Movies

The opening shots of this movie seem to be of a fog imbued with some kind of green slime; once this lifts, we’re with a small family on a fishing trip. One of two little girls is separated from her sister and parents, and comes upon a young boy with a square piece of gauze over one eye. He’s a discomfiting figure, and he’s soon pursued by adult figures who are more discomfiting, obscured by foliage. The young girl isn’t sure what ultimately happens, but she, and we, understand that whatever it was, it was bad.[embedded content]Decades later, Abby, the witness (Tuppence Middleton), is faced with selling her mom’s rickety Niagara Falls motel. Sister Laure (Hannah Gross) is all for it. Abby retains an attachment and resents the third-generation business hotshot who wants the property. Her haunted memories find a link to his back story, and her suspicions, in turn, are fed by Walter, a local podcaster, self-styled historian and conspiracy theorist. He’s played with droll understatement by David Cronenberg. Cronenberg’s entrance — he emerges from a lake in wet suit and full scuba gear — is one of the more noteworthy in recent genre cinema, in part because the robust performer is 76 years old.This intriguing movie has quite a few plot twists, and they’re all admirably worked out. But in the aggregate, they tend to pull away from the film’s strongest feature, which is the dank, dread-filled atmosphere sustained almost throughout by Albert Shin, the director and co-writer. Nevertheless, for patient or forgiving fans of idiosyncratic thrillers, “Disappearance” may deliver satisfactory spills and chills.Disappearance at Clifton HillNot rated. Running time: 1 hour 40 minutes. More

Jazz at Lincoln Center’s 33rd season will include appearances from a wide array of internationally renowned vocalists, tributes to the legends of jazz and premieres of new suites by members of its resident orchestra.The season will kick off Sept. 25-26, with a program featuring new arrangements of classic Charlie Parker tunes for the Jazz at Lincoln Center Orchestra, and will end with a similar program featuring the music of John Coltrane (June 11-12). In both cases, younger saxophonists will be featured guests.In between, the season will comprise more than two dozen different two-night engagements at Jazz at Lincoln Center’s main stages, the Appel Room and the Rose Theater.On Oct. 2-3, a quartet featuring Joshua Redman, Brad Mehldau, Christian McBride and Brian Blade will revisit “MoodSwing,” an album that these four jazz luminaries released in 1994 (as the Joshua Redman Quartet).The “Duke Sings” concerts on Nov. 13-14 will bring together four rising vocalists — including the 2019 Sarah Vaughan International Jazz Vocal Competition winner Samara Joy McLendon and the Thelonious Monk International Jazz Competition finalist Vuyo Sotashe — for a program of Duke Ellington’s compositions for voice, accompanied by a band directed by the saxophonist Ruben Fox and the pianist Christopher Pattishall.The Cuban vocalist Omara Portuondo (of the Buena Vista Social Club) will headline on Nov. 6-7. The Brazilian pianist and vocalist Eliane Elias will play the music of Antonio Carlos Jobim on May 14-15. And in a nod to the experimental edge of jazz’s global reach, on Oct. 23-24, the percussionist Cyro Baptista will celebrate his 70th birthday in performances to include John Zorn as a special guest.The trumpeter Terence Blanchard will be honored with a career retrospective, titled “A Life in Music” (March 12-13), including appearances by his acoustic-electric band E-Collective and by the vocalist Cassandra Wilson.The drummer Matt Wilson and the pianist Helen Sung will collaborate on a double-feature titled “Jazz Meets Poetry” on April 31-May 1, with each bandleader presenting a poetry-driven project.A number of presentations will have social-justice bents this year, including “Freedom, Justice and Hope” (April 2-3), a collaboration between the Jazz at Lincoln Center Orchestra and the lawyer-activist Bryan Stevenson; and “Freedom Con Clave” (June 4-5), a premiere of new works by Carlos Henriquez, the orchestra’s bassist (he will perform here with a smaller group). More

The criminal case against Harvey Weinstein was a long shot.Many of his accusers were bracing for an acquittal. Fellow prosecutors across the country were quietly questioning whether the New York district attorney, Cyrus R. Vance Jr., had made a mistake by bringing charges.But by pushing the boundaries of sex-crimes prosecutions, the Manhattan prosecutors delivered what many people declared a victory for the global movement against sexual misconduct that Mr. Weinstein’s actions had helped ignite.“It’s a perfect test case of what happens when a culture begins to shift,” said Deborah Tuerkheimer, a law professor at Northwestern.Along the way, one accuser had to be dropped from the case amid allegations of police misconduct. The central victims acknowledged having had consensual sex with the Hollywood producer after being attacked by him, and one had an intimate relationship with him that stretched for several years. Prosecutors almost never try cases in those circumstances, deeming them too messy to win convictions. At every turn, Mr. Weinstein’s lawyers argued he was a victim of the #MeToo movement gone too far.The jury’s verdict was ultimately mixed. Mr. Weinstein was acquitted of two counts of predatory sexual assault, the most serious charges against him. The jury had suggested on Friday that it was deadlocked on those counts.[Follow our live coverage and updates of the Weinstein trial verdict.]“This wasn’t ‘Believe all women,’ and certainly not ‘Believe everything women are saying,’” said Isabelle Kirshner, a former Manhattan prosecutor turned criminal defense lawyer, who has represented men accused of sexual assault. “It looks like they were fairly careful on what they decided.”But prosecutors persuaded the jury to convict on two felony sexual assault charges — which could send him to prison for up to 29 years — suggesting that accountability stretches from the court of public opinion to the court of criminal law.On Monday, some of Mr. Weinstein’s more than 90 accusers, and others around the world, reacted to the verdict with relief, tears and gratitude that the law had spoken for them.“For so long these women believed that he was untouchable and could never be held responsible, but now the criminal justice system has found him guilty,” said Tarana Burke, the founder of the #MeToo movement. “That sends a powerful message.”[Ashley Judd and other Weinstein accusers spoke to The Times about the verdict.]The #MeToo movement helped propel the prosecution. Mr. Vance, the district attorney, had drawn criticism for failing to prosecute Mr. Weinstein in 2015 after an Italian model complained to the police that the producer had grabbed her breasts and tried to force his hand up her skirt. And some of Mr. Weinstein’s accusers who had not previously gone to the police were then willing to participate in the criminal justice process if it meant supporting and protecting other women.“I just wanted to add my voice in support, and share my experience with the hopes of helping anyone else who was” victimized, Miriam Haley, a former production assistant, said on the witness stand.“I did it for all of us,” Dawn Dunning, who served as a supporting witness in the trial, said in an interview on Monday. “I did it for the women who couldn’t testify. I couldn’t not do it.”Joan Illuzzi, the lead prosecutor, did not have much by way of forensic evidence or direct witnesses to prove wrongdoing. Instead, her team strove to establish a pattern of predation, putting four additional women on the stand who told similar stories of rape or abuse by Mr. Weinstein. Those types of supporting witnesses had proved crucial in the successful prosecution of Bill Cosby in 2018. In the Weinstein trial, they provided testimony that was much larger than the sum of its parts, reflecting the collective power of women’s voices at the core of #MeToo.For decades Mr. Weinstein used high-priced lawyers and secret settlements to silence women with allegations of sexual misconduct against him. But during the trial, which began in early January, he was the one who could not speak. On the advice of his lawyers, he did not take the stand. Instead, he listened as six women testified about what they said he had done to them.Many of the women described being humiliated by the producer. As they spoke, Mr. Weinstein often appeared humiliated. At one point, as one accuser, Jessica Mann, described his genitals, Mr. Weinstein hung his head.To counter the allegations, Mr. Weinstein and his legal team drummed home the message that #MeToo had spun out of control.On the day of his arrest, he walked into a TriBeCa precinct house carrying a biography of Elia Kazan, the Hollywood director who became a victim of McCarthyism. He switched counsel several times, finally setting on Donna Rotunno, a Chicago lawyer who framed much of her defense as a broader attack on #MeToo. She argued that Mr. Weinstein’s sexual encounters were consensual, that his accusers were lying to achieve celebrity status, that women weren’t taking responsibility for their safety, and that men were the true victims and the movement had robbed them of their fundamental rights.In an interview with “The Daily,” Ms. Rotunno asserted that she had never been a victim of sexual assault because she had never put herself “in that position.”In her closing argument, she criticized what she said was “a universe that strips adult women of common sense, autonomy and responsibility.”But the jury appears to have rejected those arguments. The Weinstein verdict could prove a symbolic turning point, legal experts said, showing that sex crimes don’t necessarily follow neat scripts and reshaping public beliefs about which victims deserve their day in court.The verdict provides hope that we can “have a criminal justice system that reflects the reality of sexual violence,” said Fatima Goss Graves, the president of the National Women’s Law Center.Mr. Weinstein’s legal team has already said it will appeal the convictions, of rape and criminal sexual act. The producer also faces a separate criminal prosecution in Los Angeles, where he has been charged with raping one woman and sexually assaulting another.Jane Manning, a former Queens prosecutor and founder of the Women’s Equal Justice Project, said she hoped the Weinstein case would inspire other prosecutors around the country to pursue similarly challenging cases.“That’s how to cultivate the skill set to try them successfully,” she said. “We need prosecutors to show courage.” More

PARIS — En novembre dernier, Adèle Haenel affirmait avoir été victime, dans son adolescence, de harcèlement sexuel et d’attouchements de la part d’un réalisateur. Âgée de 31 ans, elle est la première actrice de renom à s’être exprimée publiquement sur les violences sexuelles dans le milieu du cinéma français.Le mouvement #MeToo était déjà lancé depuis deux ans, jusqu’à ce que l’histoire d’Adèle Haenel alimente d’intenses débats au sein des familles et entre collègues de bureau. Pour Brigitte Macron, Adèle Haenel mérite un « immense respect ».À l’occasion d’un récent entretien avec le New York Times – la première accordée par Adèle Haenel depuis ses accusations portées dans Mediapart en novembre – l’actrice a lancé un appel pressant au Président Emmanuel Macron , l’exhortant à intensifier la lutte contre les violences faites aux femmes.« La justice doit s’amender pour mieux traiter les femmes victimes de violence sexuelle. À tous les niveaux », nous a-t-elle confié.Christophe Ruggia, le réalisateur qu’Adèle Haenel accuse de harcèlement sexuel et d’attouchements — dont elle affirme qu’ils ont commencé lorsqu’elle avait 12 ans — a fait savoir par ses avocats qu’il réfutait les accusations. Il a été mis en examen pour agression sexuelle sur mineure de moins de 15 ans en janvier et une enquête a été ouverte.Si Adèle Haenel a choisi de se faire discrète depuis ses accusations, d’autres témoignages se sont fait entendre, dont celui de la photographe Valentine Monnier, qui dit avoir été violée en 1975 par le réalisateur Roman Polanski à l’âge de 18 ans (ce dernier a nié les faits, bien qu’il ait précédemment plaidé coupable de rapports sexuels illégaux avec une adolescente de 13 ans aux États-Unis).À la suite d’Adèle Haenel, d’autres femmes ont pris la parole pour dénoncer les violences sexuelles dans les milieux littéraire ou sportif.À quelques semaines de la sortie américaine de son dernier film, « Portrait de la jeune fille en feu », Adèle Haenel nous a accordé une interview à Paris suivie d’un entretien téléphonique. Les propos recueillis ont été édités et condensés.Vous avez partagé votre histoire il y a trois mois et ne vous êtes pas exprimée publiquement depuis. Comment votre témoignage a-t-il été reçu ?Mon histoire a été comme comme un précipité en chimie, c’était le gramme de plus où on voit le précipité apparaître. Elle a « pris » parce que la société française avait fait ce travail de réflexion autour de #MeToo.Je fais partie du milieu du cinéma, mais aujourd’hui je veux rencontrer des femmes d’autres milieux, dans la recherche, dans le monde associatif. J’ai reçu énormément de lettres manuscrites, de messages, de mails, majoritairement de femmes, mais aussi de garçons, victimes ou non, qui avaient été touchés par le témoignage, et qui m’ont fait réaliser le manque de récits médiatiques de victimes de violences sexuelles en France.Quel a été selon vous l’impact de #MeToo en France ?Il y a un paradoxe #MeToo en France : c’est l’un des pays où le mouvement a été le plus suivi, du point de vue des réseaux sociaux, mais d’un point de vue politique et médiatique, la France a complètement raté le coche.Beaucoup d’artistes ont confondu, ou voulu confondre le jeu sexuel et l’agression. Le débat s’est positionné sur la question de la liberté d’importuner, et sur le prétendu puritanisme des féministes. Alors qu’une agression sexuelle est une agression, pas une pratique libertine.Mais dans les discussions, #MeToo s’est imprimé dans les esprits. La France bouillonne de ces questions.Comment #MeToo vous a-t-il aidé dans votre démarche ?#MeToo m’a aidé à réaliser que mon histoire n’était pas juste personnelle, que c’était une histoire de femmes, d’enfants, qu’on porte toutes. Mais je ne me sentais pas prête à la partager au moment où #MeToo a émergé. J’ai mis du temps à faire le parcours personnel qui m’a permis de me placer comme victime. Je crois que je n’ai pas été plus vite que la société française.Certaines personnalités politiques ont regretté que vous vous soyez intialement exprimée dans les médias plutôt que de porter plainte. Pourquoi ce choix ?Parce qu’on a un système judiciaire qui ne fait pas des violences faites aux femmes sa priorité. Des personnalités politiques ont exprimé leur surprise, mais savent-ils ce que c’est, aujourd’hui, pour une femme, de se retrouver dans le système judiciaire en France ? Est-ce qu’on prend en compte les grandes difficultés qui jalonnent le parcours d’une femme victime de violences sexuelles ?Mon dossier est maintenant traité de manière idéale, avec des gendarmes et des policiers attentifs et bienveillants. Je souhaite ce traitement à toutes les victimes.Quel regard portez-vous sur la façon dont ces dossiers sont habituellement traités en France ?La loi française définit le viol comme un acte sexuel commis au moyen de violence, de surprise, ou de contrainte: elle est centrée sur la technique employée par l’agresseur, pas l’absence de consentement de la victime. Or, si une victime est sidérée pendant l’agression, comment fait-on pour obtenir justice ?On doit aussi croire toutes les femmes qui parlent. Dès qu’une femme a moins de pouvoir qu’un homme, on la soupçonne de vouloir se venger. On n’a rien à gagner à se dire victime et les conséquences sur la vie privée sont très négatives.Emmanuel Macron a évoqué une société française « malade du sexisme » et s’est engagé à combattre les violences faites aux femmes et de faire de l’égalité hommes-femmes la « grande cause du quinquennat ». Quel est votre avis sur l’action du gouvernment à cet égard ?Il n’y a pas assez de moyens alloués pour changer la situation, et on a dans le gouvernement actuel un représentant qui a été accusé par différentes femmes d’agressions sexuelles et d’abus de faiblesse.La lenteur de la réactivité du gouvernement face au phénomène #MeToo laisse penser que les pouvoirs publics tolèrent une marge de violence sur les femmes. Cela reste dans une certaine mesure encore accepté.Dans le milieu du cinéma, il est beaucoup question en ce moment du cas Roman Polanski, nominé aux César pour son film « J’accuse ». Qu’en pensez-vous ?Distinguer Polanski, c’est cracher au visage de toutes les victimes. Ça veut dire, « ce n’est pas si grave de violer des femmes ».À la sortie de « J’accuse », on a entendu crier à la censure alors qu’il ne s’agit pas censurer mais de choisir qui on veut regarder. Et les hommes riches, blancs, rassurez-vous : vous possédez tous les moyens de communication.Non, la vraie censure dans le cinéma français, c’est l’invisibilisation. Où sont les gens racisés dans le cinéma ? Les réalisateurs racisés ? Il y a des exceptions, comme Ladj Ly, dont le film rencontre un immense succès, ou Mati Diop, mais ça n’illustre pas du tout la réalité du milieu du cinéma. Cela reste minoritaire. Pour l’instant, on a majoritairement des récits classiques, fondés sur une vision androcentrée, blanche, hétérosexuelle.« Portrait de la jeune fille en feu » offre une vision assez différente de l’amour et des relations humaines.On n’applique pas un programme pré-écrit, qui est « tomber amoureux sans comprendre pourquoi on tombe amoureux », qui inclut une situation de domination, un rapport de pouvoir inégal qui sont considérés comme moteurs de l’érotisme.Le film s’affranchit de cela. On propose quelque chose qui, politiquement, artistiquement, nous asservit moins. C’est une nouvelle version du désir, un entremêlement entre l’excitation intellectuelle, charnelle, inventive.Quels sont vos projets désormais, et sont-ils affectés par l’impact de votre histoire ?Il est trop tôt pour le dire, mais peu importe si cela nuit à ma carrière. Je crois que j’ai fait quelque chose de bien pour le monde et pour mon intégrité. Je vais faire du théâtre à la fin de l’année, mais je ne sais pas encore comment cela impactera la façon qu’auront les gens de me voir.Je fais tout à pied à Paris, je ne vis pas dans une bulle : parfois les gens me remercient pour mon témoignage quand ils me voient dans la rue. Quand les gens disent merci, ça me touche , puisque le but, c’était d’aider. Ça me rend fière et joyeuse. More

PARIS — When Adèle Haenel said late last year that she had been abused as a child by a movie director, she became the first prominent actress in France to speak publicly about abuse in the country’s film industry. By then, the #MeToo movement was already two years old.Families argued about her story at the dinner table. Colleagues discussed it in workplaces. Brigitte Macron, France’s first lady, said Ms. Haenel, 31, deserved “great respect.”In a recent interview with The New York Times — Ms. Haenel’s first since she aired the accusations in November — the actress urged President Emmanuel Macron’s government to step up its efforts to tackle violence against women.“The judicial system needs to change to better treat victims of sexual violence,” she said. “On all levels.”The director Christophe Ruggia, whom Ms. Haenel accused of sexual harassment and inappropriate contact that she said began when she was 12, has denied the accusations through his lawyers. In January, he was charged with sexual assault on a minor under 15, and an inquiry is underway.Although Ms. Haenel has stayed quiet since airing the accusations, similar stories have followed, including an accusation by the photographer Valentine Monnier that the movie director Roman Polanski raped her in 1975 when she was 18. (Mr. Polanski denies the accusation, although he has previously pleaded guilty to having unlawful sex with a 13-year-old girl in the United States.)Other women came forward in the wake of Ms. Haenel’s account, highlighting abuse in the spheres of literature and sports.A few weeks before the American release of her latest movie, “Portrait of a Lady on Fire,” Ms. Haenel sat for an interview in Paris. It was followed by a telephone conversation, and the transcript has been edited for clarity and length.You shared your story three months ago and haven’t spoken publicly since then. How was your testimony received?My story was like the last gram in a chemistry experiment that made everything fall out of solution. It resonated because French society had gone through a thought process about #MeToo.I am part of the film world, but today I want to hear from women from other spheres, in academia, in organizations. The enormous number of handwritten letters, messages, emails — from women, but also from men — who had been moved by my story also made me realize that we lacked media stories on survivors of sexual violence in France.How would you describe how #MeToo has unfolded in France?There is a #MeToo paradox in France: It is one of the countries where the movement was the most closely followed on social media, but from a political perspective and in cultural spheres, France has completely missed the boat.Many artists blurred, or wanted to blur, the distinction between sexual behavior and abuse. The debate was centered on the question of [men’s] “freedom to bother,” and on feminists’ purported puritanism. But sexual abuse is abuse, not libertine behavior.People are talking about it, though, and #MeToo has left its mark. France is boiling over with questions about it.How did that help you tell your own story?It helped me realize that mine was not just personal, but one of many women and children, that we all carry. But I didn’t feel ready to share it when #MeToo emerged. It took me a long time to make the personal journey to look at myself as a victim. I also don’t think I moved any faster than French society.Some politicians in France criticized you for sharing your story in the media without pressing charges initially. Why did you do that?We have a justice system that doesn’t make violence against women a priority. Some public figures expressed their surprise, but do they know what it takes, today, for a woman to face the judicial system in France? Does anyone take into account the huge challenges that lay along the path of a female victim of sexual violence?My case is now being treated in an ideal manner, with trained police and investigators who are attentive and well-meaning. I wish all survivors could have treatment like this.Some women have complained that their cases didn’t receive the same treatment.Under French law, rape is a sexual act committed with violence, surprise or under constraint: It is centered on the method used by the abuser, not the absence of consent from the victim. But what if during the assault a victim is in total shock? How do you seek justice?We also have to believe all the women who speak out: Whenever a woman has less power than a man, one suspects her of wanting revenge. We have nothing to gain from coming forward as a victim, and the consequences on our private life are very negative.President Emmanuel Macron has called French society “sick with sexism” and has vowed to combat violence against women and promote gender equality. How do you see the government’s actions in this regard?There isn’t enough funding dedicated to changing the situation, and we have in our current government a representative who has been accused of abuse by different women. Keeping him in position sends out the signal that it isn’t so serious.The government’s sluggish reaction to the #MeToo phenomenon makes you think that the state tolerates an amount of violence against women. It remains accepted to a certain extent.Many recent conversations about sexual violence in the film world in France have focused on Roman Polanski, who has been nominated for the Césars, the French equivalent of the Oscars, for his latest film “An Officer and a Spy.” You’ve been nominated, too.Distinguishing Polanski is spitting in the face of all victims. It means raping women isn’t that bad.When “An Officer and a Spy” was released, we heard outcries about censorship. It isn’t censorship — it’s about choosing who one wants to watch. And old rich white men, rest assured: You own all of the communication channels.No, real censorship in French film is how some people suffer from invisibility. Where are the people of color in film? The directors of color? There are exceptions, like Ladj Ly, whose film has had enormous success, or Mathi Diop, but that doesn’t reflect the reality of the film world at all. They remain a minority. For now, most stories take the classic white, male, heterosexual point of view.But “Portrait of a Lady on Fire” offers a different vision of love and human interactions.We don’t apply a traditional playbook, which is “falling in love without understanding why.” That usually includes domination and unequal power relations that are often considered like a motor for eroticism.This film frees itself of that. We offer something that politically, artistically, makes us less submissive. It is a new version of desire, a cross between intellectual, carnal and inventive excitement.What are you plans now? Are they affected by the impact of your story?It is too early to say, but it doesn’t really matter if it harms my career. I think I did something good for the world, something that makes me feel upright. I am going to act in a play at the end of the year, but I don’t know yet how it has affected the way people see me.I walk around Paris on foot — I don’t live in a bubble. Sometimes people thank me for speaking out when they see me in the street. When people thank me, it moves me, since the goal was to help. It makes me proud and joyful. More