Connect with us

Entertainment

Amy Schumer Doubles Down on Horrific Posts Amidst Israel Bombing of Gaza, Gets Called Out … on November 2, 2023 at 5:22 pm The Hollywood Gossip

Published

on

In recent weeks, Amy Schumer has been saying some pretty repugnant things in defense of the horrific bombing of Gaza.

Stranger Things star Noah Schnapp took to the comments to cheer her on vs the “haters” who aren’t fans of massacring families.

Obviously, this is a huge disappointment to a lot of Schnapp’s now-former fans.

This is not a surprise to those familiar with Schumer’s history. Having bad takes and loudly doubling down is a huge part of her brand. But, even for her, some of these posts are unspeakable.

Advertisement

Amy Schumer speaks onstage during the 70th Annual Directors Guild Of America Awards at The Beverly Hilton Hotel on February 3, 2018. (Photo Credit: Kevork Djansezian/Getty Images for DGA)

Before we get into all of this, we can as briefly as possible discuss the terrible events that began nearly a month ago.

On October 7, Hamas — a polarizing militant organization that seeks to oppose rule by Israeli settlers — launched a brutal assault against countless Israeli citizens.

This was not a surgical strike at the IDF or any other military target. Attackers went after music festivals and other civilians. Though disinformation abounds, estimates say that more than a thousand people died, with hundreds of hostages.

Advertisement

Palestinian citizens inspect damage to their homes caused by Israeli airstrikes on October 10, 2023 in Gaza City, Gaza. Almost 800 people have died in Gaza, and 187, 000 displaced, after Israel launched sustained retaliatory air strikes after a large-scale attack by Hamas. (Photo Credit: Ahmad Hasaballah/Getty Images)

That is a harrowing situation. Hamas says that the attacks are retaliation against Israel’s apartheid regime, but children and other civilians are not responsible for their government’s crimes. Most of us do not know how far we might go if we were living under apartheid. Hopefully, we can all agree that targeting children is simply a line that we would not cross.

Ordinarily, this attack would be the primary focus of any and all discourse for weeks to come. However, Israel’s response to the attack was to begin a massive and seemingly indiscriminate bombing campaign against the civilians of Gaza.

Estimates over a week ago said that 8,000 Palestinians had died. Tragically, those numbers have certainly grown.

Advertisement

People sift through the smouldering rubble of buildings destroyed in an Israeli strike on the Bureij refugee camp in the central Gaza Strip on November 2, 2023. (Photo Credit: MAHMUD HAMS/AFP via Getty Images)

Previously, human rights experts referred to Israel’s apartheid treatment of Palestinians as “peacetime ethnic cleansing,” characterizing Gaza itself as an “open-air prison” where Palestinians suffered under Israeli occupation for the crime of being born in a country that someone else wanted.

Now, that has changed — because the “peacetime” line no longer applies. About half of the private residences and a series of hospitals in Gaza have been destroyed by Israeli bombings.

It is difficult to understand the pretext that these strikes are merely targeting Hamas. Particularly with thousands of children dead, and with members of Israel’s own government publicly declaring their intentions.

Advertisement

Palestinians gather in Ramallah in the occupied West Bank on October 10, 2023, to express their support for the Gaza Strip. Israel said it recaptured Gaza border areas from Hamas as the war’s death toll passed 3,000 on October 10. (Photo Credit: JAAFAR ASHTIYEH/AFP via Getty Images)

Both Hamas and the IDF have inflicted brutal violence, with innocent Israeli and Palestinian citizens slaughtered in the process. So why are people talking about one horrific atrocity more than another?

Maybe because one is ongoing. Maybe because the ongoing atrocity has claimed the lives of many more innocent victims. Or maybe because that’s also the side receiving money from the United States government as it continues its campaign of terror.

Or, if you ask some very out of touch people — like Amy Schumer — it’s another issue altogether.

Advertisement

Amy Schumer walks onstage at the #BlogHer18 Creators Summit at Pier 17 on August 8, 2018. (Photo Credit: ANGELA WEISS/AFP/Getty Images)

Following October 7, comedian Amy Schumer posted nearly 50 intensely pro-Israel messages to her Instagram feed.

Obviously, in the immediate wake of Hamas’ attack, that made sense and was not at all uncommon.

But many of her posts took aim at anyone advocating for Palestinian rights. Others went further, seeming to characterize the innocent victims in Gaza the way that disgraced former president Donald Trump discusses any demographic that he doesn’t particularly like.

Advertisement

Here it is. The first-ever mug shot taken of a former President of the United States. You’ve made history, Donald Trump. (Photo Credit: FULTON COUNTY SHERIFF)

Some of Schumer’s posts are so vile that sharing them would be in poor taste. One suggested that “Gazans rape Jewish girls.” She was sharing someone else’s post, a political comic suggesting that advocates for Palestinian rights are naive and possibly antisemitic.

Obviously, countless people responded to Schumer’s atrocious posts — after she turned comments back on, that is.

There’s actually a pretty useful Twitter thread on Amy Schumer’s responses and some of her deleted posts.

Advertisement

Amy Schumer posted a catch-all reply to criticisms of her abhorrent posts in October of 2023. This is Part 1 of her reply. (Image Credit: Instagram)

Now, we have to tell you that Schumer has insisted that she does not intend for her posts to be Islamophobic.

She says that she hopes that Palestinians have “freedom from Hamas,” and “safety for Jewish people and Muslims as well.”

Schumer insisted that she is not a proponent of the ongoing genocide of the Palestinian people. At least, she says that “saying I’m Islamophobic or that I like genocide is crazy.”

Advertisement

Amy Schumer posted a catch-all reply to criticisms of her abhorrent posts in October of 2023. This is Part 2 of her reply, where she seems to speculate on why people “really” don’t like her posts. (Image Credit: Instagram)

Of course, Schumer also seems to suggest that she believes that people condemning her for her posts simply dislike her appearance.

She also becomes defensive about her family ties to Senator Chuck Schumer, one of our government’s most infamously pro-Israel politicians. (Am I misremembering, or did it come up on the episode of The Good Wife where the Senator guest starred as himself?)

They are second cousins. Obviously, making statements in defense of an apartheid state’s war crimes against a captive civilian population is not genetic. It’s possible that they arrived at their dubious positions on this terrible conflict entirely separately. It happens.

Advertisement

After actress Asia Jackson tweeted about how people like Bella Hadid had to speak gently about Palestinian rights during the ongoing ethnic cleansing in October 2023, she made reference to Amy Schumer’s apparent characterization of Gazans as rapists. This resulted in a very messy DM. (Image Credit: Twitter)

Allegedly, Schumer got messy enough to DM people — including actress Asia Jackson — to confront her about merely commenting on her previous posts.

At one point, Schumer mischaracterized some of the words of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in an apparent attempt to defend the Israeli government’s actions. This resulted in a callout by none other than Bernice King.

Amy Schumer used a video of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. discussing Israel. Bernice King responded with a quote-tweet, expressing confidence that her late father would call for an end to the bombing of Gaza. (Image Credit: Twitter)

Advertisement

When you post a video of MLK to support your view and his actual family calls you out on it, it’s probably time to pack it in. Or at least to cite another source.

That said, she probably should have reconsidered her position after writing “Islamic Jihad missile.” Or better yet, before! (But it’s never too late to start being a good person, fyi)

Unfortunately, Schumer is far from the only clown at this particular circus. Sarah Silverman said some atrocious things (even for her) last month. And actors like Criminal Minds alum Kirsten Vangsness and Stranger Things star Noah Schnapp decided to throw in their lots with Schumer.

Noah Schnapp encourages Amy Schumer to ignore the “haters” on Instagram. By “haters,” he means people expressing alarm and condemnation for her callous and bigoted posts during Israeli government’s bombing campaign in Gaza. (Image Credit: Instagram)

Advertisement

It’s not really a surprise to see so many bad takes. Political literacy in international matters is fairly abysmal, even in the United States.

And, to be fair, some of the people condemning Israel on social media are not doing it for the right reasons. Neo-Nazis have been attempting to co-opt the discussion, not because they see Palestinians as people, but because they hate all Jews and want to single out Israel’s current actions. (Obviously, Israel does not represent the global Jewish population, and even its own citizens have protested the bombings)

One of the hallmarks of proponents of genocide is sampling real wrongdoings by members of a group, then boosting these stories to justify the horrors that follow. This is as true of antisemitic fascists in America as it is of Netanyahu’s regime.

Amy Schumer Doubles Down on Horrific Posts Amidst Israel Bombing of Gaza, Gets Called Out … was originally published on The Hollywood Gossip.

Advertisement

In recent weeks, Amy Schumer has been saying some pretty repugnant things in defense of the horrific bombing of Gaza. …
Amy Schumer Doubles Down on Horrific Posts Amidst Israel Bombing of Gaza, Gets Called Out … was originally published on The Hollywood Gossip. 

​   The Hollywood Gossip Read More 

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Entertainment

Ozempic Era: Beauty, Lizard Venom, Big Pharma

Published

on

The film industry is entering a new body era, and this time, the co-star is a syringe.

GLP-1 drugs like Ozempic, Wegovy, and Mounjaro have moved from diabetes clinics into casting conversations, red carpets, and agency strategy. In the United States, roughly 1 in 8 adults report having used a GLP-1 drug, with about 6 to 12 percent actively using one today. Globally, usage has surged from approximately 4 million people in 2020 to around 30 million by 2026.

This is no longer a niche health trend. It is a structural shift—one that is reshaping how bodies are constructed, perceived, and rewarded on screen.

At a clinical level, the appeal is clear. In major obesity trials, semaglutide has produced average weight loss of 15 to 17 percent of total body weight over 68 to 104 weeks, with some regimens approaching 19 to 21 percent for sustained users. In an industry built on transformation, those numbers carry real influence.

But rapid transformation leaves a visible trace. The phenomenon often called “Ozempic face”—hollowed cheeks, looser skin, a subtly aged appearance—reflects how quickly fat loss can outpace the skin’s ability to adjust.

Advertisement

For filmmakers, this is not just aesthetic—it is cinematic. Performance lives in the face. Micro-expressions, softness, and facial volume shape how emotion reads on camera. A performer may reach an “ideal” body while losing something less measurable but equally important on screen.

Beneath this cultural shift lies an origin story that feels almost written for film.

In the 1990s, researchers studying the Gila monster isolated a peptide in its venom called exendin-4, which mimicked a human hormone involved in blood sugar regulation but lasted significantly longer in the body. That discovery led to early GLP-1 drugs such as exenatide, used by millions of patients worldwide, and eventually to semaglutide.

By mid-2025, semaglutide-based drugs (including Ozempic and Wegovy) generated approximately $16 to $17 billion in just six months, making it one of the highest-grossing drug classes globally. Analysts project the broader incretin market could reach $200 billion annually by 2030.

Advertisement
HCFF
HCFF

Inside those numbers is a more complex human story.

The benefits are well documented: improved blood sugar control, significant weight loss, and reduced cardiovascular risk. But as use expands, so does scrutiny. Researchers and regulators are tracking side effects ranging from severe gastrointestinal issues and gastroparesis to gallbladder disease and pancreatitis, as well as rarer concerns such as vision complications and potential neurological signals.

At the same time, adoption continues to accelerate. J.P. Morgan projects roughly 10 million Americans on GLP-1 drugs by 2025, rising toward 25 to 30 million by 2030. At that scale, usage becomes ambient—part of everyday life across industries, including film and television.

And yet the marketing tells a different story. Pharmaceutical campaigns rely on cinematic language—aspirational visuals, controlled lighting, emotional transformation arcs—while legally required risk disclosures recede into fine print.

For independent filmmakers, this moment opens several narrative lanes.

Advertisement

There is the body: performers navigating an industry where a once-niche diabetes drug has become a quiet career tool.

There is the machine: a pharmaceutical ecosystem where a single drug category generates tens of billions annually, rivaling major entertainment sectors.

And there is the myth: a culture increasingly turning to a hormone-based intervention—derived from venom biology—rather than addressing systemic issues like food access, stress, and inequality.

Advertisement

Technology intensifies all of it. Ultra-high-resolution cameras and HDR workflows capture every detail—skin texture, volume shifts, micro-expressions. As more on-screen talent uses the same class of drugs, a new visual baseline begins to form, often without audiences realizing why.

There is also a clear economic divide. GLP-1 drugs can cost $800 to $1,000 or more per month without insurance in the United States, and coverage remains inconsistent. Rising demand has led to shortages and a parallel market of compounded or unregulated alternatives.

The gap between who can access consistent, medically supervised treatment and who cannot is becoming part of the story itself.

For cinema, the imagery is already there: the Sonoran desert, a Gila monster, laboratory research, pharmaceutical earnings calls, red carpets, and transformation narratives.

A compound derived from venom becomes a global product that reshapes not only bodies, but expectations.

Advertisement

Perhaps the most uncomfortable layer is the industry’s own role. Casting preferences, transformation culture, and unspoken aesthetic standards reinforce a pharmacological look without ever naming it.

No one explicitly instructs performers to take these drugs. The system simply rewards the results.

This is not a distant trend. It is a present-tense shift.

The numbers are rising. The images are changing. The influence is expanding.

Advertisement

The question is whether independent cinema will define this moment while it is still unfolding—or whether the story will once again be shaped by the industries profiting most from it.

Continue Reading

Advice

How to Find Your Voice as a Filmmaker

Published

on

Every filmmaker aspires to create projects that are not only memorable but also uniquely their own. Finding your creative voice is a journey that requires self-reflection, bold choices, and an unwavering commitment to your vision. Here’s how to uncover your style, take risks, and craft original work that stands out.

1. Discovering Your Voice: Understanding Your Influences

Your unique voice begins with recognizing what inspires you.

  • Step 1: Reflect on the themes, genres, or emotions that consistently draw your interest. Are you inspired by human resilience, surreal worlds, or untold histories?
  • Step 2: Study the work of filmmakers you admire. Analyze what resonates with you—their use of color, pacing, or narrative techniques.

Tip: Combine what you love with your personal experiences to create a lens that only you can offer.

Example: Wes Anderson’s whimsical, symmetrical worlds stem from his love of classic storytelling and his unique visual style.

HCFF

Takeaway: Start with what moves you, then add your personal touch.

2. Taking Creative Risks: Experiment and Evolve

To stand out, you must be willing to challenge conventions and explore new territory.

Example: Jordan Peele blended horror with social commentary in Get Out, creating a genre-defying film that captivated audiences.

Takeaway: Risks are an opportunity for growth, even if they don’t always succeed.

Advertisement

3. Telling Original Stories: Start with Authenticity

Original projects resonate when they stem from a place of truth.

  • Draw from Experience: Incorporate elements of your own life, culture, or worldview into your stories.
  • Explore the “Why”: Ask yourself why this story matters to you and how it connects with your audience.
  • Avoid Trends: Focus on timeless narratives rather than chasing current fads.

Example: Greta Gerwig’s Lady Bird was deeply personal, based on her experiences growing up in Sacramento. The film’s authenticity made it universally relatable.

Takeaway: The more personal the story, the more it resonates.

4. Developing Your Style: Consistency Meets Creativity

Style is not just about visuals—it’s how you tell a story across all elements of filmmaking.

  • Visual Language: Experiment with colors, lighting, and framing to create a distinct aesthetic.
  • Narrative Voice: Develop consistent themes or motifs across your projects.
  • Sound Design: Use music, sound effects, and silence to evoke specific emotions.

Example: Quentin Tarantino’s use of dialogue, pop culture references, and bold music choices makes his work instantly recognizable.

Takeaway: Your style should be intentional, evolving as you grow but always recognizable as yours.

5. Staying True to Yourself: Building Confidence in Your Vision

The filmmaking process is full of challenges, but staying true to your voice is essential.

Advertisement
  • Stay Authentic: Trust your instincts, even if your ideas seem unconventional.
  • Adapt Without Compromise: Be open to feedback but maintain your core vision.
  • Celebrate Your Growth: View every project, successful or not, as a stepping stone in your creative journey.

Example: Ava DuVernay shifted from public relations to filmmaking, staying true to her voice in films like Selma and 13th, which focus on social justice.

Takeaway: Your voice evolves with every project, so embrace the process.

Conclusion: From Idea to Screen, Your Voice is Your Superpower

Finding your voice as a filmmaker takes time, courage, and commitment. By exploring your influences, taking risks, and staying true to your perspective, you’ll craft stories that not only stand out but also resonate deeply with your audience.

Bolanle Media is excited to announce our partnership with The Newbie Film Academy to offer comprehensive courses designed specifically for aspiring screenwriters. Whether you’re just starting out or looking to enhance your skills, our resources will provide you with the tools and knowledge needed to succeed in the competitive world of screenwriting. Join us today to unlock your creative potential and take your first steps toward crafting compelling stories that resonate with audiences. Let’s turn your ideas into impactful scripts together!

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

What the Michael Biopic Means for Every Indie Filmmaker

Published

on

The Michael Jackson biopic Michael is more than celebrity drama; it is a real-time lesson in how legal decisions can quietly rewrite a story that millions of people will see. You do not need a $200M budget for the same forces—contracts, settlements, and rights issues—to shape or even erase key parts of your own work.

“The Michael Jackson Movie Is A HUGE HIT!” by Adam Does Movies, CC BY, via YouTube.

What Happened to Michael

The film Michael originally included a third act that addressed the 1993 child sexual abuse allegations and their impact on Jackson’s life and career. Trade reports say this version showed investigators at Neverland Ranch and dramatized the scandal as a turning point in the story. After cameras rolled, lawyers for the Jackson estate realized there was a clause in the settlement with accuser Jordan Chandler that barred any depiction or mention of him in a movie.

Because of that old agreement, the filmmakers had to remove all references to Chandler and rework the ending so the story stopped years earlier, in the late 1980s at Jackson’s commercial peak.

According to reporting, this meant roughly 22 days of reshoots, costing around 10–15 million dollars and pushing the total budget over 200 million.

Meanwhile, actress Kat Graham confirmed her portrayal of Diana Ross was cut for “legal considerations,” showing how likeness and approval issues can wipe out an entire character even after filming.

For audiences, the result is a movie that intentionally avoids one of the most controversial chapters of Jackson’s life, which some critics argue makes the portrait feel incomplete or selectively curated.

Advertisement

The Hidden Power of Contracts and Rights

The key detail in the Michael story is that a contract signed decades ago could dictate what present-day filmmakers are allowed to show. That settlement clause did not just affect the people who signed it; it effectively controlled the narrative of a big-budget film made years later. This is how legal documents become invisible co-authors: they quietly set boundaries around what your story can and cannot include.

Creators face similar invisible lines with:

  • Life-rights and defamation: If you dramatize real people, especially in a negative light, they can claim defamation or invasion of privacy if your portrayal is inaccurate or harmful.
  • Copyright and trademarks: Unlicensed music, clips, logos, or artwork can trigger copyright or trademark claims that block distribution or force expensive changes.
  • Distribution contracts: Some deals give distributors the right to re-edit, retitle, or repackage your work without your approval unless you negotiate otherwise.

Legal commentary warns that fictionalizing real events and people carries heightened risk because audiences tend to connect your dramatization back to actual individuals. That risk does not disappear just because you are “small” or “indie”; impact, not audience size, usually determines exposure.


Why This Matters for Indie Filmmakers and Creators

Independent filmmakers often choose the indie route precisely to maintain creative control, but they can face more risk if they skip legal planning. Common problems include unclear ownership of the script, missing music licenses, handshake agreements with collaborators, and no written permission to use locations or people’s likenesses. These are the kinds of issues that can derail distribution, block a streaming deal, or force last-minute cuts that fundamentally change your story.

Legal guides for indie filmmakers consistently emphasize a few realities:

  • You do not fully “own” your film unless you have clear contracts for writing, directing, producing, and underlying rights.
  • Unregistered or unlicensed creative elements (like music and logos) can make your project uninsurable or unattractive to distributors.
  • Fixing legal problems after the fact is almost always more expensive and limiting than planning for them at the beginning.

So when you watch Michael skip over certain events, you are seeing, in exaggerated form, the same forces that can shape an indie short, web series, documentary, or podcast episode.


You do not need a law degree, but you do need a basic legal strategy for your creative work. Here are practical steps drawn from entertainment-law and indie-film resources:

  1. Clarify who owns the story
    • Use written agreements with co-writers, directors, and producers that state who owns the script and finished film.
    • If your work is based on a real person or memoir, secure life-rights or written permission where appropriate, especially if the portrayal is sensitive.
  2. Be intentional with real people and events
    • When telling true or inspired-by-true stories, avoid making specific, negative claims about identifiable people unless they are well-documented and legally vetted.
    • Change names, details, and circumstances enough that the person is not clearly identifiable if you do not have their cooperation.
  3. Lock down music and visuals
    • Use original scores, licensed tracks, or reputable libraries; never assume you can keep a song just because it is in a rough cut.
    • Clear artwork, logos, and recognizable brands, or replace them with generic or custom-designed alternatives.
HCFF
HCFF
  1. Protect yourself in contracts
    • When signing any distribution or platform deal, read the clauses about editing, retitling, and marketing carefully; ask for limits or at least consultation rights.
    • Include terms that let you reclaim rights if a partner fails to release the work, goes dark, or breaches key promises.
  2. Document everything
    • Keep organized copies of releases, licenses, and contracts; these documents are part of your project’s value and proof of your rights.
    • Register your work where applicable (for example, copyright), which strengthens your ability to enforce your rights if someone copies you.

Education-focused legal resources repeatedly stress that preventative steps—basic contracts, clear permissions, and simple registrations—are far cheaper than dealing with takedowns, lawsuits, or forced rewrites later.


The Big Takeaway: Story and Law Are Connected

The Michael biopic illustrates what happens when legal obligations and creative vision collide: whole characters disappear, endings are rewritten, and the public only sees a version of the story that fits within old contracts.

Advertisement

As an indie filmmaker, writer, or content creator, you may not have millions at stake, but you do have something just as valuable—your voice and your ability to tell the story you meant to tell.

Understanding the legal dimensions of your work is not a distraction from creativity; it is a way of protecting it. When you know where the legal boundaries are, you can design stories that are bold, truthful, and still safe enough to reach the audiences they deserve.

Continue Reading

Trending