I was reading another post at this site entited “A Cornered Rat Responds” by Ole Summers (extremely well written) and was reminded of some of the reviews that I have read of Clint Eastwood’s new movie Richard Jewell. I wrote a piece on this movie a couple of weeks ago (“Put This New Eastwood Movie On Your Radar”) and believed then that there would be considerable pushback from the media establishment against Eastwood’s work. I was right.
Like the slimiest, corrupt politician (yeah, I would include Nancy Pelosi), a sizable segment of the media is attacking Eastwood and even calling for a boycott over his “egregiously sexist” portrayal of Atlanta Journal-Constitution reporter Kathy Scruggs. The AJC is even threatening a lawsuit against Warner Brothers.
Of course, this is all a smokescreen to attempt to disguise the fact that the media, led by the AJC, effectively ruined a man’s life and then hid behind the First Amendment when they were called to account for it. And now, that same spin is being employed in an attempt to obfuscate the media’s rank dishonesty.
Did Kathy Scruggs bed an FBI agent to obtain information for her slanderous story? Maybe or maybe not and we will never know (Scruggs died of a drug overdose several years ago). However, this has nothing to do with the real story. Whether the AJC (and the rest of the media) acknowledge it or not, the true story is the trashing of a person’s life and their refusal to take responsibility for it. The portrayal of Scruggs’ supposed actions is comparable to the flare-up between astronauts Jack Swigert and Fred Haise in the fantastic movie “Apollo 13.” It never happened. Director Ron Howard simply inserted this confrontation into the movie for dramatic effect. Eastwood employed the same technique.
Were there calls for boycotts of “Apollo 13”? Don’t be ridiculous. Moviegoers are more sophisticated than that. And, they will be just as sophisticated when viewing Richard Jewell. Just how ridiculous is it getting? One reporter from Slate has written, “Please do not pay to see movies that feature fictional female reporters who sleep with sources for a story. It’s an egregiously sexist, demeaning, insulting trope and at this stage, I don’t see an appropriate response other than a flat-out boycott.”
If there is a difference between the pomposity of this reporter and politicians such as Nancy Polosi, I just don’t see it. Take a look at Eastwood’s movie and make up your own mind. And, before going to the movie, take a look at “Richard Jewell Case Study – Columbia University”. See for yourself, how closely to the truth the movie portrays the destruction of a person’s life.Published in