An unnerving question but someone's gotta ask it.


I would say, separate the man from the profession. It does make it easier. I hate Liverpool, still watch their matches.
My Favorite Films

He was accused of trying to seduce Anthony Rapp, who was just 14 at the time, while drunk. There have been other accusations since, more than a dozen total. He was actually charged with felony sexual assault at one point, though not convicted.

One of the more significant things about the situation is that he didn't really deny it, but instead said he didn't remember and apologized:

Naturally, the fact that he apologized and seems to think it's plausible (even if he's telling the truth about not remembering it) has been widely treated as a de facto admission, particularly when combined with the sheer number of accusers.

Yeah, Anthony Rapp at 14 was alone in Spacey's bedroom when Spacey drunk tried to sleep with him. Why a 14 year old is at a party with drunk adults and the parents are nowhere to be seen...that is another issue.

I'm not going to stop watching Seven, Usual Suspects, American Beauty, Moon or bloody KPAX because of what Spacey did

Make a better place
I'd say its absolutely Okay

The way I look at it is...

Suppose Anthony Hopkins just admitted that he's a real life serial killer cannibal, I'd re watch his Hannibal Lecter right away
"Beliefs don't change facts. Facts, if you're rational, should change your beliefs" Ricky Gervais

His acting was not a crime. His behind the scenes antics were. Hate the man, not the movie. If that were the case, Weinstein productions released so many good movies over the last decade, there would be very little to watch on repeat.

It does affect the viewing. I was watching Se7en the other day, and when Spacey showed up on the screen, my brain did think about him being a disgusting person.

Interestingly, I hate what Polanski did to a child, but it's easier to watch his movies because his face never shows up on the screen.

I would say, separate the man from the profession. It does make it easier. I hate Liverpool, still watch their matches.

Well, not never. Polanksi does star in The Tenant. It's too bad if you'd skip it though, it's one of my favorites from him.
Naah, I won't skip any of his or even Spacey's movies. I mean American Beauty still remains one of my all time favourites.

I was stating that it's easier to forget that when the culprit doesn't come on the screen. I know Polanski has done acting role, but usually (not with Tenant) it's a smaller role.

Did anybody watch his christmas message?

Do you know what a roller pigeon is, Barney? They climb high and fast, then roll over and fall just as fast toward the earth. There are shallow rollers and deep rollers. You canít breed two deep rollers, or their young will roll all the way down, hit, and die. Officer Starling is a deep roller, Barney. We should hope one of her parents was not.

Movie Forums Squirrel Jumper
But people watch movies where jerks or bullies work on them all the time. For example, people in Hollywood say that James Cameron was a complete jerk to work for. Sure he didn't sexually assault anyone, but he psychologically abused people too, but yet we still love his movies.

Or how we can love movies directed by David O'Russell even though, he physically assaulted George Clooney on set when working with him. So I feel that we like movies by jerks all the time, and not sure why Spacey is being given special consideration compared to all the other jerks who have made movies we like.

Movie Forums Squirrel Jumper
Yes that's true. But people like other movies that are made by no angels either.

Yes, people are obviously willing to watch movies by jerks, but sexual assault is worse, so fewer people can tolerate that. Seems entirely unremarkable to me.

There's also the fact that formal charges lead to more media coverage than just "so-and-so screamed at a grip."

Movie Forums Squirrel Jumper
Yes that's true, good points. Do people now have a hard time watching movies by Harvey Weinstein as well? Me and my gf just watched The English Patient, produced by him but I didn't really pay much attention to that while watching the movie, but would most be effected by this?

I also watched The Birth of a Nation (2016) not too long ago, but then found out about the controversy of the rape allegations of the filmmaker.

Even if you aren't bothered on a personal level, there's a real ethical question about whether you should support the work of someone who's done something you strongly disagree with.
True, but the OP asked about Kevin Spacey (& American Beauty), who, IIRC, has never been convicted of any crime. I feel bad for an actor whose career is in shreds, but who, for all intents & purposes (and this could change), is innocent.
Iím here only on Mondays, Wednesdays & Fridays. Thatís why Iím here now.

The threshold for "is likely guilty" and "can be convicted" are obviously quite different. O.J. Simpson wasn't convicted, either, and they only got Al Capone on his taxes.

Ethical considerations should, I think, should only have to be based on the preponderance of the evidence and not the "reasonable doubt" threshold, since we're depriving them only of our patronage and attention and not of their basic rights. This is particularly true if the reason someone isn't convicted is, say, the statute of limitations or some other legal technicality.

In this case, Spacey has apologized and very nearly confessed, too, which makes all these considerations a lot more straightforward than if we had to judge each person's word against the other's without personal knowledge of either.

Movie Forums Squirrel Jumper
Oh okay well when I mentioned OJ Simpson, I thought there was still a lot of evidence there too also. Spacey's victims said what happened, but with OJ there was enough evidence to go to trial, where as Spacey, not so much so far?