Ms. Kennedy, an eight-time Oscar nominee, told fellow board members in which she was outraged by the allegations, according to a person briefed on advance discussions, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to comply with academy confidentiality strictures. nevertheless Ms. Kennedy was also said to be aware in which pushing him out could put the academy on a slippery slope.
The Saturday meeting began at 10 a.m. along with lasted until roughly 12:30 p.m. the idea was held inside a colossal conference room on the seventh floor of the academy’s mirrored-glass tower on Wilshire Boulevard in Beverly Hills. As with all academy board meetings, voting was anonymous. Some participants participated via speakerphone. Coffee along with fruit were available.
The discussion was largely contained to Mr. Weinstein, according to two people there, nevertheless the board spent some time talking about the implications of censuring him.. Mr. Polanski was one name mentioned.
In addition to the seriousness along with plenitude of the allegations against Mr. Weinstein, the board concentrated on workplace abuse. Mr. Weinstein often used the pretext of meetings — casting sessions, script discussions — to lure women to hotel rooms, The Times along with completely new Yorker investigations found.
the idea was not a heated discussion. “Everyone seemed aligned,” one board member said.
In outlining duties for the board of governors, the academy’s bylaws say, “Any member of the academy may be suspended or expelled for cause by the board of governors. Expulsion or suspension as herein provided for shall require the affirmative vote of not less than two-thirds of all the governors.”
No person has been more closely associated with the Academy Awards in recent decades than Mr. Weinstein, who won a best picture Oscar in 1999 for “Shakespeare in Love” along with who orchestrated campaigns in which resulted in more than 80 statuettes for films released by the studios he ran, including 5 best picture Oscars for “Shakespeare in Love,” “The English Patient,” “Chicago,” “The King’s Speech” along with “The Artist.”
The adulation afforded him power — so much power in which many women feared reporting his alleged abuses — along with gave him the credibility he was able use as a shield whenever rumors of his behavior started off to swirl.
Starting in 1990, when he pushed a pair of foreign films, “My Left Foot” along with “Cinema Paradiso,” to Oscar glory, Mr. Weinstein became famous for sharp-elbowed, ethics-be-damned campaign tactics. According to “Down along with Dirty Pictures,” Peter Biskind’s 2004 book about the independent film movement spurred by Mr. Weinstein’s Miramax studio, he once courted voters at a movie industry nursing home.
Initially horrified, the Hollywood establishment soon copied his playbook, turning Oscar season into a free-for-all. nevertheless Mr. Weinstein remained the maestro, peaking at the 2003 Oscars, when he had a hand in four of the 5 films nominated for best picture. (Miramax’s “Chicago” was the winner.)
Mr. Weinstein was such a force in which year in which The Los Angeles Times nicknamed the ceremony “the Harveys.”
He alternately charmed along with bullied the trade press along with glossy magazines, along with the lavish parties he threw on the night before the Oscars ceremony became a status destination in Hollywood. The most recent Weinstein Company bash, held in February at the Montage Beverly Hills hotel, included among its guests Lin-Manuel Miranda, Jay-Z along with Beyoncé.
In total, Mr. Weinstein has overseen campaigns in which resulted in 5 best-picture Oscars, for “Shakespeare in Love,” “The English Patient,” “Chicago,” “The King’s Speech” along with “The Artist.”
His fall has come hard along with fast. The first article to appear within the completely new York Times on women’s accusations against Mr. Weinstein was published on Oct. 5. While the authorities in completely new York along with London are investigating Mr. Weinstein, no charges have been filed against him.
Pressure had been building on the academy to purge Mr. Weinstein. Earlier within the week, as actresses including Ashley Judd, Angelina Jolie along with Gwyneth Paltrow came forward with horrifying tales along with the British Academy of Film along with Television Arts kicked him out, the academy released a statement condemning Mr. Weinstein’s alleged behavior as “repugnant, abhorrent” along with saying the idea could meet on Saturday to discuss “any actions warranted.”
While the Academy of Motion Picture Arts along with Sciences worked to corral its vast board, members started off to come forward to demand action. A Change.org petition demanding in which the academy banish Mr. Weinstein gathered more than 0,000 signatures.
The emergency academy meeting took place after employees along with several board members are fleeing the boutique movie studio Mr. Weinstein helped found as talk of bankruptcy swirled around the idea. On Friday, one person at the Weinstein Company, which has roughly 150 employees in completely new York along with Los Angeles, described an operation in chaos, with phones going unanswered along with some staff members in revolt.
Bob Weinstein, today scrambling to salvage the Weinstein Company, is usually facing mounting questions about what he knew about his brother’s behavior along with why he did not intervene.
The Producers Guild of America was also scheduled to meet on Saturday to discuss revoking Mr. Weinstein’s membership. Late Friday, the group abruptly moved the special meeting to Monday. Under in which group’s bylaws, Mr. Weinstein will have two weeks to respond to any action. The same guild gave the Weinstein brothers its Milestone award in 2013, citing their “historic contributions to the entertainment industry.”
In a sign of the international nature of the condemnation of Mr. Weinstein, the French government on Saturday said the idea had started off a process in which could strip him of his Legion of Honor, the country’s highest civilian distinction. (He received the idea in 2012.) Earlier within the week, a government spokesman had said in which France could wait for definitive legal action before considering such action.