that's true or not, and uh, it's probably different degrees
of slavery. But then there's countries in the Middle East
(04:04):
that people tell me slavery is either legal or at
least just not prosecuted, and then I was in Egypt,
and then I was staying at the Four Seasons Nile.
And if you ever get a chance to stay at
the Four Seasons on the Nile, you gotta do it.
It's exactly what you think would be. It's insane. So
(04:24):
four Seasons at the Nile. I'm down at the pool.
There's like wealthy Arab families. Clearly slaves. Clearly slaves are
taking care of their kids. And I mean they're not
even allowed to sit on chairs. One was allowed to
(04:45):
sit on a nice chest. And when I say clearly
they are slaves, I'm like, I'm absolutely twenty percent certain
that these are slaves. I don't know. They say, there's
all these slaves. I'm looking at them right in front
of me. And then they busted it out into song
and I stopped him. I threw him all into the pool.
I said, that's offensive. Do not be happy, do not
(05:06):
What was that song you were just singing, ma'am zippity
doo doo. Never sing that again. Okay, don't make me
come back here. Okay. I don't know how we got
on that tangent, but back to the box office, yeah, Ilio,
I don't know. Maybe it'll do well. How to Train
Your Dragon Stronghold over from last weekend probably be doing
(05:28):
big business this weekend. And this is a live action
adaptation that had a strong opening last weekend, and it's
you know, competition, isn't that great? It's gonna be big again.
Leelo and Stitch still probably do eight to ten million
this weekend. Mission Impossible, unlike the episode that we put
(05:50):
out last week, which we called Listen Impossible, the Final
Reckoning still be floating around The Materialists. Now this one
will probably bump up a little bit. Is this the wait?
Is this the yeah? This is the first weekend of
The Materialist because I saw at a preview. Now, I
(06:11):
sat at a preview, so last weekend it did something,
but I start at a preview before that, and then
this weekend there and estimating five to seven million. What
do you need to know about The Materialists? It's kind
of an exciting movie. I was happy I saw it.
I could have seen Mission Impossible or Lelo and Stitch,
(06:32):
and then I just took a left turn and said
I'm gonna go see this. It's directed by Selene's Song
and you might remember her from the film Past Lives,
which was critically acclaimed, Oscar nominated, and this is her
sophomore effort, and I got to say, it's even better
(06:54):
the Past Lives. Now. I don't know if you remember
Past Lives. It was basically a really deep kind of
movie about these two kids, Nora and High Song, and
they're super tight growing up in Korea. But then Nora's
family dips to America. Fast forward like twenty years, and
they reconnect online and eventually meet up in New York.
(07:15):
They you know, check out each other's lives, and then
what happens. I mean, it was a while since I've
seen it, but Nora, who's actually married. Now that's a problem,
and it's all about, Hey, these old you know, connections
stick with you even if you've moved on, and then
(07:36):
you contemplate the different lives you could have lived. Who
hasn't done that. I contemplate that all the time, and
I always come back to wow, I think I better off.
So anyway, so back to the Materialists, materialist movie, I
recommend it. She goes see it. Star studied cast if
(07:57):
you call Dakota Johnson, Chris Evans, and Pedro Pascal as
star studied, pretty star study, but Pedro Pascal is in
every movie. Have you noticed. You go see a movie,
he's in the trailers and you come out and he's
in another poster. So here's a plot. Lucy is a
successful matchmaker in New York City. She doesn't make a
(08:17):
lot of money herself, but she's only doing high end
relationships and you know it, they're all transactional to her.
It's a merger of assets and lifestyles. But her own
romantic life gets complicated when she finds herself torn between
two very different men. Harry, who embodies her materialistic philosophy
with his wealth and stability. And of course there's John,
(08:39):
her ex with whom she shares a deep emotional history
but lacks financial security. He's like, you know, a waiter
slash caterer. He's a waiterer. The film explores the tension
between love and money. I mean, this is an old theme,
but she does it really well, asking whether a genuine
(09:00):
connection can survive in a world where material concerns heavily influenced.
Romantic choices delves into the math of modern love. She's
always doing math. It's just just do the math. Is
this a match or not? And a key plot point
involves Lucy's disillusionment with her job after a client she
matched experiences with some other guy had a very negative outcome,
(09:27):
and then she questions her cynical view of relationships and
this influences where she's going to end up in the
end of the movie. And it has an amazing other
plot twist of what she what she finds. There's mister
Wright and then there's mister Cool. Now mister Wright has
a secret too, of course he does. Nobody's a ten
(09:47):
out of a ten, but at first she thinks he's
a ten out of a ten and his secret is.
So I just love that this was a plot point
in a movie, his secret, And you got to see
the movie of I know what his secret is? What
is Pedro Pascal's secret? What nobody could be that perfect?
What's wrong with him? You would never guess it in
(10:08):
a million years, although there are some hints dropped along
the way in the film. All Right, we're going to
take a break and come back. I'll talk a little
bit more about this movie and some others and some
other business on Joe Escalante Live from Hollywood. Joe Escalante
Live from Hollywood. We are back, coming to you from
New York City this weekend and next weekend. Coming to
(10:32):
you from Utah, Salt Lake City at the X Games.
Live from the X Games. How do you like that? Okay,
we get around, We're all over the place. Let's go
back to The Materialist. Did you see it during the break?
Did you push pause on your podcast? Go see it
and then come back. That would have been a good
(10:53):
idea too, but now it's too late. Okay. So another
thing about this movie. It's from A twenty four, so
obviously it's art house, you know, art house that push
the boundaries. Now people are calling it a rom com,
but there's no jokes. Okay, rom drama, I don't know.
(11:19):
And most people like it. They call it, you know,
smart and witty and honest. But I'll tell you this
is it's another movie that where like a lot of
these movies, like I was listening to the podcast of
Brett Easton Ellis the other day and he's talking to
another writer and they were discussing how they can't they
(11:45):
don't want to write stories that take place in a
world with cell phones, so they write stories from the
eighties or earlier because a cell phone complicates everything, Like
you have some drama. You have some conflict, but you
could you just call use the phone, look up Google anything.
Characters can't get lost in these movies about today's people
(12:10):
because of Google maps. So people just don't want to
write in that world this movie. I like many movies,
they instead of the phone, the phone is there. But
what is not there is religion. And I usually come
(12:31):
from the view of Catholicism. Now, if these people were Catholic,
they couldn't do any of this stuff. They wouldn't be
obsessed with premarital sex. They wouldn't be living together and
trying people out to see if they're a good match,
and be sleeping with each other to see if they're compatible.
They wouldn't be doing any of that. They'd be saving
themselves and they would have a spiritual connection. Then when
(12:53):
they would make this solemn religious problem promise to God
and the just unbreakable and they would never break it.
So the matchmaker be out. I mean, you could have
a matchmaker. I think is a big role for a matchmaker.
Of course in religions, like in the movie what is
that Fiddler on the roof? Is that the matchmaker? One? Yeah?
Matchmaker or is it gental I didn't see ental suf
(13:17):
Fiddler on the roof. Yeah, matchmaker. So it can be done.
But you have to assume that all these people have
no religion. They're pagans, or they're atheists or Satanists or what.
I don't know what they are, but they're they're worshiping
material goods, which you can have Catholic people that are
(13:39):
very materialistic. There's a lot of rich religious people. There's
the whole what do you call that prosperity ministry. Yeah,
those people are materialistic. They believe in like speaking things
into existence and what do they call it, positive confession,
speaking things into existence? And financial giving, making money so
(14:04):
you can give more, and this is the key to
unlocking God's blessings of wealth and health in this life,
in this life. So that does exist. I guess you could,
but in this movie it doesn't work. If anyone's got
I have so many movies I watching them on I
could solve this problem. This movie be over. I could
be on the freeway. If I just converted these people
(14:24):
instantly into Catholics, all their problems will be solved. But
that's not the world we live in. We don't want
to see only films about cell phones, worlds with cell
phone without without cell phones, and we don't want to
see only movies where everybody's capfulic I get it. Okay,
what if you wanted to see The Materialists? It's into
(14:45):
theaters right now, So of course I recommend always go
to the theaters because one day you'll wake up and
there will be no theaters and you will feel like
you didn't do enough to support them. So it makes
you go get over whatever phobias you have. I don't
want to sit in a room with a bunch of people.
I just watch it at home on my big TV.
Get over it. Go see The Materialists where you're like,
(15:09):
where can you see it? I think it's coming to HBO.
If you're a loser, you can wait, and but that's
not until around October. So you got to go to
the theater. Yes you do, because A twenty four doesn't
play around. There's a long time between now and in October.
(15:30):
Right next up on the Big Show, P Diddy, I
know we're sick of it, but what's he I'm just
going to give you a recap. This might wrap up,
this might have wrapped up on Friday, but what do
we got? We got Here's what happened this week. Jurors
(15:58):
were shown explicit freak off of it. If you don't
know what a freak off is, it's a drug fueled
sexual encounter central to the prosecution's case. They showed him
for the first time on Monday and Tuesday, and they've
had previously only been seen as still images or heard
as audio. But they got to see actual videos of
freak offs because all freae COFs are filmed. A special
(16:19):
agent testified about evidence related to these freak COFs, including
tax flight records and hotel bills, and did He's legal
team has indicated that he is unlikely to testify. Oh,
so the big man is not going to take the stand.
M probably a wise move. I think a wise move
because I think it's going to be hard to prove
(16:40):
all their charges and a lot of stuff is going
to be not guilty. Maybe he'll get charged on something,
but not. I don't think he's but he has a
chance to just do very little time or maybe none
at all. The Judge I issued a stern warning this
week to both the prosecution and Evince about information after
(17:01):
information about a sealed proceeding allegedly leaked to the media
and he threatened criminal contempt for future violations. That's about
it for P Diddy, But it might have been the
prosecution may have rested its case. Okay, Now what happens
when the prosecution rests its case. Other then the defense
(17:24):
comes up and they make their case. So let's go
with Uh, we'll find out, you know, we'll find out
next week. How about the Justin Baldini case. I know
you're sick of that and you don't like it, and
I don't talk about it a lot because it's just
like lame. So here's what's new though. You know how
(17:47):
Blake Lively sued Justin Baldini for all the stuff you
ruined me, you sexually harassed me, all this stuff, and
then Baldini filed the countersuit. He su Blake Lively and
her husband for allegedly attempting to destroy his reputation and career.
Handy sue the New York Times sort of defamation related
to articles about the onset conflict, but it got dismissed,
(18:12):
so his arguments were rejected by the court. Wow, so
now he's just defending a big, expensive lawsuit. But his
lot he was like suing her for like four hundred
million dollars. It's just like, what are you doing? Where
does that number come from? So now just the broader
(18:35):
underlying dispute about sexual harassment and hostile workplace environment, this
kind of stuff still ongoing. All right, let's take a
break and come back with more. I got some Disney news,
I got some you never know what I got up
my sleeve kind of news after this. Joe Scalante Live
(18:56):
from Hollywood. Joe Scalante Live from Hollywood. If by Hollywood
need a burbank. This is two hours of the business
end of show business. We do it every Sunday on
KiB eleven to fifteen your AM dial. And there's a
podcast version. They turn the show into a podcast miraculously,
(19:17):
and then you get it on iTunes or Spotify or
wherever you get your podcasts. Okay, all right, let's go
to a Supreme Court case on intellectual property. Can you
imagine this week? June seventeenth, the US Supreme Court officially
(19:39):
rejected a bid to revive the copyright claim against Ed
Sheeran over his twenty fourteen hit song Thinking Out Loud.
This decision brings an end to the decade long legal battle.
This is a sub total bum out. Poor guy. The
villain here is a company called Structured Asset Sales, which
holds copyright into st interests in Marvin Gay's Let's Get
(20:02):
It On, And they alleged that Cheeran copied the melody,
harmonies and rhythm of this Marvin Gate nineteen seventy three classic.
Now you can see how since here this is the
family and Marvin Gay family has sold the rights to
this song to a bunch of fill in the ranks,
and they are suing everybody inside because of the terrible
(20:23):
decision that was made years ago, claiming that Pharrell Williams
and Robin Thick, Robin Thick or it's this kid. Yeah,
Robin think his dad is Alan. His dad's from my generation.
Alan think he was famous. So Robin think Pharrell Williams
(20:44):
said that they stole the song from Marvin Gay and
they didn't. And I'll I'll go over it again. The
copyrighted material that was protected something. If you copyright something,
it's protected. What was partet in that case was the copyright.
The copyright had sheet music in it, and the judge
(21:05):
let the jury hear the finished recording with piles and
piles and piles and piles of unprotected material on it,
and then the protected material that's in the copyright is
the only thing the should been played. They should have
had a string cortet come out there and play that
protected version and then we compare that to the melodies
and the expressions in the Robin Thick Farrell Williams song.
(21:29):
But instead they compared something that is where like the
final version of the Marvin gay song. So they could
go take the final versions and say, oh, okay, you
stole that. Well, it's just you know, they're inspired by that.
And then they did what everybody else does, listen to
a song, get inspired a bit. They'd like the feel
(21:49):
of this song, and that jury said, well, you can't
take the feel. Oh my gosh, yeah you can. You
can take the feel. So in this case, the same
company comes after. Maybe it's after that that the Marvin
Gaye family sold it to these people, but I don't know.
So these people are running around suing people since they
got a bad decision, and finally a court said no,
(22:11):
you're not getting another bad decision, and then went to
the Supreme Court and they said, yeah, you're not getting
a bad decision. Go away. So that's why I call
them the villains. Whoever this company has structured asset sales. Yeah,
he already won the case in twenty twenty three. So
Supreme Court confirms the lower court it's findings in favor
(22:33):
of she Ran and saying that these similarities were mere
common musical building blocks. So go pound sand. And this
goes back to something I always say is do we
want to live in a world where these musicians are
(22:56):
afraid to create because some terrible jury instructions were given
in the Robin Thick Pharrell Marvin Gay case. No, it's
not the world you want to live. You want people
to be taking genres and being influenced by it and
taking it to the next level. You can't pick apart
(23:18):
their work and sue them for taking chances and being
creative and pushing boundaries and saluting the original artists. It's
like if you took that Marvin Gay song that they
used r any of these songs, you could reverse engineer
(23:42):
the lawsuit to find who that person took their influences
from and wake that person up out of the grave
and get their estate together and sue the plaintiff in
the new lawsuit So do we want to live in
this world where that's how artists are shackled? I don't
(24:07):
think we do. Okay, let's go to the phones. Just kidding,
taping this, Okay? Anyway, what's going on in the Harvey
Weinstein trial. I knew that's what you were going to ask,
and you did, and I have it for you. You know,
as you know, he had some of his charges thrown out,
(24:32):
and he had a retrial, he had a new trial.
Good news for Harvey. A lot of good news in
this trial. Doesn't mean he's not going to die in prison,
which I believe he is. But a jury in New
York reached a split verdict in his retrial, and he
was found guilty on just one count of criminal of
(24:52):
a criminal sexual act in the first degree related to
the accusations by Miriam Hayley. Now, let's let's remind everybody
who Miriam Haley is, because this is the big one,
the one that two times he was convicted of a
sexual act in the first degree. Miriam Haley was a
(25:14):
production assistant briefly worked on Project Runway, the show that
was actually produced by the Weinstein Company. Now, production assistant
is the lowest level person on a set the most vulnerable,
if you will. Often they are very good looking young
(25:35):
girls that are like this girl's hot. She doesn't have
any skills, but to be a production assistant, you don't
need any skills, and you end up just kind of
fitting in. Wherever you excel, you either get fired or
someone notices that you're good at something, and you know,
and just concentrate on whatever skills you have. She's in
(26:01):
the Weinstein world. She testified that she was seeking professional
opportunities in the industry and viewed Weinstein as a guy
could help her, and she described a series of interactions
with him that were sometimes professional and polite, but other
times inappropriate and suggestive. So he's kind of grooming her
and he pushed the boundaries. She maintained that she was
(26:21):
never interested in sexual or romantic relationship with him, only impressional,
only professional advancement. Okay, she's allowed to do that. She
testified that in July of two thousand and six, remember
this is you know, years ago, Weinstein invited her to
his Manhattan apartment, where she expected to be him to
(26:43):
be professional and have a friendly meeting, and during the meeting,
he lunged at her to kiss her. She said no, thanks,
but then he forcibly grabbed her and pushed her into
the bedroom. Once in the bedroom, he pinned her down
and performed oral sex on her against her will, despite
her pleas to stop, saying no, no, no, it's not
(27:04):
going to happen. Okay, So she feels humiliated afterwards. Then
she says she did not immediately report the assault to
the police and continue to have contact with Weinstein for
some time afterwards, even sending cordial emails, signed lots of
love and seeking professional favors. So yeah, she's milking it.
(27:27):
That hurts her testimony, but she ultimately prevailed in this claim.
She explained that her continued contact was because she was
trying to and this is in quotes, navigate the whole situation.
So that's her excuse. I'm trying to navigate the whole situation, okay.
She wanted to preserve any potential professional opportunities and cope
(27:49):
with the trauma by suppressing a lot of things. She
also testified about another sexual encounter a few weeks later
at a hotel that she described as unwanted but which
she didn't physically resist. Basically had sex with them and
then she felt stupid. She said she did it. She
agreed to it because she felt stupid for having agreed
to meet him. You know, maybe she was afraid. Okay,
(28:11):
but you know what, We're gonna explore this att flirt
further since this is, you know, almost done kind of.
But first we shall go to traffic. Joe Scalante live
from Hollywood.
Speaker 2 (28:31):
Yeah, Joe Ascalanti, here's my lawyer. You don't want money.
Speaker 1 (28:49):
Joe Scalante live from Hollywood. If by Hollywood you mean Burbank.
Two hours of the business, end of show business right
here on k e IB eleven fifty, your am dial. Okay. So,
in the Weinstein retrial, guilty criminal sexual act in the
first degree with Miriam Haley, we just told you who
Miriam Haley was. In the last break, she was found
(29:12):
not guilty of another criminal sexual act involving Kaja Socola. Now,
who is Kadja Socola. Let's read, Let's let's go down
memory lane with that one. Who is Kaja Sokolaw? Now,
if you remember, Kaja Sokola is the Polish born former
model and aspiring actress who became an accuser in the
(29:33):
Harvey Weinstein sex crimes original trial, and she was just
used in that trial as an example of prior bad acts,
and she wasn't a it wasn't a separate charge. But
in the retrial, looks like she became a new charge.
And if you remember and which which he was, he
was found not guilty of Okay, So what did she say.
(29:57):
It's pretty much the same old stuff. She met Weinstein
in two thousand and two. That's why it was so
long ago. It wasn't really a part of the original claim.
When she was about sixteen years old, she was on
a modeling trip to New York and she met him
and was invited to his apartment to discuss her acting career,
(30:18):
but once there, she was told to take off her
clothes and rub his naughty bits. She described feeling scared, confused.
If you want to be an actress, that's what actors
do in films, you should get used to it. That's
what she said that he said, so not guilty, And
(30:42):
a juror actually spoke out and said they didn't find
her credible because of her continuing relationship and just her testimony,
and she said she couldn't come to terms with the
alleged abuse at the time, you know, and so she
you know, they found diary entries. She didn't talk about this,
like it wasn't that big a deal. She didn't even
(31:02):
talk about her her diary. But she said she couldn't
trying to like just kind of rewrite her life and
career and her career choices. Now, the jury also couldn't
reach a verdict in a third case brought by a
woman named Jessica Man. Now, let's go down memory lane
(31:24):
and remember who Jessica Man is. Jessica Man was an
aspiring actress and cosmetologist in her late twenties when she
met Harvey Weinstein around twenty twelve or twenty thirteen in LA.
Like the other accusers, she testified that Weinstein initially showed
interest in her career, leading her to believe that he
could help her. She described a complex and often degrading
(31:45):
relationship that lasted about five years. So this guy, I mean,
he was accused of sexually assaulting these women who he thought,
I mean, I think he's a perv and he shouldn't
do this, and he was married. On top of all this,
that he was these girls had him believe at least
that they they thought they were getting something out of it.
(32:06):
So I believe that he didn't think he was raping them.
He's just disgusting, you know. He just thinks, ah, this
is you know, I'm gonna help him, and this is
how it works in Hollywood. So and again, she said
it alternated between him being charming and being like aggressive
and abusive. She called him a doctor Jekylo and mister Hyde.
And the word no was a trigger. How do you
(32:28):
like that one? Whoever came up to that one should
get a bonus? No was a trigger, Ladies and gentleman
of the jury, She said no, and then it was on.
So the core accusation of Jessica Mand's case revolved around
an incident at a hotel in Midtown Manhattan in March
of twenty thirteen. I cannot tell you which hotel it is,
(32:50):
but there were two trees involved. Okay, you get it.
She testified that she was in New York with a
friend who was supposed to meet Weinstein for breakfast. Instead,
she found him checking into the hotel. Can you imagine
Harvey Weinstein checking into a hotel with two trees involved?
My camp? But he did it because he's a perf.
(33:12):
She said he became angry with him with her and
told her he demanded she come up to his room,
and of course she went up to the room, tried
to leave, he grabbed her, demanded she undressed. She recounted
a moment there where she just gave up due to
the aggression and her fear. And there's what she said,
He raped her. This is Jessica, man, This one didn't stick.
(33:36):
This is where they found the erection inducing syringe in
the bathroom, or she said she found it. You gotta
take pictures of stuff like that. That's what I see.
But anyway, this is all I mean. It's hard to
judge these people. She also testified about a previous instant
before that in La where he forced himself on her
during their first private meeting in a hotel room. This
(33:58):
guy loves hotel rooms, and then he invited her up
there of course to you know, talk about careers. She
said that one was a real battle, but despite these assaults,
she still maintained a relationship. Said she was trying to
buy time. She believed that maintaining contact might take the
pain away or create a path for her career. This
(34:20):
just shows you how hard it is to be an
actress and to be in the entertainment industry. So I
don't know anyway, I know you're wondering, how often does
this happen to your host? Almost never? But I did
have one situation where a film was offered to me
to direct. All I had to do was bad stuff
(34:47):
and that film was never made. Just leave it there, okay, Now, okay,
So these these Jessica man Kaja Sokola and and Miriam Haley,
those things, those are the three charges, the main ones.
(35:08):
Miriam Haley, this one sticks. And then okay, so what's
going on with the guy?
Speaker 2 (35:15):
Now?
Speaker 1 (35:18):
I think you're sick of this and you just want
to He remains incarcerated despite the overturned twenty twenty New
York conviction. Weinstein has been serving a sixteen year sentence
from his separate twenty twenty two California conviction and the
New York conviction which was thrown out. You know, actually
the one that's now been affirmed twice is a potential
(35:43):
twenty five year sentence. So in July second there will
be sentencing on this new conviction for Miriam Haley, but
he's still serving time for the other one. So he's dying.
He's dying in prison. That's all we can say. Even
though he's appealing that California thing. Actually, he could win
his appeal in the California one and you could feel
this and you could be set free. Is it gonna happen?
(36:05):
Probably not. Am I gonna talk about this ever again?
Probably not. Okay, thank you for indulging me for me.
I just want I wanted to get the party straight too,
and so in this report I was able to get
the parties straight again. Okay, I got one more thing
for you. Kind of interesting. There's a liquid death beverage
coming out that has evidently contains DNA of Ozzy Osbourne
(36:31):
in it, so recent marketing initiative featuring a some juice
from his DNA. Just I mean, what does DNA taste
like anyway? Are you gonna notice it? Probably not? Is
it poisonous? I hope not, But it's open to peculiar
discussion on the intersection of like celebrity branding and future
(36:53):
bio legal considerations that we never thought would happen. Ten
limit edition Infinite Ozzie iced tea cans were sold, each
containing purportedly trace amounts of mister Osborne saliva, DNA, so
Ozzy spit. The explicit premise of the campaign was to
future potential was for future potential fans to clone mister Osborne,
(37:17):
should technology and federal law permit. While human reproductive cloning
from such samples remains outside current scientific capability and is
widely prohibited or restricted by existing state law and international laws,
this promotion raises interesting hypotheticals, you know, regarding the ownership
and the intended use of genetic material in a commercial context.
(37:42):
And let's just be glad nobody's proposed yet to clone
share in Osbourne. All right, that does it for this one,
And I now leave you with a taste of the
greatest song ever written.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy And Charlamagne Tha God!
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.