|
People still work with Roman Polanski
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 18:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 02:02 |
|
|
If you defend woody Allen on any level you are a giant piece of poo poo and part of the problem, hth
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 18:23
|
|
|
If i worked on his movie i'd kick him in the dick on the last day so hard it fell off
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 18:27
|
|
|
bad day posted:He molested and married his stepdaughter like ages ago, why are people even talking about Woody Allen. I can’t stand his movies, they’re not funny, I have no idea why anyone likes them. Some of his earlier stuff holds up, like Love and Death.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 19:32
|
|
|
I was a huge Louis C.K. fan for the longest time, but I'm completely done with him. I'm done with Woody Allen too, but I can't deny that Annie Hall is a terrific movie, and he has written and directed some other good things (but none were as good as that, a true classic).
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 20:07
|
|
|
Louis CK really hurt because I thought his comedy was great at probing around the inner morality of people, but all of that obviously goes out the window when you yourself indulge in the same heinous thoughts your id dreams up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 20:20
|
|
|
esperterra posted:Same, tbh. Woody def has done some skeazy poo poo w/r/t the timing around marrying Soon Yi, which is a weird situation far beyond their age gap, but I can't condemn him without knowing the full truth. I want to believe Dylan Farrow and feel terrible for her, whatever happened, but I also kinda fully believe Mia Farrow is and especially was batshit insane. Here's the thing though: the whole idea of "oh that lady is crazy" is a tactic specifically used to discredit women who speak out. It's why Harvey Weinstein was able to get away with being King Sleazebag Rapist for so long, because he had a massive publicity department behind him that could make make women like Rose McGowan (also someone who has been called batshit insane a lot and has been vindicated over the last few months) look like they're crazy. Woody Allen has some top tier publicists whose job it is to make you think that Mia Farrow is and especially was batshit insane. I'll let Dylan Farrow's words speak for themselves here, and it's why I think this goes beyond "he said, she said": quote:Allen denies my allegations. But this is not a "he said, child said" situation. Allen's pattern of inappropriate behavior — putting his thumb in my mouth, climbing into bed with me in his underwear, constant grooming and touching — was witnessed by friends and family members. At the time of the alleged assault, he was in therapy for his conduct towards me. Three eyewitnesses substantiated my account, including a babysitter who saw Allen with his head buried in my lap after he had taken off my underwear. Allen refused to take a polygraph administered by the Connecticut state police. he was in therapy for his broader inappropriate conduct, which was witnessed by multiple people, not just Mia. A judge denied him custody and, most importantly, there was no credible evidence that Mia coached her. The idea that Mia coached Dylan to say this was an argument concocted by Woody Allen and his legal team to muddy the waters, which worked because of his publicity team and the reputation of Mia Farrow at that time. The real reason that the Allen stuff appears to be more unclear than some instances is because when you say "oh i don't like woody allen because of what he did to his daughter," the first thing that generally comes to mind is the Soon-Yi stuff, which, while creepy and evidence of a broader attitude towards younger women that is uncomfortable at best, isn't illegal. That's because that has been in the media for years and years and has become a part of Allen's broader story in a way that Dylan's allegations haven't, because they were largely covered up for about 20 years until 2014 when she wrote her open letter on the night he was receiving a lifetime achievement award at the Golden Globes. My more conspiratorially minded thought is that Allen and his publicists didn't really shut down talk about Soon-Yi and how questionable that relationship was because if that's the first thing people think of when they think of Woody Allen's creepiness, then it's easier for them to shut down talk about what he did to his daughter because people are too distracted by the other gross (but legal and not really on the same level) thing. a really gross sleight of hand trick. edit: for a more recent example of the same trick being played in the media, think back all the way to October 2017 when we all learned that Roy Moore was a gross molester. While the plan for the actual campaign was to deny everything and slander all involved parties, the conservative media at large went with a different approach: deny the most troubling (and illegal) allegations and counter with "well yeah he's a creep but it's not illegal to hit on 16 year olds and also think of all the good he would do for the Republican Party". Nothing Woody Allen did with Soon-Yi was ever illegal, and so when you try to say "oh woody allen is a child molester" the response from someone looking to defend him is "look, i know he's creepy but he never did anything illegal with Soon-Yi, and plus, look at all of the great movies he's made". DC Murderverse fucked around with this message at 00:18 on Jan 8, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 00:12
|
|
|
Also, batshit insane women can be abused. Mentally ill people are some of the worst-treated people in society.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 00:18
|
|
|
Academy members now regret banning Weinstein so hastily https://pagesix.com/2018/01/06/academy-members-now-regret-banning-weinstein-so-hastily/ 'When Hollywood’s most prestigious organization, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (AMPAS) — the group of nearly 7,000 actors, directors and other industry types who dole out the Oscars — expelled Harvey Weinstein on Oct. 14, audiences applauded. But by acting so swiftly, a mere nine days after the New York Times first reported allegations of sexual assault against the movie producer, the outfit now finds itself facing a dilemma. Put simply: What to do with the rest of them? “Harvey opened the floodgates,” said one male Academy member. “Now the Academy’s drowning in a tide of s—t. They don’t know what hit them.” What hit, of course, were more alleged horror stories about so many other members: Kevin Spacey assaulting multiple young men, Dustin Hoffman sticking his hands in women’s pants, director Brett Ratner forcing himself on actresses. Ben Affleck seen on video groping a female host on “Total Request Live.” Screenwriter James Toback accused of sexual misdeeds by nearly 40 women. (As of this past Tuesday, the Los Angeles County district attorney’s office said it is considering criminal charges in five cases against Toback. He, Spacey, Hoffman and Ratner, deny the claims against them.) And it’s not just new allegations that are haunting the Academy. What to do about two of the most notorious accused sexual predators in Hollywood, Bill Cosby and Roman Polanski, who were charged years before the Weinstein stories broke? Or, for that matter, Casey Affleck — who last year won the Best Actor Oscar — and the two settled cases of sexual-harassment against him? (Cosby and Affleck deny the accusations.) To join AMPAS, you must work in the production of theatrically-released films and be recommended by two members — unless you are already an Academy Award nominee, in which case you are automatically considered for inclusion. Before Weinstein, there had only been one example of revoked membership: “Godfather” actor Carmine Caridi in 2004, who’d loaned out Academy screeners that wound up being sold.) Now, a barrage of petitions, complaints and letters are hitting Academy CEO Dawn Hudson and newly elected president John Bailey about these other men. Some Academy members are fed up with the feet-dragging. “...right now, it’s easier to get someone an Academy Award than to get them expelled from the Academy.”'
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 02:04
|
|
|
I'm not trying to say Mia Farrow is some awful villain or that Woody Allen is def not a creep, just that there's a lot going on in the case that makes things unclear. Hasn't Moses Farrow also come forward before with claims that Mia was physically abusive and coached Dylan for the accusations against Allen? There's just so many sides to the story, and it makes it difficult to try and decipher the truth. Did Allen do it? Maybe. Did a Farrow furious over his affair with Soon Yi make it up to get back at him? Maybe. Were either of them abusive to eachother or their children? Maybe. We may never know. I prob worded my thoughts badly earlier, I didn't mean to brush it aside as if Mia Farrow being a bit unhinged (which I do think she kind of is, though surely through no fault of her own) makes it all her fault or anything, or that Allen himself couldn't have fed into that at the time (and certainly has since, iirc the way he's talked about Farrow has been pretty disgusting whether you see it as a guilty man pinning blame elsewhere or an innocent man lashing out at the person responsible for the claims). Just that it's a muddy situation all around where I'm personally hesitant to take any one side. But again I don't blame anyone who does take a side. It's one of those cases where I can buy believing either. I just don't feel right doing it myself. I feel terrible for their kids no matter what the truth of the matter is. e: iirc the first time the 'mia coached dylan' thing was floated was after he took a lie detector test and passed, while mia refused to take one at all or something. there's a lot going on and a lot of material both of their teams had to run with in campaigning for and against the case. e2: actually refreshing myself on some of this i think child psychologists were involved with the initial claim dylan had been coached, but i can't find atm if this was before or after the polygraph What a loving mess of a case in general. esperterra fucked around with this message at 02:31 on Jan 8, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 02:22
|
|
|
Zogo posted:Academy members now regret banning Weinstein so hastily Maybe some kind of 3 strikes law, since they're in cali 3 settlements
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 02:27
|
|
|
Also can I just say I think it's weird Mia Farrow is still close friends with Roman Polanski, all things considered? Especially if it's true what Allen did to Dylan. Especially when there's zero doubt Polanski is guilty of the same horrendous crime. Again, a mess!
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 02:34
|
|
|
esperterra posted:Also can I just say I think it's weird Mia Farrow is still close friends with Roman Polanski, all things considered? Especially if it's true what Allen did to Dylan. Especially when there's zero doubt Polanski is guilty of the same horrendous crime. ...yeah, that actually is kind of sketch and like the one thing that makes me side-eye her in the situation you would think that having her daughter get raped would kind of turn her against the idea that some pedos are ok
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 02:51
|
|
|
esperterra posted:I'm not trying to say Mia Farrow is some awful villain or that Woody Allen is def not a creep, just that there's a lot going on in the case that makes things unclear. Hasn't Moses Farrow also come forward before with claims that Mia was physically abusive and coached Dylan for the accusations against Allen? There's just so many sides to the story, and it makes it difficult to try and decipher the truth. Did Allen do it? Maybe. Did a Farrow furious over his affair with Soon Yi make it up to get back at him? Maybe. Were either of them abusive to eachother or their children? Maybe. We may never know. here's a pretty substantial reminder of the facts of the case: (i bolded the part that is most relevant to our current discussion) quote:Earlier this week in Slate, I took issue with Robert B. Weide’s much-passed-around Daily Beast piece defending Woody Allen against accusations of sexual assault that have been made by his daughter, Dylan Farrow, who recently wrote an open letter in the New York Times detailing her memories of the alleged abuse. Many readers have criticized my piece for focusing on Weide’s rhetoric and tone, not his facts. So here’s a just-the-facts second pass clarifying five key points that Weide fumbled. this is more than enough for me IMO LORD OF BOOTY posted:...yeah, that actually is kind of sketch and like the one thing that makes me side-eye her in the situation i don't really give a poo poo about Mia Farrow in this case (other than to say that her continued association with Polanski is gross), it's about believing what Dylan Farrow says (which is generally backed up by the legal opinions of judges who worked on the case). Also Woody only did a lie detector test with a member of his legal team, he refused to do one for the Connecticut police department.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 02:58
|
|
|
It's wild to me seeing people in this thread calling the Woody Allen case complicated or up-in-the-air at all.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 06:05
|
|
|
LesterGroans posted:It's wild to me seeing people in this thread calling the Woody Allen case complicated or up-in-the-air at all. it just means that his publicists are very, very good at their jobs.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 06:40
|
|
|
I guess, for me the big thing is that medical team or whatever that interviewed Dylan found no evidence of abuse. Of course, there's some serious weirdness surrounding that group too; it's a bit hard to get my head around. Anyway I don't think it's exactly an open and shut case, but my knowledge is based on like 3 hours of Internet research a few years ago so I could be completely off base.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 07:38
|
|
|
The Dave Chappelle Netflix comedy specials feature some prime rationalizing about the culture of Hollywood. To his credit, Dave sees how bad it really is and knows it has to change, but how seems to elude him because he still wants to look himself in the mirror and see a good guy. The guy who still clings to calling women "bitch" in a casual way decides that accusers have a "brittle soul" and that Iceberg Slim should be quoted as serious philosophy. Because capitalism is really the problem you see, not some guys who just want to get rich off the backs of women.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 10:24
|
|
|
I feel like Woody Allen being a pedo creep has been an open secret for so long that people are numb to it; paradoxically, to the point that they'll deny it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 16:07
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:I feel like Woody Allen being a pedo creep has been an open secret for so long that people are numb to it; paradoxically, to the point that they'll deny it. Everybody in a position to make waves is probably just hoping he finally dies so that they can post their very brave thinkpieces about how they always knew and how concerned they are about this issue.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 16:09
|
|
|
exquisite tea posted:Everybody in a position to make waves is probably just hoping he finally dies so that they can post their very brave thinkpieces about how they always knew and how concerned they are about this issue. I think you hit the nail right on the head and drove it through the goddamned board. See also: how everyone discussed Michael Jackson post death.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 16:22
|
|
|
Speaking of Michael Jackson, people asked earlier about Mia still considering Roman a friend... similarly Cory Feldman has said over and over Michael Jackson is the only person in the entire industry he trusted completely and believes his innocence
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 16:32
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:I think you hit the nail right on the head and drove it through the goddamned board. Post-death, the pendulum seems to have swung more to "Jackson was just crazy and thought he was a kid and people tried to profit off of that by making false accusations" as opposed to people thinking he molested kids. The percentage is much different than it was right around the trial(s) when people were saying "I knew it!"
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 17:14
|
|
|
LesterGroans posted:It's wild to me seeing people in this thread calling the Woody Allen case complicated or up-in-the-air at all. I'm puzzled honestly. Darko posted:Post-death, the pendulum seems to have swung more to "Jackson was just crazy and thought he was a kid and people tried to profit off of that by making false accusations" as opposed to people thinking he molested kids. The percentage is much different than it was right around the trial(s) when people were saying "I knew it!" I dunno man, reading some of the stuff that's come out since then makes me think, yeah, he was definitely a chomo. HUNDU THE BEAST GOD fucked around with this message at 17:25 on Jan 8, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 17:22
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:I'm puzzled honestly. I had studied a lot of the Jackson material for something I was writing and the biggest issue is that there is and was so much false or misinterpreted information about the cases and the surrounding circumstances. As an example, the oft-repeated talk about Jackson letting kids stay in his bedroom is offset by the fact that his 'bedroom' spanned two floors. Or that when kids stayed with Jackson often their parents stayed too. There were absolutely false accusations against him. The ones before his death (that led to him being in court) were certainly that. Even after reading up on so much of it, it's really hard to make a concrete decision. Jackson is a singularly weird case because of his mental state. His family largely leeched off him when he outgrew them, treated him like poo poo and then he spent most of his adult life as a semi-recluse who tried desperately to capture a childhood he never got to have. Trying to provide reason to him sometimes is a fools errand. DrVenkman fucked around with this message at 18:37 on Jan 8, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 17:55
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/VioletPaley/status/950252181965410304
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 19:11
|
|
|
I'm not James Franco so I don't remember that
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 19:15
|
|
|
Its naht true its bullshit
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 19:16
|
|
|
twerking on the railroad posted:The Dave Chappelle Netflix comedy specials feature some prime rationalizing about the culture of Hollywood. Like, Chappelle's whole thing with the transgender joke was kind of microcosm of it, I think. He starts defending himself saying he isn't a bigot, he retells his joke because he wants to show its funny and not offensive, he makes a couple of jokes about himself to try and show he isn't a bigot, and then he ends up finally acknowledging that he feels bad for hurting someone. He seemed to put the entire personal conflict on display. I'm willing to give folks who say "I'm not the bad guy, i'm not the bad guy... am I the bad guy?" some time to get there. I've experienced the same process and probably will again. I think its not terribly easy to uproot your own sense of self and moral standards like that and the questioning and discomfort is probably the right first step. Its people who reject it and fight who probably aren't going to get there. STAC Goat fucked around with this message at 20:32 on Jan 8, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 20:30
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:It played kind of similar to the Stewart and Silverman stuff I've seen. There were cringeworthy moments and obviously their first instincts are to defend themselves and their friends, but all three seemed to basically acknowledge that they knew their instincts were wrong and they needed to work through some complicated feelings to grow. Being a comedian just seems like a bad place to be when you're going through some personal conflict over some very public stuff. I think Stewart on the Stern show gave a pretty good reasoning behind what he had said. I think part of it is that we seem to expect the 'right' answer instantly. It's different asking you or me what we might think of CK, but it's a lot different to ask a friend, particularly if you're doing it on live TV (In that respect I think Stewart was a little flummoxed, but he should've seen it coming). I think when it comes to transgenderism it can just be complicated for some people. Chappelle's jokes to me seemed to be someone accepting of a person's choice, but not understanding it and that's where the comedy comes from. In terms of our modern day conversation about these issues, I think these are the people who are being left behind the most. I have friends, wonderful people without a bad or bigoted bone in their body, but being transgender is a mystery to them. And I think if you go online right now and try and talk about it you can't afford to be confused by it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 21:12
|
|
|
What was his joke
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 21:16
|
|
|
banned from Starbucks posted:What was his joke Very roughly paraphrased: "I totally get why you feel you have to do this, and your commitment, by virtue of its cost (cutting your dick off) proves how real this is for you. No one should ever feel disqualified or disenfranchised for what their brain is telling them is right. But like ew right? Who would wanna see Caitlyn Jenner's gross fake pussy."
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 21:25
|
|
|
banned from Starbucks posted:What was his joke It was something about how he read that Caitlyn Jenner might pose naked in SI and while he respects her choices and everything she's been through "but yucky." Something like that but it was obviously more of a journey and he ultimately does like 20 minutes around that, the reactions, and his reactions. He defends himself a bunch, makes some more jokes including some about him hooking up with a transgender lady when he was younger, and then ends up with a story about reading a letter from a young transgender fan who was hurt by it and it affecting him and making him rethink things. STAC Goat fucked around with this message at 21:33 on Jan 8, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 21:29
|
|
|
I'm glad there's more to it than that first description because that's basically one of those mid-90s shithead comedian jokes about "look, i understand that gay people don't choose to be gay and I respect their gayness but BOY HOWDY I AIN'T SUCKING NO DICKS!"
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 21:33
|
|
|
Yeah, the description sounds like a pretty accurate (to my memory) account of the joke itself which I guess he told on a previous special (I didn't see it). But his material on this special was all basically about the fallout of that joke and the ups and downs as he tried to process if he had done anything wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 21:36
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:It was something about how he read that Caitlyn Jenner might pose naked in SI and while he respects her choices and everything she's been through "but yucky." Something like that but it was obviously more of a journey and he ultimately does like 20 minutes around that, the reactions, and his reactions. He defends himself a bunch, makes some more jokes including some about him hooking up with a transgender lady when he was younger, and then ends up with a story about reading a letter from a young transgender fan who was hurt by it and it affecting him and making him rethink things. The person who wrote the letter wrote a thing about how they feel Chapelle misrepresented them fyi https://medium.com/@tylergfoster/i-wrote-dave-chappelle-a-letter-about-his-terrible-transgender-jokes-55478970b9f
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 22:12
|
|
|
Yossarian-22 posted:Defending John Landis is especially dumb in lieu of Rod Serling being the far superior director Rod Serling is the GOAT in being ahead of his time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 22:28
|
|
|
Comedy needs context and tone to *get* where someone is going with a joke, and can't really be judged by excerpts and quotes. See the initial news reporting about Chapelle's show before anyone actually saw it. Also, the perspective of a black man raised by Boomers about false accusations or level of response to accusations on celebrity, as well as fighting for one's identity will be different than that of someone else.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 15:46
|
|
|
Darko posted:Comedy needs context and tone to *get* where someone is going with a joke, and can't really be judged by excerpts and quotes. See the initial news reporting about Chapelle's show before anyone actually saw it. Yeah, I remember not really being on Dave's side until I saw the skit that made him quit the show. Then you can see where he's coming from by freaking out about it being a skit written by his white lead writer, filmed by a predominantly white crew and feeling like he's making a minstrel show.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 16:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 02:02 |
|
|
What skit was it?
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 17:03
|
|