This Washington Post piece by Jonathan Capehart, which faults Precious actress Gabourey Sidibe for failing to drop everything in order to immediately entertain Capehart’s every whim at the White House Correspondent’s dinner, is brimming with oddly personal attacks. Capehart accuses Sidibe of being a “jerk,” “horrible,” not a “true star,” lacking in “grace,” and undeserving of his “pompoms.” Them’s fighting words, Washington Post columnist who is awkwardly frank about his bizarre sense of entitlement to private conferences with Hollywood actresses! (Thanks to Shakesville for the tip).
But the most ridiculous assertion in Capehart’s column concerns WaPo colleague Jo-Ann Armao, a woman who claims to have “watched Precious three times.”
Armao, a Post editorial writer who has watched Precious three times, was also on-hand to bash Sidibe at the White House Correspondent’s Dinner, calling her “horrible.” Capehart writes:
Back at the table, I sheepishly related the incident to my colleague Jo-Ann Armao. “Oh! She’s horrible,” Armao said in her wonderfully blunt way. She told me that she saw Sidibe at the pre-cocktails and told her that she’d seen “Precious” three times (an amazing emotional feat that only adds to my awe of Armao) and that she thought Sidibe’s performance was “incandescent.”
Record stop. Say you’re in Sidibe’s position. Some lady walks up to you “at the pre-cocktails,” congratulates herself for watching a movie about incest on repeat, and then compares your performance to a light bulb. What do you do? You don’t say, “Why is this insufferable asshole bothering me while I’m trying to get myself a fucking pre-cocktail?” Instead, Sidibe chose a far more horrific response: “I guess I should say, ‘Thank you.'”
Wasn’t Sidibe aware that she was speaking to a woman who has watched Precious three times, an amazing emotional feat that should only add to any reasonable person’s awe of her? That scientists are currently hard at work studying the brains of people who have watched Precious three times in order to determine the evolutionary origins of their innate superiority to the rest of us? That watching Precious three times is now an absolute requirement for sainthood? That watching Precious three times is considered a persuasive character defense in criminal trials? (“I admit that I stole the flat-screen, your honor, but I will say in my defense that I went on to watch Precious three times on it”). That watching Precious three times confers upon you a lifetime exemption for ever being called an asshole, even when you are accusing a woman who was instrumental in actually creating said movie of being “horrible” for acting insufficiently impressed by the fact that you have watched Precious three times?
Photo via Wikipedia Commons.