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

And before someone twists my words, I must reiterate that I'm obviously SUPER glad it's out there and psyched it's getting this much attention

unless you think the news shouldnt cover... bad things?!

you really wanna make the issue here that dylan farrow should have started a tumblr

― socki (s1ocki), Sunday, February 2, 2014 1:17 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Kristof could have posted it on his Tumblr instead of bringing it to his editors as a "get"

Then Tumblr would have profited off of it then. She should have just set up a press conference in the middle of Times Square.

this conversation is really stupid

yeah

apology accepted

sorry for the detour yall

Sure but "all else being equal, this is a thing that can happen to some people" doesn't apply because all else IS NOT EQUAL. It can't be said enough that to take some stance of "neutrality" or "objectivity" is functionally siding against the victim.

My point about Annie Hall does not depend on "all else being equal". I'll acknowledge that this might not be the best time to discuss it, though.

"generating traffic" is the new "wildly profiting"

btw milo z, I'm all for defrocking and shooting pedophile priests into space. but keep on hating.

all the 'well mia is just as or more guilty than woody' stuff is bizarre here also, the 'we can't trust the motivations of a woman who adopts children and actually gets angry when she finds out her common law husband is having an affair w/ their daughter via amateur porn' stuff but we can trust the motivations of a man who grooms a child to be his lover and agreed to see a therapist over an 'incident' involving his then 7 yr old daughter (mia says it involved molestation, woody denied it but didn't clarify what the 'incident' was then)(i mean there's tons of totally normal reasons a man might need to agree to seek therapy over an incident involving him and his 7 yr old daughter)(maybe she pronounced vincent van gogh 'like an arab'). i can agree that mia's decisions might be poor or i would've done it differently (and i can pretend w/ certainty that i would've) but the major choices she made here - 1) making woody agree to seek therapy instead of immediately calling the cops 2) not allowing the da to bring charges cuz she wanted to protect her child 3) permitting a clip to be shown and then regretting it - seem to fall more in the 'humans are fallible' category than 'humans are monsters'.

woody denied it but didn't clarify what the 'incident' was then

He told 60 Minutes there was no incident, but then you knew that from the Fandor link i posted, Sherlock.

a man who grooms a child to be his lover

what did this grooming consist of? was it like Gigi?

some of Mia's other decisions also covered in the '92 CBS interview, unless WA fabricated the valentine with the needles and kitchen knife stuck into the family photo.

o right he just agreed 'yeah i guess my relationship w/ my 7 yr old daughter does warrant therapy. it's totally healthy though, no reason to be concerned.'

ran across this quote last night, from 2011 - and aside from the "be careful what you wish for" ironic quality, it's startling how glib and reductive he is about what happened. admittedly it was in response to an awful question, but you'd never guess the guy was talking about a situation that led to him having no access to his children after being accused of having molested one.

http://ca.reuters.com/article/entertainmentNews/idCATRE75L1OV20110622?pageNumber=3&virtualBrandChannel=0

Q. Still, critics like this film. Do you think America is ready to forgive you for your past scandals?

A: "What was the scandal? I fell in love with this girl, married her. We have been married for almost 15 years now.

"There was no scandal, but people refer to it all the time as a scandal and I kind of like that in way because when I go I would like to say I had one real juicy scandal in my life."

Obv the entire corpus will need to be reevaluated

― Mordy , Sunday, February 2, 2014 10:33 AM (2 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

otm i think

the profound selfishness of the woody character that runs through all his movies has to seem just a little bit less funny, now, right? how can you not know what you now know

like i said before, manhattan already creeped me out, and now...

very few of the protagonists from Annie Hall on seemed meant to be wholly, or even mostly, admirable

These accusations have been out for twenty years, no reason for anyone to work themselves into a panic over reassessing his oeuvre. And that'd be a silly concern even if the claims were new.

but let's talk about Ronan, and how cannily he's promoting his MSNBC show.

Like if anything take it as an excuse to NOT spend time thinking about his movies

the character(s) meant to be funny. i'm not really gonna be laughing for a while.

i don't see why we shouldn't be talking about his work, it's the only way i know the man. the only reason we know as much as we do is because he and the mother involved were both public figures and artists.

working out your exact calculus of how sure you are of the horror of what he did vs how deeply you are still moved by what he made is basically pointless, sure. even tho i suppose that's what i'm doing.

but let's talk about Ronan, and how cannily he's promoting his MSNBC show.

― images of war violence and historical smoking (Dr Morbius), Sunday, February 2, 2014 1:11 PM (5 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

ok, how cannily is ronan promoting his msnbc show? really seems like a key thing to be thinking about.

ive been following this closely enough and i had no idea he even had an msnbc show, but please go ahead and find some novel ways to cast blame on the accusers here

i'm saying no matter what the truth is, the tweeting/jokes thing on his part is not in the best of taste, nor a display of compassion toward his sister.

You really weren't saying that. At all. You may have been thinking it, but that statement bears literally no relation to what you said.

oh NOW your moral judgment kicks in

Binge reading feminist legal scholar Aya Gruber at the moment because of this. There are many more positions than two here, and I am not gonna argue the point with you all, but would suggest some of you read her as well.

Bottom line is that the anti-rape culture position of "believe the victim first and more" isn't solely a position of righteousness if you are willing to think about lynchings in the American South within living memory, and it isn't the only alternative to shaming and calling the accuser a liar and believing wholeheartedly in the innocence of the accused.

i'm saying no matter what the truth is, the tweeting/jokes thing on his part is not in the best of taste, nor a display of compassion toward his sister.

― images of war violence and historical smoking (Dr Morbius), Sunday, February 2, 2014 12:28 PM (14 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

irony like this should be illegal

as one of the few ppl here who have a pedophile piece of shit for a father, can i say fuck u morbz now and forever

im gonna go ahead and say that

you dont get to tell ppl how to feel about how their shithole parents wrecked their psyches, even when those children are grown.

I'm sorry. I've v possibly said things badly if you think I'm being tolerant of crime.

In case I have never made my position in regard to child abuse clear in the past, I'd like to say ftr that I'm against it.

it has been kinda shocking and horrifying to see here and elsewhere (ie facebook) ppl actually doing the 'why didn't she come forward earlier

it's so crazy to read this shit all day and floated suggestions that these accusations emerged before the Oscars, as if THIS was why the accusations came forward in the first place: so Woody Allen and Cate Blanchett would be denied Oscars.

so disgusted by dudes posting that weide article on fb with comments like "Lengthy but lucid analysis of the Allen allegations" "Interesting"

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/woody-allen-responds-dylan-farrow-676435

"Mr. Allen has read the article and found it untrue and disgraceful. He will be responding very soon," a rep for Allen tells The Hollywood Reporter in a statement.

That should take care of it.

allen's statement - It is tragic that after 20 years a story engineered by a vengeful lover resurfaces after it was fully vetted and rejected by independent authorities. The one to blame for Dylan's distress is neither Dylan nor Woody Allen.

by 'fully vetted and rejected by independent authorities' he presumably means 'the da involved w/ the case said he was convinced allen was guilty but dropped the charges because the child at issue was "fragile" and "regressive under stress"'.

It's HIGHLY dubious to look to the movies for "corroboration." That said (I'm going to go ahead do something dubious), IMO maybe the creepiest appears in Stardust Memories.

Two dialogue scenes between Woody Allen (Sandy Bates) and Charlotte Rampling (Dorrie).

1) The couple are in his apartment, affectionately bantering. As part of their flirtation, Sandy starts talking about the romantic relationship Dorrie apparently had with her father when she was a child. NB this topic is meant to be flirty/ sexy. (!)

2) Same couple, same apartment, later date, arguing. Dorrie is furious because (she claims) Sandy had been making eyes at and flirting with her little (13-year-old) sister/ niece. Sandy says she's being crazy, paranoid. Dorrie says she knows what she's talking about, because of the kind of relationship she had with her father when she was a child.

I believe SM was made before (or at the very start) of WA's relationship with Farrow, long before they adopted Dylan, so obviously none of the former is "based" on the latter. But IMO that bit of pedo/ incest fantasy is revealing, nonetheless. Of course it doesn't prove anything, yet is oddly prophetic (e.g. the "crazy" girlfriend accusing him). What strikes me most, though, is the reference (in dialogue) to an incestuous-seeming father/ daughter relationship as something romantic and sexy, rather than something traumatic and despicable. (Of course, the CR character does end up in a mental institution, so there's that.)

The Mariel Hemingway relationship in Manhattan is supposed to be flirty/sexy AND she's endowed with wisdom -- the wisdom of babes. Even before the nineties allegations the ending of that movie is some of the creepiest, most facile things I've ever seen.

I like this piece, though it's probably preaching to the everyone-but-Morbs choir: http://thenewinquiry.com/blogs/zunguzungu/woody-allens-good-name/

― Murgatroid, Sunday, February 2, 2014 5:11 PM (5 hours ago)

i've hated everything else i've read by bady but yes, this piece was OTM.

As part of their flirtation, Sandy starts talking about the romantic relationship Dorrie apparently had with her father when she was a child. NB this topic is meant to be flirty/ sexy. (!)

so i have seen maybe two WA movies so maybe plot points like this (or the plot of manhattan) are old hat to y'all but holy shit

I don't think I have ever seen a WA film. I don't understand how that creepy, awkward, unattractive man is meant to be any kind of love interest. Always thought this. I hate awkward shit like Curb yr Enthusiasm too so I dunno, its not for me.

But holy fucking shit @ anyone in this thread being a rape/paedo apologist about this. Disgusted.

Many xp but

that doesn't seem like something that desperately needs unpacking, cardamon; you are just saying Hm But Truly Who Are We To Disapprove Of Murder?, it's like one of those heroic Jesus interventions amid a stoning only it's "really can child abuse ever really be ~known~?"

Right, just posting to make it clear I get this. My post looks shitty re-reading it. But when I was like 'How should we respond' I really didn't mean that dismissing the allegations, because who can ever truly know, was a way we 'should respond'.

So now - how much of the widespread refusal to believe Allen might be an abuser, has to do with the character he openly portrays so often: an unhealthy, pervy, fucked up man? Do people see someone being like that, and take it as proof of a level of self awareness and therefore self-control?

idk if thats anything to do with it, prob rather the opposite, as demonstrated by the unease ppl have looking back, the more this goes on and the more public/direct the accusations have become- the seeming obviousness of a lot of the references in the work now make it v difficult to effect any separation btwn art/ist if one were of a mind to try.

was curious to see if the person who wrote that 'hot mess' thing quoted above had changed her mind about mia farrow being the real villain of the story and yes she has -- she's decided nick kristof is the real villain of the story.