Don’t pity Tommy Wiseau for not getting a word in at the Golden Globes, both him and Franco are celebrated for nothing more than being overconfident assholes.By Nicole Froio Once you’re awake, you can’t ever truly enjoy a movie again. That’s the conclusion I got to watching James Franco’s “The Disaster Artist”, a comedy about the production of the worst film ever made turned cult classic “The Room”. Franco, who won a Golden Globe for Best Actor in a Musical and Comedy, set out to tell the bizarre story of Tommy Wiseau, a quirky-looking, strange-acting man whose dream was to be a Hollywood actor, and his quest to write and film his ‘masterpiece’. However, given the continuous revelations of sexual assault and harassment in the last four months and the practices of abuse of power that seem to be pervasive in Hollywood, Franco’s “The Disaster Artist” shows how white male privilege is uplifted in society—even if the ‘artist’ in question is essentially a failure. The fact that Franco’s movie is billed as a comedy shows how he thinks white male privilege and the abuse that often comes with it is a huge joke. Franco himself was caught trying to pick up a minor in 2014, and is now being accused of taking advantage of actress Sarah Tither-Kaplan. No wonder he made a movie that essentially celebrates white male incompetence and abuse. When Wiseau and his friend Greg Sestero move to LA to try their luck in Hollywood, it is obvious that they are both painfully, objectively untalented. While Sestero can rely on his good looks and youth, Wiseau’s frighteningly pale skin, long greasy black hair and creepy demeanor puts him in an extreme disadvantage when auditioning for parts. His Eastern European accent would perhaps be forgiven if it wasn’t for his insistence that he is 100% American and from New Orleans. From the very moment anyone meets Wiseau, it’s evident that something is off; yet, his strange behavior is forgiven as quirky and eccentric by Sestero.
Painting white boys and men as lone wolves has become a tradition of its own. Men don’t want to be seen as violent or toxic, and they don’t want to address sexism and misogyny.“I knew he had to be Black. I said it: You can tell this is a [redacted] because ain’t no rhyme or reason to none of these attacks.” Said my grandmother, circa October 2012, about the DC Sniper. Apparently because the shootings seemed random, instead of calculated (at the time) was proof of Black deficiency, of intellectual inferiority. A white mass murderer would have planned, calculated, deduced. This was one of my earliest memories of terror—distant terror because I lived in the Midwest. But terror all the same. I was twelve, and this was obviously right after 9/11. The DC Sniper’s name was Muhammad. That was enough for him to be labeled a terrorist without mens rea. (I learned that term from Legally Blonde, by the way.) In actuality, according to this research, the amount of mass shootings committed by white men, Black men, etc. is directly proportionate to the population. The main common denominator, if we exclude military/imperialism, seems to be gender: men are more likely to commit murder or violence period, though the reasons why are oft-disputed. However, it seems that, while “terrorism” is the go-to name for Black and brown perpetrators of violence, there is a certain hesitation people have when the accused is white. Also, equally suspect is the fact that the definition of domestic terrorism was amended—not, it seems, to stop violence but for the US to be able to target activists, organizers, and protesters.
This op-ed is trash heaped upon a dumpster fire sparked by the normalization of alt right white supremacy and misogyny. By Samantha Isabel Wright Calero “In Defense of the White Male” by Roland Merullo belies the catastrophic and banal legacy of white