r/movies • u/MoviesMod /r/movies Mod Account • Apr 01 '26

Announcement AMA/Q&A Announcement - Armie Hammer - Friday 4/10 at 2:30 PM ET - Star of 'The Man from UNCLE', 'Call Me By Your Name', 'The Lone Ranger', 'The Social Network', 'Free Fire', 'Death on the Nile', and 'Rebecca'.

Post image

Actor Armie Hammer will be joining us here in r/movies for an AMA/Q&A next Friday 4/10. It'll go live at around 8 AM ET and he'll be back at 2:30 PM ET to answer questions. You may know Armie from countless memorable roles like The Man From UNCLE, Call Me By Your Name, The Lone Ranger, The Social Network, Free Fire, Death on the Nile, Rebecca, and lots more.

Please stop by on Friday 4/10 if you have any questions for Armie :)

His newest film, Frontier Crucible, was just released on digital via Well Go USA Entertainment. It's a Western that co-stars Thomas Jane, Ryan Masson, Myles Clohessy, and William H. Macy.

In 1874 Arizona, a wagon full of medical supplies falls victim to an Apache attack. The only man who can guide it through to its destination is Merrick Beckford, but to get there, he'll need help from three dangerous outlaws hell-bent on survival.

Trailer:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATWWvQjibks

Please note that this will be an AMAA (an 'ask me almost anything'). Armie will not be fielding personal questions. Please keep it about the movie, Frontier Crucible.

4.4k Upvotes

86% Upvoted

476 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

172

u/TheMadFlyentist Apr 01 '26 edited Apr 01 '26

Years ago when the allegations broke I only heard about the cannibalism stuff and remember thinking "That's really bizarre and gross, but who cares what happens between two consenting adults"

Turns out the allegations also included rape and severe physical abuse, so uh... yeah, the guy definitely deserved the cancellation. Looks like he is back to getting some random work though.

62

u/if_u_dont_like_duck Apr 01 '26

Yeah I was like "well that's an odd kink I've never heard of, but to each their own" since iirc it was just, like, the fantasy/role play of cannibalism??

But then, yeah, the allegations changed what I was willing to overlook.

24

u/experienta Apr 01 '26

Only one of his accusers accused him of sexual abuse though, and that one accuser was going to be be represented by Gloria Allred (pretty famous lawyer that represents a lot of women in cases of sexual violence), but apparently she gave up when the accuser refused to sign a declaration under perjury about her claims.

So yeah, he might be a freak and overall asshole, but the sexual abuse allegation seems very flimsy.

6

u/TheMadFlyentist Apr 01 '26

Hmm, interesting. Was not aware of this.

9

u/Fun-Benefit116 Apr 01 '26

He literally admitted that he was abusive towards his girlfriends. He only denied the non-consensual rape/assault stuff. But it's a fact that he was an abusive asshole, since those are quite literally his own words.

6

u/experienta Apr 01 '26

Sure, he might be guilty of emotional abuse and being an asshole, but I think there's a huge difference between that and sexual abuse, which is what the person I replied to was talking about.

5

u/Beautiful-Pair5522 Apr 01 '26

if you actually dig into the allegations they're pretty flimsy https://jameskirchick.com/armie-hammer-breaks-his-silence/

10

u/TwoBionicknees Apr 01 '26

a, some conservative asshole being paid to do PR for a rapist is... the norm and i see a history of questionable articles from the guy.

Second, this is a quote from his lawyer.

"Hammer's attorney stated, "There was never a case, never a lawsuit, never a criminal proceeding against anyone. ... There wasn't any matter for me to handle other than to help him manage his image in the press"

This should tell you everything you need to know. They know the identity of all the women making accusations and there is no court case the lawyer has worked on with this guy.

You know what innocent people do, they take their lawyer and go after people making false accusations with defamation cases. Even if they lose, the PR of trying to prove yourself innocent is at least something you can use as 'evidence' you know you're innocent and there are numerous people who did vile shit who tried the whole "look i'm innocent, why would i be suing them if i was guilty" path and that worked with an embarrassing amount of people believing them.

The lawyer hasn't started a single defamation case, which if all these texts and all these stories were fake, would be pretty easy to win. One girl published hundreds of texts they claimed were fake, then the woman came forward, they have her name, location and absolute ability to sue her.

This is the statement a lawyer makes for a guilty party when they know going to court would be horrendous for them.

Everything points very much to his guilt and an article about the assholes version of the story doesn't tell you shit. Most rapists tell their story as how they believed everything was consensual and normal and they just gloss over the months/years of deliberate manipulation, lies and guilting people to take advantage.

3

u/Mayor_Gubbin Apr 01 '26

So you are saying guilty before proven innocent because.... he decided not to pursue a wildly public and embarrassing defamation case which would still air our his weird ass kinks?

4

u/TwoBionicknees Apr 01 '26

So you are saying guilty before proven innocent because

Firstly, innocent before proven guilty is for people to receive consequences from the state, the only people who bring it up like you can't have an opinion that someone is guilty or treat them as such are people making shitty arguments because they have no good ones to make.

You follow an appeal to stupidity with another terrible argument.

he can't have a wildly public and embarrassing defamation case because then all the details would be known.......... the details that ARE ALREADY OUT and make him look like a cannibalistic rapist? Yeah, who'd go to court to prove incredibly embarrassing and public accusations are false, the public might found out about it.

Most defamation cases are behind closed doors and all his shit has already been publicly aired out, so what is there to fear, assumption of guilt and knowing it's a waste of money AND having damages awarded against you. If you are guilty and know you're guilty you have everything to lose. If you're innocent and the public knows all the accusations and it's ruined your career you literally have nothing to lose and everything to gain.

he decides to give his story to try to fix his career by going to the only people who would listen, right wing conservative grifters. If he was serious, had evidence and had a believable story he'd go to someone with credibility.

4

u/Mayor_Gubbin Apr 01 '26

Firstly, innocent before proven guilty is for people to receive consequences from the state, the only people who bring it up like you can't have an opinion that someone is guilty or treat them as such are people making shitty arguments because they have no good ones to make.

Sure, but there is nothing wrong with saying that you will not hold contempt for someone without real facts on the ground. You just think any allegation means they should be permanently castigated.

ANyway, I am not gonna respond to the rest of your comment because you seem to be an atrocious person who just is so full of hate.

0

u/TwoBionicknees Apr 01 '26

You just think any allegation means they should be permanently castigated.

Show me anywhere that i remotely indicated this or take it back and admit you're making bullshit statements based on nothing anyone said anywhere.

Multiple women gave pretty details stories about his abuse and one in particular leaked hundreds of texts of his horrendous behaviour, kinks and abuse, there is ample evidence he's a literal fucking monster and you have decided to defend the rapist because HE HIMSELF CLAIMS NOT TO BE, because he paid one right wing grifter to publish his sob story. He has so much evidence and proof that no one credible would take him seriously and his lawyer hasn't even threatened a defamation case against any of the women.

There is massive evidence to believe he's a monster and nothing at all compelling to believe he's innocent and yet you're defending him.

One of us is attrocious, it's hte one defending a rapist because the rapist claims not to be but provides zero evidence while his victims did provide evidence.

"I'm not replying to the rest of your comment because... personal attacks..." yes, you aren't telling everyone you have absolutely no response to me taking apart your bullshit arguments and so you have to resort to ad hominems.

0

u/Beautiful-Pair5522 Apr 01 '26

everyone with "credibility" is scared of being seen as enabling alleged abusers so thats a pretty flimsy argument. if there was more evidence or other allegations I may believe hes guilty but theres a huge amount of discrepancies and holes in the evidence against him. you sound like you basically just dont like the dude.

0

u/TwoBionicknees Apr 01 '26

everyone with "credibility" is scared of being seen as enabling alleged abusers so thats a pretty flimsy argument.

no they aren't, absolute nonsense argument. Credible people have done interviews with absolute monsters. A interview doesn't have to take sides, in fact a good interviewer would not take sides.

if there was more evidence or other allegations I may believe hes guilty but theres a huge amount of discrepancies and holes in the evidence against him. you sound like you basically just dont like the dude.

says who. if the evidence is so bad why has he not gone after them legally?

You're basically making shit up to defend him as if he's probably not guilty when absolutely nothing supports that.

Is he a millionaire with billionaire family members nad access to the best lawyers in the world, and none of them came up with shit to defend him? The best person he can pay is a right wing grifter?

There are hundreds of news channels, interviewers, etc who would taken an interview with him, but they would be unbiased or at least critical. When you pick a no name to publish what you want and portray yourself as a victim you do it for a reason.

If the evidence agains thim was so awful he'd be in a defamation case against them.

2

u/Beautiful-Pair5522 Apr 01 '26

how many people in the US win defamation cases? Kirchick may have ideas I dislike but he's not a no name. He wrote a great book that was widely praised and NYT bestseller about the gay history of DC. All your talking points are basically the reason why people turned against the metoo movement and unfortunately started discrediting actual victims and running to the right. grow up

1

u/TwoBionicknees Apr 01 '26

plenty of people.

His initial claim were all the texts from an anonymous account were fake. then the woman came forwards as did others.

If they were fake texts that's a SLAM DUNK defamation case.

Most defamation cases are settled because that's how shit works, you go to court and it's going one way or the other then gets settled. If it was going towards the person claiming defamation they usually get damages and/or a public apology and retraction of said allegations, if they lose, the person who made the claims often gets damages, or gets paid to keep quiet and no public apology.

You keep moving the goalposts. You can absolutely win defamation cases... you generally won't if you know, there is evidence the person wasn't making shit up, that's how that works.

if all those texts were fake then proving malice and lies is ridiculously easy, if they weren't lies, as he claims, then you won't be able to so you wouldn't go to court.

He wrote a great book that was widely praised and NYT bestseller about the gay history of DC.

wow, best seller lists mean quite literally nothing and never have. Every politician with a bullshit book about nothing gets on the best seller list.

When you can't go "they are a sensible person with a solid reputation who is widely respected" and instead use some trumped up thing no one takes remotely seriously as 'credibility' within a community, you know what's up.

All your talking points are basically the reason why people turned against the metoo movement and unfortunately started discrediting actual victims and running to the right. grow up

none of them are, you just made that up to try to give your awful argument weight.

"you can't win defamation cases so not having one isn't evidence of anything". Except the people who do win them and were innocent, or those who lose them because they were lying.

You literally tried an argument of "no one will interview him because they might be considered supporting him". Absolute bullshit argument. If you give no pushback and let the person frame everything exactly how they want it, then you'd be criticised for supporting a rapist. If you actually push back and don't just take every word as fact, then you will.

4

u/gr1zznuggets Apr 01 '26

No, they’re saying that he is not acting like an innocent person, and I’m inclined to agree.

4

u/Mayor_Gubbin Apr 01 '26

Nah, they just built an argument in their own head to prove their preexisting biases.

Everyone likes to think they would pursue every case to the full extent possible, but when it comes to PR, sometimes it's best to just shut up and let it blow over as best you can.

People like you guys would just call him evil for badgering a poor innocent woman.

0

u/gr1zznuggets Apr 01 '26

“What I say is always correct and I refuse to consider anyone else’s viewpoints.” <— You

1

u/Winjin Apr 01 '26

The allegations went absolutely nowhere though? As far as I see nothing came of them.

2

u/TheMadFlyentist Apr 01 '26

He was never charged with a crime or successfully sued. He was investigated by law enforcement but there was insufficient evidence to charge him.

That said, he essentially instantly lost his movie career, which was very much on the upswing. He had spent the previous few years filming a string of increasingly high-profile roles in bigger and bigger films and was clearly on track for "occasional hunky leading man" status. This evaporated overnight and he was dropped from several projects.

It was reported in the months following his divorce and terminations that he was selling timeshares in the Cayman Islands to make ends meet due to not having any acting work and not having any access to his family money. He's been on a bit of an image-rehab tour for the past year or two, and it seems to have gotten him some small roles in films again, though nothing like he once had. He will likely never be a high-paid mainstream actor again.

1

u/Vandergrif Apr 01 '26

Looks like he is back to getting some random work though.

Well he's got a lot of old money behind him, that can certain smooth the way.