Skip to main content

View Diary: I don't GET Woody Allen (244 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  asdf (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    coachster, Creosote

    Is it kind? is it true? is it necessary?

    •  it is true, it is necessary because i will NEVER (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Kevskos, susans

      give child molesters a pass because they make movies.

      is that clear enough for you?

      people keep posting that he does autobiography as a neurotic, insecure bladabladabladaaaaa.... and nothing could be further from the truth.

      that is an ACT, people - he could have worked for ringling brothers - he is that good at snookering people.

      in real life, he is an arrogant prick.  

      i'm a new yorker, remember?  in theatre, remember?  worked there, ran into him.  

      so you want me to color the truth to lie?

      nope.

      sorry.  i do not lie.  especially to give a child molester a free pass.

      EdriesShop Is it kind? is it true? is it necessary?

      by edrie on Tue Jan 14, 2014 at 12:55:25 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  With edrie on this one. True and necessary. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Kevskos, edrie

      And kind to children — little girls who probably ought not to be put in the position of being only eleven years old upon first meeting their prospective husband-to-be in the guise of their mom's boyfriend.

      The Dutch kids' chorus Kinderen voor Kinderen wishes all the world's children freedom from hunger, ignorance, and war. ♥ ♥ ♥ Forget Neo — The One is Minori Urakawa

      by lotlizard on Tue Jan 14, 2014 at 02:46:11 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Having been falsely accused myself, (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        live1, UnionMade, Creosote, itsjim

        of harassment -- I am leery of making definitive judgements. I know how easy it is to say something horrible and salacious and there is a certain segment eager to believe any such indictment no matter how little evidence (or clear evidence against). People throw the words "child molester" out there and that is something we just don't know. What we DO know is that at the very least he carried on an affair with his girlfriend(not wife)'s adopted ADULT daughter (she was 20 at the time). Tacky, certainly -- disgusting, hard to argue with. But not illegal, not incest and not pedophilia. He never adopted or raised her, never lived with Farrow, and consequently with her daughter.

        And yes, Dylan "accused" him but the video that contains that accusation also contains Farrow coaching the child. Unwise at best, devious at worst...especially as you consider that Farrow was (and is) unhinged. What kind of mother declares publicly that she's not sure who her kid's father is? Why would she put him in the spotlight like that?

        Those kids are messed up as the product of two egocentric Hollywood weirdos, for sure. And I'm suspicious and  uncertain of Allen's true nature; we know enough to keep our kids away from him and avoid hero-worship -- but we don't know enough to to condemn and the possibility exists that the child-molestation accusation was created by his ex-girlfriend to get back for the shitty way he treated her by leaving her for her daughter.

        Cad, definitely. Criminal? You might be wrong. I know personally how circumstance can hang a man and be 100% wrong.

        If Jesus had a gun, he'd be alive today.

        by PBJ Diddy on Tue Jan 14, 2014 at 05:14:14 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  There seem to be diametrically opposing views of (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Kevskos

          … the truth regarding this point:

          never lived with Farrow
          Other commenters and presumably the diarist dispute that, asserting the exact opposite: that it's a well-known verifiable fact that Allen and Farrow were de facto living together for a period of time.

          The Dutch kids' chorus Kinderen voor Kinderen wishes all the world's children freedom from hunger, ignorance, and war. ♥ ♥ ♥ Forget Neo — The One is Minori Urakawa

          by lotlizard on Tue Jan 14, 2014 at 06:06:11 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yes, we dispute the "living together" claim (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            pigpaste

            They do it in layers; like global warming deniers. They try the big lie first and then ratchet back if they discover you know some facts:

            H(ater): Woody Allen married his stepdaughter.
            N(on)H(ater): Uhh no, Woody Allen & Mia Farrow were never married. Soon-Yi is not his step- or adopted- daughter.
            H: Well they presented themselves as man & wife, Common Law marriage.
            N: No, they never publicly presented themselves as married or otherwise met the legalities of Common Law marriage.
            H: They were engaged.
            N: Nope.
            H: Well they lived together as a family.
            N: No, never. In fact, Farrow did not restrict her “dating” to Woody Allen. I assume Allen played as well; certainly by the last few years of their relationship they were hardly dating each other at all except for meals oriented around two subsequent OTHER children they had adopted together, and the natural child Allen had been told was his.
            H: They adopted Soon-Yi and raised her together.
            N: No. Farrow (then married to Previn) was a serial adopter (admirable, 9 in total along with 4 biological, good for her) and had adopted Soon-Yi two years before she started dating Allen. Woody Allen had neither then, nor ever, any family or legal relationship whatsoever with Soon-Yi.
            H: Well, Soon-Yi was raised from a small child with Allen as an important figure.
            N: Soon-Yi was about 8 years old by the time Allen & Farrow began dating. A complicating factor here is that Soon-Yi’s birth date, even the year, is unknown, only estimated by bone scan (with an accuracy range of 3 years), and the ages for her tend to use the later birth date (making her the youngest end of the range). She herself does so. She could actually be a year or two older, but not younger.
            ————
            H: Woody Allen took pornographic pictures of Soon-Yi when she was 14 years old.
            N: The pictures were nude but not pornographic, and she asked Allen to take those pictures when she was 20 years old (she says; others say 19; 18 would have been legal even if they WERE pornographic).
            H; 15 years old, 16 years old, 17 years old.
            N: No. No. No. The principals say no and no evidence to the contrary.
            ———————
            H: Woody Allen molested another child, seven years old.
            N: Mia Farrow claims that, but a panel of experts employed during the custody battle said no sign.
            H: But the judge said he was guilty anyway.
            N: No, the judge said he found the panel’s findings inconclusive. Allen has never been found guilty of anything along these lines; and these are custody charges anyway.
            H: But there were witnesses to sexual abuse.
            N: Farrow’s friends and family have described Allen’s attention as creepy. He once was seen in public applying sunscreen to the upper portion of the kid’s bottom. Das it.
            H: The child said it was all true, and more, on tape.
            N: Yes; the tape also shows Farrow clearly coaching; and this tape was seen by the judge when he ruled “inconclusive.”
            H: But the kid says so still, to this day.
            N: Yes, the whole Farrow side of the family (and friends) fervently declare it. Continually. Frank Sinatra offered to have some guys break Woody Allen’s legs. They BELIEVE it.
            H: Attic, attic, attic!!!
            N: The period of time (the two were out of sight) was between 5-15 minutes and most likely at the short end; no evidence it ever happened. Allen says he didn’t even know where the attic was and is claustrophobic and would never go there if he knew. It’s possible. Score one for the haters.

            •  Correcting my error: 5 years old instead of 7 (0+ / 0-)

              I said Mia Farrow claimed Allen sexually abused the child at age 7. The child was 7 when Farrow made the accusation but she said it had happened 2 years earlier when the child was 5.

              I wish these things could be edited.

              I apologize for my error.

            •  that's the best you've got to defend a pedophile? (0+ / 0-)

              "haters" - well, yes, i DO "hate" pedophiles.

              and, yes, i DO "hate" men who go after the children of the women they are sleeping with...

              and, yes, i DO "hate" child abuse...

              and, yes, i DO "hate" the betrayal of trust between a child and an adult parent figure...

              and, yes, i DO "hate" that seemingly intelligent people fawn over and make excuses for the sorry example of a human being that is woody allen.

              EdriesShop Is it kind? is it true? is it necessary?

              by edrie on Tue Jan 14, 2014 at 08:31:46 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  did YOU marry your "accuser" - a child who was (0+ / 0-)

          decades younger than you are?

          don't excuse this bastard because you had someone falsely accuse you.  he doesn't deserve it.

          EdriesShop Is it kind? is it true? is it necessary?

          by edrie on Tue Jan 14, 2014 at 07:38:28 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site