Mia Farrow's son -- Ronan Seamus Farrow -- really creeps me out!

morbs, come on

it's just funny that the "i'm not comfortable issuing a verdict on woody allen" sentiment even comes up, because no one is asking anyone to issue a verdict. the guy was given a bafflingly tone-deaf celebration on network tv, the brother and mother of the daughter who accused him of molestation called out the celebration and linked to the vanity fair articles covering their side of the matter. unless you work for the golden globes, all anyone's asking is for you to be aware of this shit. if it keeps you from wanting to see his movies, fine. if they don't, fine. but unless your public interaction with all things woody suggests a lack of awareness, nobody gives a fuck whether you think he's guilty, innocent, or if you're uncomfortable of making that call.

the thing is, as with the OJ Simpson trial, I do not give a good goddamn about anyone's opinion, including my own.

prove it

"I object, your honor! This trial is a travesty. It's a travesty of a mockery of a sham of a mockery ..."

http://lawinthereelworld.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/bananas.jpg

also, the thread is off topic.

Woody responds.

https://twitter.com/Maloneyberry/status/215558750893903873

lol @ the onion

?? @ that tweet

Onion otm

any particular reason you linked to that tweet, jaymc?

(and yes, i realize who wrote it.)

"Innocent until proven guilty" is a legal standard juries use to consider verdicts. It doesn't require people to suspend judgment based on known or easily-inferred facts or, more importantly, to act like morons.

right, which is why I always delight when someone throws out the chestnut

I didn't know "guilty until proven innocent" was a Millennial thing, mea culpa.

― eclectic husbandry (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, January 14, 2014 7:18 AM (12 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

you all are underselling morbs inability to differentiate between a court of law and the rest of the world by ignoring the fact that it was all a gambit to sarcastically condescend to millennials, it really demands some sort of lifetime achievement award for ignorance and wrongness

guys quit it you're trampling all over his first amendment rights

tbf his defense of child molesters here is nothing compared to when he gets started on the catholic church

his defense of the catholic church is kinda sensible imo its just wildly out of whack w his moral absolutism about every other thing in the world (except childhood sexual abuse i guess)

you're both garbagemen.

balls, show me one place where i defended child molesters, you motherfucking asswipe

www.ilxor.com

nice plagiarism btw, weird yr spec freelance film crit career didn't gain more traction w/ secondhand goods like that

you're both garbagemen.

― eclectic husbandry (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, January 14, 2014 9:53 PM (27 seconds ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

no youre garbage, man *high fives balls, double over the shoulder birds to morbs as i walk away*

Woody responds

Woody would never say "doozy," "gosh," or "go to bat."

lah di dah

Looking at the evidence: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/culturebox/2014/01/did_woody_allen_molest_his_adopted_daughter_22_years_ago_reviewing_the_evidence.html

ha.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/boy-ive-really-put-you-in-a-tough-spot-havent-i,34949

Turning this into a stalker thread

could we maybe be moving away from "describing things as stalking is hilarious" just wondering thanks

Oh man, if there was any doubt before, the photo with that story dispels it. He is absolutely Sinatra's genetic material

yeah that picture's the first one i've seen that felt decisive

Ronan Farrow, the estranged son and brother-in-law of movie-making legend Woody Allen, shelled out $1.495 million for a swanky Upper West Side pad, in advance of his cable-TV debut, The Post has learned.

Also refering to him as "blue-eyed." Why not go all the way and call him young blue-eyes?

that photo looks like he is in the midst of crooning

kind of don't get why that is a story

this kind of story is all the news is unless there's a school shooting or jennifer lawrence does something semi-endearing.

Like, dude comes from a family that probably has money (although I don't know what his mom's financial situation is exactly), he's a Yale grad lawyer, and he probably got a sick advance on his show. The average sale price of a Manhattan apartment now is over $800K, and over $1.3 million for new construction. Dude is moderately rich and bought a moderately rich dude apartment.

it's the Post

I was surprised he only spent 1.5mn tbh

Not so fast:

First, the Soon-Yi situation:

Every time I stumble upon this topic on the internet, it seems the people who are most outraged are also the most ignorant of the facts. Following are the top ten misconceptions, followed by my response in italics:

#1: Soon-Yi was Woody’s daughter. False.

#2: Soon-Yi was Woody’s step-daughter. False.

#3: Soon-Yi was Woody and Mia’s adopted daughter. False. Soon-Yi was the adopted daughter of Mia Farrow and André Previn. Her full name was Soon-Yi Farrow Previn.

#4: Woody and Mia were married. False.

#5: Woody and Mia lived together. False. Woody lived in his apartment on Fifth Ave. Mia and her kids lived on Central Park West. In fact, Woody never once stayed over night at Mia’s apartment in 12 years.

#6: Woody and Mia had a common-law marriage. False. New York State does not recognize common law marriage. Even in states that do, a couple has to cohabitate for a certain number of years.

#7: Soon-Yi viewed Woody as a father figure. False. Soon-Yi saw Woody as her mother’s boyfriend. Her father figure was her adoptive father, André Previn.

#8: Soon-Yi was underage when she and Woody started having relations. False. She was either 19 or 21. (Her year of birth in Korea was undocumented, but believed to be either 1970 or ’72.)

#9: Soon-Yi was borderline retarded. Ha! She’s smart as a whip, has a degree from Columbia University and speaks more languages than you.

#10: Woody was grooming Soon-Yi from an early age to be his child bride. Oh, come on! According to court documents and Mia’s own memoir, until 1990 (when Soon-Yi was 18 or 20), Woody “had little to do with any of the Previn children, (but) had the least to do with Soon-Yi” so Mia encouraged him to spend more time with her. Woody started taking her to basketball games, and the rest is tabloid history. So he hardly “had his eye on her” from the time she was a child.

maybe it's just me but i find it gross that he went out of his way to address Dylan by her new name

that article is VERY skewed

Τhe vf piece wasnt?

i agree that it's pretty gross. also found it kind of creepy that someone linked to her twitter upthread. xxpost

Why is that creepy?

Pieces that defend Allen on this ALWAYS start with Soon-Yi, so they can demolish all the straw-misconceptions and get off on the right foot by making it look like there's a public witch-hunt against Allen, then move on to the "more complicated matter" of Dylan.

Then there's a lot of "I'm not saying...I'm just saying" kind of aspersion casting, and he ignores a lot of the most damning evidence, and stretches the fact that prosecutors determined they didn't have enough to prosecute Allen into there being "no credible evidence," which I don't think anyone investigating the situation ever actually said but I could be wrong.

she's not a public figure in the way that the others involved in this story are, imo

also the Moses Farrow "brainwashing" quote with no context whatsoever -- a conversation with who? With the author of the article? In reference to what?

making it look like there's a public witch-hunt against Allen

uh there kind of was/is tho

she's not a public figure in the way that the others involved in this story are, imo

oh sorry. i thought you meant mia's twitter.

the "woody doesn't go online" thing in that article explains why he thought cate blanchett needed to do an IT course to be able to do interior design online