Again, all in the contract. If a director is Cameron or Spielberg, obviously they will negotiate a deal for the backend. Why? Cause their films make money. Other directors would rather have an upfront cash settlement. If a director has acclaim, but his films never make money, then why bother getting a back end deal? Polanksi's most successful film made 32 million in theatres, it cost more than that. He is not a box office success, so he would rather get an upfront deal.
Question....would you watch films of people who support him? People who still continue to work with him despite this knowledge? I know they didn't do the act, I'm just wondering.
Way to ignore Rian Johnson...
No, I won't boycott people who like him. He's the one that did it. Other's opinions of the man don't affect me, just the same as my opinion doesn't affect how you view his films.
@ mark f I'm going to say to you one of the only things I've ever heard Bill O'Reilly say that I agree with; pointing out someone's wrong doings doesn't justify someone else's wrong doings. Having endured hardships probably should have made Polanski more sympathetic to others and not make him take advantage of a girl who was far too young to make a grown up decision. Even if that's not how it affected him, it's not an excuse for his behavior. There
is no excuse for that sort of thing.
Now, if everyone could please stop trying to change my mind about Polanski, because
it's not going to happen, can we get back to the questions I asked?
Namely this post:
Wow! I am completely stumped...
When I started a thread about watching films
objectively vs. subjectively most of you said they couldn't be watched without subjectivity. When I say that I try to be objective when being critical of a film I get people looking at me like I'm crazy.
And yet, I stand (near) alone on a subject that is very much separating ones emotional response form their critical one! How does this happen? You're all able to separate the artist from the art but not yourselves from the art? Wow!
I guess I'm as weird as people have been telling me all these years. I usually just shrugged it off, now I have to actually question its validity...
And it really does make me curious why you can't all remove yourselves from the art but you can remove the artist from the art. That truly fascinates me!
Also, as I already asked, is there a line that a filmmaker could cross that would make you double think watching their films? Take my example of Leonard Little or something worse (though how you get worse than manslaughter without jumping straight into murder is beyond me) and tell me where you would draw the line. To me, manslaughter/rape is pretty much it.
And remember, I haven't completely boycotted Polanski's work. I just won't give the man money and I can't watch his films with a completely open mind...though some of you are acting as if I've gone to the mans house to kick his puppies or something...yeesh!