Revisiting Controversial Films and Figures in the Era of “Cancel Culture”

One of our core values at ReSee Movies is inclusivity; my goal as a founder is to build a company that makes each member of our community feel seen, represented, and respected. Sure, there will always be blind spots and imbalances to work on (for example, we are keenly aware of the lack of gender diversity on our advisory board at the moment!), but inclusivity isn’t a status one just achieves; it’s an ongoing process and a commitment to always be mindful of one’s community. We are and will always be working at it. 

Of course, the more diverse any population becomes, the more difficult it is to keep everyone happy. Inclusivity is really, really hard work, and that’s why so many in our society would rather turn a blind eye to inequality and the suffering of others, rather than actually put in the work to improve our local and global communities.

Why bother focusing all that energy on reconciling the past, or creating space for victims of harassment and discrimination to share their truths, or acknowledging our own privileges, when we can instead just roll our eyes, label the complaints as baseless/as overreactions, and accuse victims of chasing clout or having some other ulterior motive? To keep us from feeling guilty or conflicted, our brains are capable of doing mental gymnastics that would make a Simone Biles routine look like kindergarteners doing cartwheels. 

That unwillingness to do the work is at the core of the “cancel culture” controversy; many people in our society seem borderline incapable of acknowledging their privileges, learning from their mistakes, and humbling themselves enough to show sincere contrition. And we’re all guilty of being unwilling to do so at some point in our lives. Like I said, it’s an ongoing process. 

But let’s make one thing clear: “cancel culture” does not exist. It never existed. It’s just a hollow buzzword that certain political pundits and their followers love to throw around whenever they’re trying to justify hateful rhetoric or avoid atoning for their indiscretions. It’s what people bemoan when they get fired for sharing blatantly xenophobic, racist, or ignorant views. It’s them complaining about their “First Amendment rights” being violated when a private, for-profit company decides it’s in their best interests to distance themselves from the stupidity, ignorance, and bigotry of one of their employees. Which, of course, is always laughable, because that’s not at all what the First Amendment protects them from 🙂↔️

At the same time, we have seen lengthy, successful careers and reputations altered, reframed, or tarnished. We’ve seen previously revered works from artists removed from the public eye when new controversies arise. Social media is constantly ablaze with keyboard warriors attacking and defending their favorite celebrities, oftentimes revealing their very thinly veiled misogyny, racism, or malicious weirdness in the process. 

And yet, none of that adds up to being “canceled”. Sorry, it’s still not a thing.

What it is, is the public rightfully demanding that high-profile, privileged, and influential people be held to a higher standard. It’s understanding that unless they are held accountable, they will set a precedent for millions of others to follow their lead and do reprehensible things without fear of real repercussions. 

For obvious reasons the discussion around “cancel culture”, which would probably be called “accountability culture” if the conversation were to ever be had in good faith, has been most visible in the film industry. Time’s Up and the #MeToo Movement has worked by leveraging the platforms and influence of some of Hollywood’s biggest figures to finally bring attention to the rampant harassment, violence, and abuses of power plaguing not just showbusiness, but our society at large. And since then, it has become harder (but still easy) for celebrities to get away with unruly behavior.

All of this is a good thing, and yet again, there is no “cancel culture”. Sorry if I sound like a broken record. 

The #MeToo movement has normalized victims speaking up, sparked the creation of new initiatives to stop future incidents, and changed the way that we do business. Interestingly, it’s also normalized us consumers voicing our own displeasure and holding accountable the businesses that want our dollars. 

As a business owner, especially one in the film industry, balancing inclusivity and accountability with freedom of expression is a tricky endeavor - one that’s constantly on my mind. Trying to represent and celebrate the entire spectrum of film means we will inevitably address works created by or featuring people whose reputations have been marred by scandal. I don’t want to gloss over those incidents any more than I want to dwell on them. And I don’t want to ignore the trauma of our community members any more than I want to force them to revisit it.

Every time a ReSee team member chooses to celebrate a certain film or person, I have to honestly assess whether it’s good or not for “the brand”, and that feels really gross at times. And while we obviously try not to glorify criminals, sex offenders, and bigots, completely ignoring their contributions to the art form is borderline impossible.

It also begs the question of where one draws the line: should we refrain from recommending or commemorating films if the director or main actor has been embroiled in controversy, or does the same apply for the supporting actors? What about the cinematographer? What if nobody in the movie itself is problematic, but it was a film produced and distributed by Miramax?

Candidly, this came to a head during a conversation in a ReSee Slack channel, as our content family discussed Johnny Depp; some members of our team, myself included, adore and revisit many of his iconic films. Others shared that Depp is on the list of actors whose movies they’ll never voluntarily watch again. For decades, Depp has found himself at the center of legal battles, many of which involve domestic violence. The Depp v. Heard trial played out all over social media, and while the case was in many ways simply too bizarre to be a textbook example of anything, the fallout shone a light on many social issues related to abuses of power, misogyny, our criminal justice system, and the out-of-control behavior of celebrities.

Thankfully, our internal discussion was wholesome and productive, and it reminded me that I wanted to go on record with an official company policy surrounding divisive figures like Johnny Depp. Not because I speak for anyone else on my team, but because ReSee as a brand has a duty to make its stances clear so our audience can decide if we’re the kind of community they want to be a part of. And I wanted to take the time to share that stance with all of you.

ReSee’s Policy On Referencing the Works of Controversial Figures

Ultimately, what our team agreed upon is that we all have a personal right to stand up for our beliefs and to decline to support anyone we don’t morally endorse. We also have the right to vocalize our beliefs and shed light on social dilemmas surrounding popular celebrities, and those opinions will always be welcome on ƒour blog and in our community. However, at the same time, we should be prepared for others to disagree or, even worse, to simply not care. When we choose to speak up for what we believe in, we can almost certainly count on people denying our truths, dismissing us, and trolling us. And we should still speak up anyway.

Applying that stance to ReSee means acknowledging that we will inevitably highlight and even promote works from controversial figures. It means that, in each instance, some members of our community have made the difficult decision to separate that particular art from the artist. It is not in any way an endorsement of their behavior nor a downplaying of the controversy. Simply put, it is an acknowledgement that we all see the world a bit differently, and the best we can do in our efforts to be inclusive is to accept that diversity might mean more disagreement, but it also means more open-mindedness and respect. 

To our readers and our online community: if our content and our choices bother you or you have constructive suggestions for us, know that our DMs are always open. We want to make you feel heard, and your feedback is welcomed and appreciated. We also hope that you’ll understand why we may make the difficult decision to discuss controversial works and figures, and know that the decision was probably not made lightly.