Rose McGowan Counter-Offered for $6M before Weinstein Story released
She got an offer to keep quiet for $1M, counter-offered with $6M, and then suddenly had a change of heart once Weinstein got revealed in the NYTimes story. Guess they didn't get back to her fast enough or she would have taken the $6M and kept quiet.
McGowan, who has accused Weinstein of raping her in a hotel room in 1997, told the New York Times that she had received the offer from an individual close to Weinstein in late September, weeks before multiple sexual abuse allegations against the disgraced mogul came to light. The actor allegedly had previously signed a $100,000 settlement with Weinstein in 1997 over the incident, but says that she discovered this summer that the agreement did not include a confidentiality clause.
The actor says that she initially responded to Weinstein’s offer with her own counter-offer of $6m, partly as a way of raising money towards paying for her career as a multimedia artist and partly as a means of torturing the producer. However, one day after the New York Times published an explosive investigation detailing decades of alleged abuse by Weinstein, she decided to reject the offer outright. “I was like – ew, gross, you’re disgusting, I don’t want your money, that would make me feel disgusting,” she said.
|by Anonymous||reply 56||12/06/2017|
She is broke and jobless, she would have taken those 6 million in a beat.
|by Anonymous||reply 1||10/30/2017|
R1 she still has "Charmed" residuals, I'm sure.
Her "change of heart" motivated completely by altruism, I'm sure!
"However, one day after the New York Times published an explosive investigation detailing decades of alleged abuse by Weinstein, she decided to reject the offer outright. “I was like – ew, gross, you’re disgusting, I don’t want your money, that would make me feel disgusting,” she said."
|by Anonymous||reply 2||10/30/2017|
R2, I would not count on the Charmed residuals. She was late to the party and probably didn't get that good of a deal. Also, residuals decrease over time.
|by Anonymous||reply 3||10/30/2017|
Wasn’t he disgusting when he raped her? How did the story going public change that?
|by Anonymous||reply 4||10/30/2017|
As mentioned in a previous thread, she supported a child rapist.
|by Anonymous||reply 5||10/30/2017|
It would have been WAY cheaper for him to simply hire an escort.
|by Anonymous||reply 6||10/30/2017|
r4 because she was going to take the money until the story was leaked, which stole her leverage and she knew they'd never give her even the $1M now. That's why her sudden "oh he's gross" change of heart is, at best, disengenuous. She would have taken the money and kept her mouth shut. The fact that she realized that she didn't sign an NDA and suddenly this offer of $1M shows up means she probably reached out to him in some manner and actively solicited for it, hence the $1M offer. They wouldn't have just offered suddenly out of the blue. It just seems like she's not this women's champion of rights she's being made out to be. She just turned the situation to her advantage after she lost the money.
R6 agreed, but it's not about sex for him, it's about the power play.
|by Anonymous||reply 7||10/30/2017|
NYTime's take. The headlines make it seem like she refused the $1M out of principle but when you read the story you can see what actually happened - it's just not how they're framing it.
|by Anonymous||reply 8||10/30/2017|
Something about her had me side eyeing her since this story broke. Not that she isn’t a victim, her motivation reads suspect as all hell. But wait, if you criticize her it’s “slut shaming”.
|by Anonymous||reply 9||10/30/2017|
Exactly, R9 - she can be a victim AND also be a money-grubbing opportunist. It's just a bit suspect that she's rebranding herself as this paragon of feminism and virtue when, in fact, she is not.
|by Anonymous||reply 10||10/30/2017|
Well, the way she turned this into a story all about her had me suspect, r9. The whole Rose's Army hashtag was all about her. At least "me too" is person agnostic. She also made it seem like she single handedly broke the story when it was really braver and less greedy women than she that did himnin. She really was a "me too". A loud one, but a "me too".
|by Anonymous||reply 11||10/30/2017|
r11 it's crazy how she's become the leader of this even though she originally pulled her name out of Ronan's story. If you look at the timing, she told him not to use her name around the time when she was negotiating for the $6M.
|by Anonymous||reply 12||10/30/2017|
[quote]she still has "Charmed" residuals, I'm sure.
Yup, I am sure the "Charmed" residuals make her a milllionarie, many times over.
|by Anonymous||reply 13||10/30/2017|
Yeah, this doesn't exactly make her look good. And we all know how this will be spun by the (mostly right wing) media.
|by Anonymous||reply 14||10/30/2017|
If you look at her Twitter feed she's got #RosesArmy everywhere, including in her banner and info. Nothing about #MeToo. And she's selling a forthcoming book on something about "being brave". All branding, folks.
Now she's trying to piggyback off the Spacey revelation for more attention.
|by Anonymous||reply 15||10/30/2017|
r13 it's interesting that you seem to think there's no stops between the destitute/poor and millionaire stations.
|by Anonymous||reply 16||10/30/2017|
I can't blame anyone broke for selling out for that much money. Disappointing , but even multimedia artists have got to eat.
|by Anonymous||reply 17||10/30/2017|
R17 It doesn't really bother me either, except now she's trying to make a buck from it and is transparently branding herself on this as some kind of virtuous soul. At least be honest you want the money, girl!
|by Anonymous||reply 18||10/30/2017|
So fucking what? Her career and life were ruined and she had the right to negotiate around that. I don't think this negates, at ALL, what she is saying or how she is presenting herself. It's just another way these fucking bastards try to discredit their victims. She didn't take the money and who gives a shit why? FUCK YOU, OP, for your complicity in defending a rapist by spreading what is essentially no big fucking deal.
|by Anonymous||reply 19||10/30/2017|
OH PLEASE her career and life were not ruined. She got money from it and went on to do Charmed and other shows. Yes, it's unfortunate that it happened to her, but you're being really fucking overdramatic.
It's idiots like you, R19, who make it impossible to have a discussion about this. SHE IS NOT SOME SORT OF SAINT. The fact that you can't even admit that she's being opportunistic - and documentedly so - about the whole thing and have to defend her with such venom, is really telling. Just because this happened to her doesn't make her Jesus and to pretend otherwise is to discredit the victims who aren't trying to parley it into financial gain for themselves, and who weren't trying to do so from the beginning. So please spare me the "HOW DARE YOU QUESTION HER, SHE IS FORGIVEN OF ALL SINS" narrative you seem to be spinning.
Trying to shut down the conversation is not doing anything but turning people off.
|by Anonymous||reply 21||10/30/2017|
So you're telling me if a multi-millionaire raped you... you wouldn't try to get everything you could from him? Some of you are lying your asses off. Until weeks ago, and still, there's no hope he'd get prosecuted for rape - I'm getting his money.
|by Anonymous||reply 22||10/30/2017|
r22 nope, I'm not saying anything of the sort. Read the rest of the thread.
|by Anonymous||reply 23||10/30/2017|
Hell - If I'm gonna get raped, I'd prefer it be a multi-millionaire.. rather than an oily vagrant, or the shift manager at Steven's Shoes. Go her.
|by Anonymous||reply 24||10/30/2017|
r24 you're missing the nuance where she was negotiating with him and only decided to "come out" with her allegations after her thunder got stolen. Now, of course, she's a womyn's champion and feminist for all! She turned the money down because Harvey was gross, is the true reason! Oh and also, buy her book!
|by Anonymous||reply 25||10/30/2017|
At first, I rallied behind her but now I find she is becoming insufferable. A Rose tweet from today said "I told Ronan to be BRAVE and he did". Please. Once again, she is framing herself as the catalyst for this whole expose - and she's not. She's helped keep it in the forefront. But her self-promoting #RoseArmy is becoming self-serving. #MeToo resonated with women; I doubt #RoseArmy has had the same effect.
And agree with r21, her life and career were not ruined. She went onto Charmed and then got the lead role in Part one of Grindhouse, which was a Weinstein production.
|by Anonymous||reply 26||11/04/2017|
Her career was definitely not ruined. She continued to get work in studio films after the incident; what really did her in was a succession of studio flops (Phantoms, Ready to Rumble, Monkeybone). Even then, she was able to turn to tv and eventually land two more (flop) films: Grindhouse (where she actually appeared in two films) and Conan.
She's actually fortunate she's been able to work for so long.
|by Anonymous||reply 27||11/04/2017|
I don't blame them or doubt the damage HW brought on their lives, but Rose's and Asia's crusade on twitter has become a crazy parade of shrieking "warriors" blaming and shaming anyone who's not blindly and ruthlessly backing the "movement". They're starting to look like middle eastern "moral police". I can't stand them, and i'm on their side.
|by Anonymous||reply 28||11/04/2017|
Sorry but I don't believe she was raped because she settled for only $100,000 in 1997. She and her lawyer would have never settled for such a low number if she was truly raped.
|by Anonymous||reply 29||11/04/2017|
r28 I agree. And you have Bourdain on the sidelines assisting in the bullying.
|by Anonymous||reply 30||11/04/2017|
In reference to above, I thought she was actually cool in Conan and I liked that movie. But I was one of the small number of people who actually did, apparently.
|by Anonymous||reply 32||11/07/2017|
r7 Rose truly is a logistical nightmare. Not just re: the HW stuff, but when discussing her life in general, particularly the decline of her career.
|by Anonymous||reply 33||11/07/2017|
R27 Starring in flop after flop ruined her career. So did having awful plastic surgery and shaving her head and generally being mentally ill. Plus she was fun in Scream but, let's be honest, she was never really that talented. Like a lot of actresses known more for their tits than their talent, the good roles dried up as she got older and now she's lucky she can get direct to DVD horror crap like the upcoming The Sound, a reviewer of which claimed that Rose declared was going to be her final film and that she was retiring. Then this whole sex thing blew up and now she's not retiring but instead is rolling around in the spotlight like a kitten on catnip.
|by Anonymous||reply 34||11/07/2017|
STILL no mention of the Danny Masterson accusations. Why isn't she on his ass?
|by Anonymous||reply 35||11/07/2017|
R35 Is she afraid of going up against a Scientologist? Are her and his wife Bijou friends or something?
|by Anonymous||reply 36||11/07/2017|
Whatever. Keep going Rose. You're on the right track.
|by Anonymous||reply 37||11/07/2017|
It had to take her 20 years before she could come forward? Seriously, after 20 years, why did he offer any money? Rose can not bring charges against him after 20 years.
|by Anonymous||reply 38||11/07/2017|
Rose is insane. She was willing to settle? I wonder if she tried to stop that vile sex tape that leaked. I doubt it , she was broke and promiscuous on top of it.
|by Anonymous||reply 39||11/07/2017|
I always assumed Harvey had a micropenis.
|by Anonymous||reply 41||11/07/2017|
Agreed [R34]. Rose was always a limited actress. Not terrible by any means, but not the greatest. I won't deny she had a certain charisma and screen presence (which isn't without merit, really) and she was pretty stunning pre-surgery, but her 'big' movies like Scream were ensemble roles. Jawbreaker, for example, where she was the lead wasn't a major hit - it developed a cult following over many years. She was mostly known for doing slightly off beat indie movies, then Charmed happened and gave her a mainstream profile boost (outside of the Marilyn Manson years, of course). Limited talent + loss of looks due to increasingly poor cosmetic procedures, plus a string of underperforming projects after Charmed which failed to give her any leverage for becoming a box office draw were just nails in the coffin. I remember watching one of the indie straight to DVD flicks she did after the show and her performance was *not* good.
I was a fan of hers since the late 90's, and as soon as her 'activist' phase began I was suspicious - this was at least a couple of years before the Weinstein revelations. She's always tried to pass it off as becoming tired of the game, blaming Hollywood etc. and her intention was to become a director/whatever, but imo it's more likely the work dried up *at least* partly due to the aforementioned limitations and damaged looks. There are more talented actors being passed over for decent roles than Rose McGowan. She was always a bit 'edgy' or quirky and opinionated, or whatever you would call it, but nowhere near this extent.
I don't think she's lying about the initial allegations though, because I don't think she's anywhere near far gone enough to have instigated this much of a shit storm if it wasn't true. No way. She's always been adamant nothing bad happened to her when she was a kid growing up in some bizarre cult situation but I dunno... I think she should've been in therapy or something a long time ago. Then again maybe she has been, who knows.
|by Anonymous||reply 42||11/07/2017|
"It had to take her 20 years before she could come forward? Seriously, after 20 years, why did he offer any money? Rose can not bring charges against him after 20 years."
California eliminated the statute of limitations for rape last year. So, technically charges could be brought, but the State might not choose to prosecute since there would probably be limited evidence.
|by Anonymous||reply 43||11/07/2017|
I thought she was raped at Sundance. California laws wouldn't apply. HW didn't want her to talk. The offer was probably made after the veiled tweet and before a bunch of women started talking. He might of thought getting her to shut up would keep a lid on it.
|by Anonymous||reply 44||11/07/2017|
None of this means she wasn't raped.
|by Anonymous||reply 45||11/07/2017|
Being offered that much to keep quiet doesn't make her story untrue, if fact, it lends it weight.
Assholes like Weinstein wouldn't offer that much if he didn't gave done thing serious to hide.
|by Anonymous||reply 46||11/07/2017|
It's all about the money!
|by Anonymous||reply 47||11/07/2017|
No one's claimed she's lying (in this thread, I don't think). That's not the point of the thread.
|by Anonymous||reply 48||11/07/2017|
"Excuse me, but, umm, like, you're not rich enough to rape me"
|by Anonymous||reply 52||12/05/2017|
Down with Rose! Down with Rose!
|by Anonymous||reply 53||12/06/2017|
Is she bitter she is not the TIME Person of the Year?
|by Anonymous||reply 54||12/06/2017|