Much of the recent furor over Bully concerned the MPAA rating. The Weinsteins objected the 'R' rating and chose to fight. Ultimately, the film was rated PG13 (after 3 "fucks" were removed). The Weinsteins also battled the MPAA over the ridiculous decision to assign The King's Speech an 'R' rating. Fighting the MPAA's rating system is something that most cinephiles would support and agree with. The Weinstein brothers were also responsible for bringing many indie films into the spotlight during their early Miramax days (that includes helping Quentin Tarantino with his career). Again, this is something good.

On the other hand, they have mastered the art of the Oscar race and are the masterminds behind several dubious Oscar decisions every year (Shakespeare in Love over Saving Private Ryan being perhaps the most dubious).

So, how will history view the Weinstein brothers? As forces of good for taking on the establishment? Or, as evil bullies?

Probably heroes,cause nobody really cares that much about the Oscars anymore.

They're executives in the entertainment industry.

So probably evil.

The better question... Will they be remembered at all? Or should I ask how far in the future are you projecting? 20 years? 50 years? a hundred?

I'm going to guess positive since, history has a strange quality of making us forget the flaws and amplifying the virtues of people, in general. I mean you gotta do something really shitty in order for history to frown upon you. Genocide will usually cause long term negative opinion of an individual, but up to that, you're usually fairly good. Outside of Neo-Nazi rallies, you're unlikely to be seeing anyone going "hail Hitler!" Thieves, murderers, bank robbers, mob bosses, on the other hand, are often romanticized. (Jesse James, Bonnie and Clyde, The Godfather, etc.)

What I'm getting is your usually lionized, forgotten/neutral, or Holocaust causing maniac. This tends to be even more true of the movie business than anything else. My guess therefore regarding the Weinsteins is that in 20 or so years, in spite of their Oscar gerrymandering, they will probably be remembered positively. That is their exploits against the MPAA will become a legendary battle for free speech, with them as the anti-heros and the MPAA as the curmodgony establishment, or else they will be forgotten altogether.

*Unless*, it turns out the Weinsteins were really secretly genocidal dictators in Africa leading double lives. Than they might have a problem.
-Jeremy

See, they should make a movie of this struggle. The Weinsteins would champion it and maybe the public will wake up to how big of a narcissistic shitpile the MPAA is.

I think you're on the right track here, and no, outside of film historians (amateur as well as professional), they won't be remembered.

Well, sure, but we're talking from a film context here. Ed doesn't mean that they're Sacco and Vanzetti, he means among people like us. And I think they'll be remembered positively.

This for me, specifically the Tarantino part, is their greatest contribution to cinema. But then I have to ask, are the Weinsteins or Lawrence Bender, uh, more, um...the "producer" of Tarantino's films?

Weren't they producers for Sex, Lies, and Videotape? Wasn't that the movie that raised the profile in indies? Yes, I agree Ed...this is ultimately a good thing. Outweighs the crap I hear about them and the Oscars...for me at least.

Seems to me that if you want someone to back your film it should be The Weinsteins.

Regardless of their overall intention (money aside) and their certain "manipulation" when it comes to awards season, they will put everything they have behind their movies.

Is that necessarily a good thing? No. But if they can give some great films the warm light of day, I can't be overwhelmingly negative.