Make Your Picks

Allen v Farrow

Tools    





When I first watched this, I admit to being bothered by the age difference. On hindsight, it shouldnít have, as she seemed more then willing to give her consent to such a relationship, despite the age difference. I need to give this movie another chance.
Before anyone argues otherwise, yes, a 17 is more then capable of deciding if she wishes to give consent to an older man.
I could see people being bothered by the age difference, I was more struck odd by the fact that the people in the film's universe never seemed to have any problem with Woody's character dating an underage girl. I guess I expected his character to get all sorts of flack but nope that never happened.



Just an aside: in my state Washington, it use to be 16 was legal, that was when I was back in high school. The state law might have changed by now.



Noticed it, excused it, and have become bothered by my ability to ignore my feelings on it. Never thought I would get here, but I think I might not watch any of his movies anymore. Including Annie Hall, which is a top ten movie for me
Where does one draw the line by refusing to acknowledge the works of an artist? Whether it be an auteur like Allen, a composer, a painter? Picasso, for instance, was one of the very bad boys of the art world, but he was also a genius. He had sex with at least one underage girl, but Iím not going to stop loving & viewing his multi-media works of art. (God knows what other men were up to across all fields of art, film, music, etc.)

Just my viewpoint.
__________________
Iím here only on Mondays, Wednesdays & Fridays. Thatís why Iím here now.



Mia alone adopted Dylan when she was 2 weeks old.
I thought she talked him into adopting the two of them later. Either way I think he became a father figure in her life.

Either way, I'm interested in how that relates to what I said about Soon-Yi
__________________
Letterboxd



I thought she talked him into adopting the two of them later. Either way I think he became a father figure in her life.

Either way, I'm interested in how that relates to what I said about Soon-Yi
Sorry, but Iíve lost the gist of the thread & I have to leave.

Can you explain again what youíre asking & I will get back to you Friday?



I could see people being bothered by the age difference, I was more struck odd by the fact that the people in the film's universe never seemed to have any problem with Woody's character dating an underage girl. I guess I expected his character to get all sorts of flack but nope that never happened.
Manhattan came out in 1979. Way way different times man. Guessing it wouldnít fly now, but I could be wrong.

Just occurred to me how civilized we are being to each other in this thread even though to some itís an extremely divisive issue.



Manhattan came out in 1979. Way way different times man. Guessing it wouldnít fly now, but I could be wrong.

Just occurred to me how civilized we are being to each other in this thread even though to some itís an extremely divisive issue.
If Manhattan came up today it would be cancelled, either that or openly embraced as an expression of personal freedom. (btw, I'm not saying that's my stance!)



Sorry, but Iíve lost the gist of the thread & I have to leave.

Can you explain again what youíre asking & I will get back to you Friday?
Just not sure why him being a father to Dylan has anything to do with him being a father to Soon-Yi. Seemed like you had a reason fir asking me that.

This is from Wikipedia. Obviously not fool proof, but what I remembered about his adoption of Dylan from the doc.




Where does one draw the line by refusing to acknowledge the works of an artist? Whether it be an auteur like Allen, a composer, a painter? Picasso, for instance, was one of the very bad boys of the art world, but he was also a genius. He had sex with at least one underage girl, but Iím not going to stop loving & viewing his multi-media works of art. (God knows what other men were up to across all fields of art, film, music, etc.)

Just my viewpoint.
I honestly don't know the correct answer. This is the first time I have felt strongly enough about an artist to consider not watching his stuff. We shall see how woke I become. Probably not very or enough to be honest.



I honestly don't know the correct answer. This is the first time I have felt strongly enough about an artist to consider not watching his stuff. We shall see how woke I become. Probably not very or enough to be honest.
Sean did you feel this way before about Allen? Or was it after watching the HBO Allen v Farrow?



Sean did you feel this way before about Allen? Or was it after watching the HBO Allen v Farrow?
Honesty time. Deep down I have always felt gross about Allen's personal life. I really knew nothing about the Dylan stuff before this but still did. You might be able to find my Manhattan review around here. I haven't read it in a long time, but I know I talk about my Allen feelings in it.

This sent me over the edge. I am not going to knee jerk and not watch stuff. I will try and take it as it comes. I need to evaluate how I engage though.



Honesty time. Deep down I have always felt gross about Allen's personal life. I really knew nothing about the Dylan stuff before this but still did. You might be able to find my Manhattan review around here. I haven't read it in a long time, but I know I talk about my Allen feelings in it.

This sent me over the edge. I am not going to knee jerk and not watch stuff. I will try and take it as it comes. I need to evaluate how I engage though.
Thanks Sean for being honest. And I know what you mean about taking something and feeling over the edge about it, some things just hit us in the gut that way.



The Adventure Starts Here!
Where does one draw the line by refusing to acknowledge the works of an artist? Whether it be an auteur like Allen, a composer, a painter? Picasso, for instance, was one of the very bad boys of the art world, but he was also a genius. He had sex with at least one underage girl, but Iím not going to stop loving & viewing his multi-media works of art. (God knows what other men were up to across all fields of art, film, music, etc.)

Just my viewpoint.
I think my own viewpoint is that since Allen is still alive, if I pay to see or rent one of his movies, I'm still putting money in his pocket. That would concern me. I think at least one person on the documentary said this (in the fourth episode): that part of the distinction is whether the person is long dead and therefore no longer benefiting from one's patronage.

It's perhaps a silly distinction, but it would likely work for me. I know a lot of people, for instance, have not only stopped buying books by Marion Zimmer Bradley (Mists of Avalon author who was accused of child sexual abuse by her daughter in 2014), but have actually destroyed the copies they already owned. One friend (a bestselling author herself) said she destroyed her copy because she didn't feel right even giving it away for someone else to read. She didn't want to encourage anyone to become a new fan of hers.

I still have my own copy but if I could easily find it (ha ha), I would probably toss it out.

So there are various ways to handle one's discomfort with an artist's sins. I think it would depend on what those sins are--since I believe that we are all sinners anyway. So, an anti-Semite writer would get yanked from my shelves permanently, for instance. As would someone convicted of any sort of sexual crime. Unconvicted? Untried, as Allen stands today? I think that has to become a more personal choice. I wouldn't dictate to someone else how to handle future viewings of his movies, but I know I'm not likely to give him another dime while he's alive. That's my own conclusion based on my own conscience in the matter.



I watched Part 1 of this documentary yesterday and I tried not to read too much of what's already posted here in order to try and remain objective about what I was about to learn. I found myself riveted and I was impressed with the element of balance the writers and directors have brought to what was revealed thus far. I was expecting Allen to be painted as a monster and he really wasn't in the first part. It was interesting that when he first met Farrow, he really wanted nothing to do with being a father. The most difficult part of the watch was watching Farrow. She mentioned that she hasn't spoken about this for decades but it was obvious that a lot of the pain for her is still pretty fresh. I was also impressed with how fair she seems to be trying to be to Woody. Her guilt about not seeing what was going on earlier than she did. This couldn't have been easy for Dylan either, but it seemed cathartic for her too and it was nice to get some perspective from some of Mia's other kids. And am I the only one who noticed Dylan's striking resemblance to former SNL cast member Vanessa Bayer? Looking forward to part 2.



The Adventure Starts Here!
I watched Part 1 of this documentary yesterday and I tried not to read too much of what's already posted here in order to try and remain objective about what I was about to learn. I found myself riveted and I was impressed with the element of balance the writers and directors have brought to what was revealed thus far. I was expecting Allen to be painted as a monster and he really wasn't in the first part. It was interesting that when he first met Farrow, he really wanted nothing to do with being a father. The most difficult part of the watch was watching Farrow. She mentioned that she hasn't spoken about this for decades but it was obvious that a lot of the pain for her is still pretty fresh. I was also impressed with how fair she seems to be trying to be to Woody. Her guilt about not seeing what was going on earlier than she did. This couldn't have been easy for Dylan either, but it seemed cathartic for her too and it was nice to get some perspective from some of Mia's other kids. And am I the only one who noticed Dylan's striking resemblance to former SNL cast member Vanessa Bayer? Looking forward to part 2.
Of the four parts to this documentary, I actually found part 1 to be the least balanced and the most "sensationalistic." That was my impression anyway. I was surprised that they did start to add in quotes and documentation from other people in the remaining three episodes. They do swing back around to more of the Mia/Dylan interviews in episode 4 again, and it's clear they're trying to leave you with your sympathies in a particular corner, but by then the other bits and pieces had added up for me personally.



I believe Woody Allen,






Watching both sides of the story Allen's side has always been based more on facts and evidence while Farrow's side simply has not



Thanks for posting that. I haven't watched it but I haven't watched Allen v Farrow either. I do hope those who have watched Allen v Farrow and have strong opinions about the case will watch that video you posted. Maybe it will give them a new perspective, or maybe it will confirm what they already believe. Either way watching a different viewpoint on such an important topic can't be a waste of time.



I think my own viewpoint is that since Allen is still alive, if I pay to see or rent one of his movies, I'm still putting money in his pocket. That would concern me. I think at least one person on the documentary said this (in the fourth episode): that part of the distinction is whether the person is long dead and therefore no longer benefiting from one's patronage.
Interesting viewpoint. I guess my viewpoint is: I strictly focus on the work of art (film, music, art, etc.) & not on the background or current behavior of the artiste. For some reason, I am able to separate the two.



The Adventure Starts Here!
Interesting viewpoint. I guess my viewpoint is: I strictly focus on the work of art (film, music, art, etc.) & not on the background or current behavior of the artiste. For some reason, I am able to separate the two.
Usually I am. I mean, who cares if the guy gets traffic tickets, right?

But certain behaviors cross a personal line for me. Child abuse would be one of those lines, as would murder. I think Cosby crossed lines for me and I can't listen to his comedy anymore. That's mostly because I probably wouldn't laugh like I used to back before all his stuff broke in the news.

Also, mine is not an unusual viewpoint (of not adding to an artist's coffers while he lives). It's mentioned by several folks in the documentary, and I had already arrived there myself before they said it. Having said this, though, it's not like I'm going to go out and rent Love and Death the day Allen dies, either. I have a feeling it would no longer hold the same place in my heart that it held when it first came out. My interest in all things Allen has definitely waned since this whole thing broke in the 1990s. This documentary mostly just gave me the information I needed to back up a choice I had mostly already made.

Now...having said all THAT...

I am not a person who boycotts companies over every little thing, either. I mean, if I tried to boycott every company or product that did something I didn't agree with in principle, I'd have to live off the grid and grow my own food, make my own clothing, and somehow make my own electricity. And what would I do about the internet?

So I admit I may not be completely consistent in my own decisions. But since Allen was someone whose movies I truly LOVED back in the day, believing what I now do about his behavior just taints all of his movies for me. Possibly because so many of them involve him acting like a character who is so much like Allen himself.



I side with Woody...and here's why


  1. The notion that Woody is this huge star and had this massive backing is well...bull. Mia Farrow through her friends and Ronan Farrow has ties to most major media outlets, from Variety Fair to The Times, to The Washington Post to MSNBC to HBO. The more compelling documentary that actually breaks down the case is on Youtube.
  2. The crime doesn't make sense from a practical point of view. Dylan's belief that she was molested in a crawlspace with a train set going seems like a fantasy from a seven year old. Keep in mind the allegation isn't rape so no physical evidence can conclude that a crime occurred. This also occurred in a crowded house where two witnesses that did not support Mia.
  3. Nanny Monica Thompson and Moises Farrow both claim Mia Farrow pressured them to support the accusations. This is important because unlike 4 year old Ronan and 7 year old Dylan these are people with cognitive abilities to recognize dishonest behavior.
  4. Moises Farrow claims Mia made him strip naked in front of his family. Soon Yi claims she was assaulted by Mia Farrow. Two of Mia's children died due to suicide one due to poverty and another child has a gofund me. None of the children Mia has conflicts with are her biological children and all of her children that she has a conflict with are not white.
  5. Stacey Nelkin claims Mia asked her to lie about the age she ended up with Woody Allen going from 17 to 15.
  6. Sexual Abuse is a compulsion, it's very rare to go from post pubescent girls (teenagers) to pre pubescent ones. And in the 30 years after the allegation not a single other allegation has come about Woody.
  7. Mia Farrow had a motive, her allegations allowed her not only to keep her children and "win" the case but she also got to work with non-profits. She has a job as an ambassador even though she has abuse allegations about her.
  8. Mia was taken in by Andre Pevin and his wife, Mia's friend Dory Previn. Mia broke up the marriage and Dory ended up in a mental asylum. Dory passes away in 2012....a year after her death Maureen Orath writes another article about Woody(20 years later) the GG's and Ronan and Dylan rehash the abuse allegations in 2014.
  9. In 2016 we start to question Ronan's parentage, and Mia potentially committing fraud, 1 year later Ronan launches the #Metoo movement against Harvey Weinstein.
  10. This case has never gone to civil or criminal court, this has only been tried in the media a media that believes women and has stronger ties to the Farrows.



I'd have to live off the grid and grow my own food, make my own clothing, and somehow make my own electricity. And what would I do about the internet?
There was me thinking you did all these things.