It’s a movie starring his nephew in the lead role, approved by his estate, and by all accounts it just feels like an attempt to whitewash him. This is a man who was accused of being a serial child molester, settled with a family out of court for $25 million just to avoid a trial (Chandler), and openly admitted he slept in the same bed as kids while he was an adult (Bashir interview), among other things. I don’t really see what there is to debate.
Anything pointing this out gets backlash on movie-related subreddits, which I find wild. It makes me wonder, if Epstein could sing and dance, would he have gotten a biopic too? Would people be defending him like this?
Aren’t “anecdote” and “testimony” technically the same level of trustworthiness?
No…
Anecdote: “he’s a nice guy who didn’t have a childhood so he hung out with children, he couldn’t have possibly done anything wrong, I know him” -> opinion
Victim testimony: “he took advantage of my trust and innocence and molested me. I didn’t realize I’m being abused and it has given me a lifetime of mental suffering” -> data
You can say you don’t trust the victims, but it isn’t the same as proclaiming someone definitely didn’t commit a crime because I have a positive experience with them.
Hmm, point taken. I think they’re both equally valid data points in theory, which is what I was trying to convey, but to your point, “he didn’t molest me” has much less determining power than “he molested me” when trying to determine if he molested someone. I see what you’re saying now.