General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWoody Allen may well be a despicable creep and pedophile. He's still a great artist
with a remarkable body of work.
His receiving the Cecil B. DeMille award at the Golden Globes recognized his body of work and artistry, not his humanitarianism.
I guess I don't see the point in denying that he's a great artist. He's hardly singular. I can both wholeheartedly condemn his as a person and still recognize his worth as an artist.
Ohio Joe
(21,760 posts)It gives me the creeps.
pnwmom
(108,980 posts)But I can't stand to look at the loathsome creature.
valerief
(53,235 posts)BTW, I used to really like his films. Well, except for how the Mariel Hemingway one played out. That was creepy. And, now we know, autobiographical.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)Some will continue to enjoy it. Some will not be able to do so comfortably. And every time he is in the news, people who are bothered by his actions will speak up about them.
cali
(114,904 posts)They'll still be taught in film schools around the world. They'll still be an influence in the industry. Assuming the world is still teetering on a century from now, the same will be true.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)theHandpuppet
(19,964 posts)He belongs in jail, not at a tribute.
Sheldon Cooper
(3,724 posts)And now Godwin's law has been evoked, so this thread is over.
sufrommich
(22,871 posts)DontTreadOnMe
(2,442 posts)end!
kelly1mm
(4,733 posts)Same with D. W. Grifith and Birth of a Nation - racist as all get out but a seminal piece of film history.
MADem
(135,425 posts)You're right--her stuff was rather brilliant--and I get the same creepy feeling watching her works as I do when I flip past one of Woody the Pedo's films...
Your post wins, I think!
dsc
(52,164 posts)and yes, a despicable human being. There are few great directors which are decent people. John Houston maybe, Spielberg, Ron Howard, and that might exhaust the list.
nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)awful. Same with David Cronenberg, though he strikes me as a bit more "normal" than Lynch.
nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)If we dismissed the works of everyone who's committed (or enabled) terrible acts, much of the greatest literature, cinema, music of all time would go out the window. Throwing out the baby with the bathwater, as it were.
SaltyBro
(198 posts)I don't care what he's done for the arts, he should be in prison.
Tikki
(14,559 posts)Something I never acquired
seem so dragged out.
But then, I am a fan of James Jarmusch and John Waters and Penelope Spheeris' works
they sure aren't
everyone's cup of tea either.
Tikki
Skidmore
(37,364 posts)And I felt this way long before his personal scandals became public. He engages in too much navel gazing and lint picking.
Annie Hall remains one of my favorite movies.
I just saw Play It Again, Sam for the first time in a long time (it's now on Netflix). Honestly, I found his whininess more annoying than I remember, but I had quite a few belly laughs watching it and still enjoyed the film over all.
I don't like all of his movies and I haven't even seen many of his movies made since the '90s, but these two movies and a few others will always be favorites of mine.
randome
(34,845 posts)They will fade with time as everything else and someday no one will know who he was.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Rules are made to be broken. Including this one.[/center][/font][hr]
cali
(114,904 posts)nothing more.
Shakespeare? Just plays. same with Moliere. Diderot? Just encyclopedias. etc, etc.
randome
(34,845 posts)...I don't have a problem dropping Woody Allen movies out of my consideration. There are always more -and greater- works of art to fill that 'void'.
I can live without him. I'm sure you could, too.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]TECT in the name of the Representative approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]
cali
(114,904 posts)an important figure and big influence.
and yes, I could live without him.
tabasco
(22,974 posts)Woody Allen and Shakespeare?
Fan boy much?
quinnox
(20,600 posts)Most people who are film fanatics agree on that. And I am not even a huge fan in that I have not seen most of his movies after Annie Hall. But Annie Hall is a masterpiece of comedy.
And yea, sometimes artist types do things way outside the norm, and sometimes they are self-destructive. That is fairly common.
GeorgeGist
(25,322 posts)LordGlenconner
(1,348 posts)I don't get the appeal either.
LeftinOH
(5,355 posts)but it's for grown-ups... with grown-up tastes. No sight-gags, no fart jokes. Some of his work is over the heads of many people. And.. I'm referring to his work here, not his personal life.
LordGlenconner
(1,348 posts)If you don't like Woody's art you're a moron or a child or both.
Got it.
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)WillowTree
(5,325 posts)El_Johns
(1,805 posts)stopbush
(24,396 posts)I wonder what it must be like to be a director and watch yourself acting like crap in your own films.
HangOnKids
(4,291 posts)We might find out.
stopbush
(24,396 posts)What a childish response.
HangOnKids
(4,291 posts)JCMach1
(27,559 posts)he will always be remembered in the history of film...
also a very funny actor...
Gormy Cuss
(30,884 posts)Gormy Cuss
(30,884 posts)That was a careful word choice.
Throd
(7,208 posts)BainsBane
(53,035 posts)I know we have never talked much, but I'm glad to see you back posting.
cali
(114,904 posts)boston bean
(36,222 posts)YMMV of course.
librechik
(30,674 posts)CBGLuthier
(12,723 posts)Anyone who believes those allegations is a fool.
And as for Mia Farrow, she now brags about sleeping around on Allen and possibly fathering a kid with someone else. So much for her fucking high horse.
Squinch
(50,956 posts)It has nothing to do with Mia's horses.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)Boudica the Lyoness
(2,899 posts)I also don't think that sleeping around, with other adults, behind your husbands back, equals what he did.
NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)The flow. The script. The camera angles. The cast. Has he ever been to San Francisco? It looked like Jersey, from accents to actors to the cast (does he know of no other culture?). God, I thought I was watching an old 80's flick. I don't think he can keep up with the film industry's innovation. He is old news.
I haven't seen anything good from him since Match Point, and that was just a Dostoevesky rip-off
WeekendWarrior
(1,437 posts)And you have no idea what you're talking about.
NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)If an unknown writer and director did it, you wouldn't of heard of it.
Its been done before. Its been done better. We expect more these days.
lady lib
(2,933 posts)It was weirdly out of both place and time. The only saving grace was Cate Blanchett's acting.
WeekendWarrior
(1,437 posts)But in this case you're just wrong.
MADem
(135,425 posts)I think I can find films to watch that aren't made by pedophiles. I just won't support him in any way, shape or form.
Also, it's no great sacrifice to eschew his work--I find his efforts a bit whiney, tiresome and long-winded. I think the award has as much to do with an element of insular navel-gazing that Hollywoodland sometimes likes to indulge in, as any actual talent. Keep repeating "He's a genius!" enough, and if the "right people" start saying it, he gets the prize.
I don't find his stuff particularly compelling; it's not "awful" but he's not in my Top Ten, or even Twenty.
cali
(114,904 posts)It's about his impact on the field. And that has been considerable. That's what the award was for.
MADem
(135,425 posts)I think that the award givers have the attitude that the Emperor's clothes are rich and beautifully tailored.
I think this odious pedophile will end up -- through the very long lens of history -- having far less impact on the field than, say, DW Griffith--an odious racist whose films are rarely viewed outside of film schools and the odd late night on Turner Classic films. However, DW at least advanced the way films are made with feature length efforts, use of narrative, etc. That said, if you mention his name, most people will think you're talking about Andy of Mayberry. No one knows who he is and they haven't seen any of his films.
I think Woody the Pedo will eventually be consigned to the dustbin of film history, known only to film school students who will recognize "whining" as a recurring feature in his efforts.
cali
(114,904 posts)is not addressing his impact on the field in the slightest bit. His impact on the field can be seen in any academic setting, for instance. Again, your personal opinion is not defining. I think you're letting your personal distaste get in the way.
MADem
(135,425 posts)the Awards Committees'--is "controlling." That's for history to decide.
Here's the point I made:
That doesn't mean anyone will give a half-shit about him twenty years after he's dead...or even sooner.
Ask any kid who Maurice Chevalier is -- he got that award, too, and most young people today have never heard of him and couldn't pick him out of a photo line-up on a bet. Woody, of course, knows just who he is--Maurice sang one of his favorite songs:
Squinch
(50,956 posts)My sister loves it and slaps me when I say that, but Jeez!
MADem
(135,425 posts)cretin....).
But really--unless you're of a certain age, who remembers him? He got the damn award for being "charmant," and "avuncular" and having a twinkle in his eye, and because, at the time, "all things French" were the rage.
He was a young and handsome French song-n-dance man who grew into a stately, older, pleasant looking song-n-dance man. He wore straw hats with a tux--ooh, la la! He sang some tunes that didn't demand much of a voice.
And he got the same doggone award...!
As for the movie, I agree with you--it wouldn't surprise me if it's on Cardinal Law's "fav" list!
dorkzilla
(5,141 posts)From some truly talented film makers:
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x7clor_les-marx-et-mooorice-chevalier_shortfilms.
Edited to add: I don't know why the thumbnail isn't posting...it's worth the click!
MADem
(135,425 posts)Vattel
(9,289 posts)Falling in love with a 17-yr-old is not pedophilia.
quinnox
(20,600 posts)I don't really know the story, but sounds like typical celebrity gossip.
Donald Ian Rankin
(13,598 posts)I have know idea if it's true or not, but it's been alleged.
maindawg
(1,151 posts)Woody sees himself through the same glasses that created his art.
Ty Cobb was a bad guy. Fatty Arbuckle was ruined by a conspiracy.
I sure hope Woody did not abuse his step daughter. But I think he probably did.
Vattel
(9,289 posts)nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)And it's been suggested he was having sex with his quasi-stepdaughter even before that age.
Dorian Gray
(13,496 posts)I get it. (Though I do watch his movies)
Xyzse
(8,217 posts)I've only seen a few, and it did not impress me. Then again, I may have been too young to appreciate it.
Still, the statute of limitations for crime if it is committed, may be long past.
I can understand that people recognize his worth as an artist. However, when I saw some, I was not impressed, and when I learned what he has allegedly done, I just couldn't.
I don't see his as a great artist out of personal preference, but I have avoided his films since the 90s. I can see people lauding him, but that is on them, I generally detest the guy.
get the red out
(13,467 posts)As a person, he gives me the creeps.
Donald Ian Rankin
(13,598 posts)I enjoy, and will continue to enjoy, a lot of his work, but if the allegations are true (I should stress that I have no idea if they are or not; for all I know he may be being unfairly maligned) then he still belongs in jail.
They could put him in the cell between Polanski and Koestler.
MineralMan
(146,318 posts)His character's inappropriate relationship with a teenager in the film just turned me right off, and I never really watched any more of his films after that.
Reflected in his real life, I still feel the same way. His life has colored my opinions of his filmmaking.
Your opinion might differ.
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)"Happy father's day -- or as they call it in my family, happy brother-in-law's day."
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Not as great as many directors but better than most.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)Or 'Summer of 42' a maybe not great film, but an important period film.
I think Woody Allen is disgusting, but his films are well-liked, and considered important.
Despite that, I do agree with those who say that his personal life will overshadow his works, and he will become a footnote in film history, if that. I'm fine with that; you might disagree, but that's just how society works.
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)closeupready
(29,503 posts)But whatever.
nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)But I suppose he's a sufficiently nuanced character to give rise to more than one interpretation.
LordGlenconner
(1,348 posts)underpants
(182,843 posts)From "Love and Death"
WeekendWarrior
(1,437 posts)The girl he married was neither underage or related to him. And while it may be a little unsavory, there's been much worse.
As for the charges of molestation, they came in the middle of a custody battle at a time when the wounds were still raw.
Re: the girl (now woman) in question, I'm sure she's spent decades being poisoned about Woody by her mother, and there has been not one shred of evidence to prove that he ever harmed heror anyone elsein any way.
That said, I don't know for sure. I can only make assumptions and they may well be wrong. But if my assumptions can be wrong, so can anyone else's. And I refuse to condemn any man based merely on speculation.
Instead, I'll simply enjoy his movies. Which are mostly brilliant.
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)WeekendWarrior
(1,437 posts)and a panel of judges found his behavior unacceptable. And prosecutors say a lot of things. I've seen plenty of them insist a wrongfully convicted man was rightfully convicted, even in the face of DNA evidence that proves otherwise.
Like I said, there's not proof. And, honestly, if a prosecutor felt there WAS enough evidence, he would have prosecuted. Lack of evidence has never stopped them before.
I find it interesting that people here on DU, who claim to be progressive, are so willing to convict Allen in the face of no credible evidence whatsoever.
vankuria
(904 posts)The only thing Woody Allen is guilty of is using bad judgment in getting involved with Soon Yi Previn because she was a sister to his other children. However Soon Yi was 19 at the time, legally an adult and Woody never married her mother so he was not her step-father. The charges Mia made against Woody, that he molested their younger daughter came out during a custody battle.
Mia was involved with Woody for a number of years and only made the molestation charges after she learned of his affair with her older daughter. I believe Mia's hurt, public humiliation and being deceived not only by the man she loved but her daughter as well made her want to hurt Woody the worst way she could, so she accused him of being child molester.
Just my opinion but I believe Mia to be a bit unstable, she even legally changed the name of the son she and Woody conceived together. Now she's saying he's not Woody's son at all, but was conceived from an affair she had with Frank Sinatra(?)! I don't believe this for a minute, just another fantasy she has to rid herself of the pain he caused her.
WeekendWarrior
(1,437 posts)If you look at a photo of the kid, Sinatra is definitely in there.
vankuria
(904 posts)but that's just my perception. And I also wonder how logistically Sinatra and Farrow would've gotten together for this supposed "fling" that produced a child and why they never conceived a child together when they were married. Frank's been married several times but only had children with his first wife and by the time he and Mia could've conceived Ronan he would've been 73 years old. Frank had been sick for many years before he died, suffering from bladder cancer, kidney disease and dementia so it makes no sense that he and Mia had a baby together.
When Mia and Woody had Ronan she was really into him and only turned against him when she found out he was fooling around with her daughter. My opinion, I think Mia lays awake at night thinking of ways to discredit Woody.
countryjake
(8,554 posts)Child Sexual Abuse Clinic, in his decision to deny Allen custody of his children, said that he had "reservations about the reliability of the report."
The report which he was questioning is the one that concluded that Dylan Farrow had not been sexually abused.
Thibault cited a litany of practices employed by the YaleNew Haven clinic that at least one expert put into question. Based on an examination of court documents and the report, he wrote, The Yale team used psychologists on Allens payroll to make mental health conclusions. He reported that the team had destroyed all of its notes, and that Leventhal did not interview Dylan, although she was called in nine times for questioning. They did not interview anyone who would corroborate her molestation claims. Judge Elliott Wilk, who presided over the custody hearing brought by Allen, wrote in his decision that he had reservations about the reliability of the report.
WeekendWarrior
(1,437 posts)there's enough evidence to prosecute?
By the way, even if he did say itand I'm not seeing itwhy should we believe a judge over a group of experts who studied the case and said the allegations were baseless?
It seems to me you simply want to believe Allen did something heinous, so you're looking for anything that might support that belief. Like a bad cop or prosecutor or politician.
The truth is, this was already handled by the authorities, the experts and the courts, and Allen was cleared. I believe in the dictum "Innocent until proven guilty."
WeekendWarrior
(1,437 posts)El_Johns
(1,805 posts)underpants
(182,843 posts)A HUGE fan ... especially the early funny stuff
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)Pretty mean with a clarinet too : saw him play here in the UK.
HipChick
(25,485 posts)Michael Vick comes to mind..
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024323627
MADem
(135,425 posts)Number23
(24,544 posts)This place is so full of it
HipChick
(25,485 posts)Folks won't take Micheal Vick off the cross...but want to give Woody Allen a pass...
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Is there an overlap of those who hold Vick to one standard and Allen to another? I didn't really see any, but I didn't collate the names either.
ProudToBeBlueInRhody
(16,399 posts)....that the same people defending Woody are crucifying Mike Vick.
nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)It's a fine distinction, perhaps, but quite an important one.
HockeyMom
(14,337 posts)I always thought he was dumb and boring. Oh, born and raised in MANHATTAN, Woody.
elias7
(4,012 posts)Mozart was not an exemplary character, and we don't remember him for his personality or personal issues. His music is remembered because of its genius.
I think that if we reject the art of those very human individuals because of their very human foibles, we're not only missing out on much of the world's great literature, poetry, music and philosophy, but also falling into that People Magazine/gossip world mentality that timeless art should transcend.
eridani
(51,907 posts)Nietzsche and Pound also come to mind here.
So you're a horrible person. How does that mean you're not talented? Ask Picasso or Pollack or...or...Woody Allen.
A lot of us have traits we're not proud of, yet we got to work each day and pretend we're normal. It doesn't diminish from the work itself.
I must be clear, although the Outrage Brigade already has their fingers on their buttons, that I'm not excusing, condoning, endorsing or otherwise saying anything good about being a pedophile or a molester or anything else. I'm not condoning being a rabid DU flame-thrower. I am asking you to step back and take a deep, deep breath...
Did you ever like Picasso's, Pollack's or even Woody Allen's art? Did you ever?
If so, how does that make the art you loved, the art that moved you, any less than art that moved you?
Gaugin was a fucking creep, but there are entire museums devoted to him. Not a word of outrage on DU about him, though.
Hmmm. Call the Selective Outrage Brigade!
If a piece of art moves you, then it moves you. If it genuinely makes sick because of the life of the artist who created it, you'd better be prepared to empty your walls and throw away your DVD's and just buy shit from The Mall Art Store and the Disney Channel -- but don't watch ABC Family...that's some fucked up shit!
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Call the Selective Outrage Brigade!
As opposed to the Head in the Sand Platoon?
(Six of one, half a dozen of the other... and both petulantly imply the aberration as the norm. Insert distinction without a difference here)
Atman
(31,464 posts)I asked if certain art moved you.
Does certain art move you?
When you first stood in front of a great painting (or just a mediocre painting done by a friend) and were moved by it -- you felt it, you loved it -- did you immediately wonder about the artist's fucked up life? Because many artists are psycho. Many are not. Many are drunks or dope heads, many are not. Many have serious emotional issues, many do not.
The underlying question remains: Did the art move you? That is all art is about. Observe. Immerse yourself. If you can't watch a Woody Allen film (there are many in which his only appearance is his name in the credits) without retching at the thought of his life outside of the film you're watching, then fine. Don't watch Woody Allen films. But if those sames films once moved you, once made you happy, once made you smile or cry, are they now less than art?
Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)I don't care how "good" his works are.
He should be in prison.
MADem
(135,425 posts)Though I wouldn't call him shitty, really...he's more like a whingey, whiney one-note wonder. He never steps outside a very narrowly defined comfort zone, he's not a risk-taker, except, apparently, in his private life.
He became famous when whingey, whiney introspection was all the fashion, and he articulated that sense well, so people have made assumptions about him and his artistry that really aren't supported over the long arc of his career.
It's like a guy who went to high school in the fifties still wearing the "d.a." (duck's ass) hairstyle thirty or more years later--he looked cool at the soda shop, he was hot stuff at the prom, but after a while, ya might want to try something new!
WillowTree
(5,325 posts)DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)A well-deserved reward, in my view.
Brother Buzz
(36,447 posts)Take the Money and Run, and What's Up, Tiger Lily? The rest of his stuff was to cerebral, or something, for my pea-brain.
El_Johns
(1,805 posts)consider it great art, just a good movie.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)Blue_In_AK
(46,436 posts)I've boycotted his movies for years -- I never cared for his style anyway. Too whiny, too neurotic. I don't go to movies to be "entertained" in that way.
Rex
(65,616 posts)yet is that what he is remembered for? History might (not) be kind to Allen, all we can do is speculate.
FatBuddy
(376 posts)so I can't remember if he advocated child fucking.
child rape pretty much invalidates EVERYTHING about someone as a human being.
Niceguy1
(2,467 posts)I have heard of no trial or convictions,,,,,,
nilesobek
(1,423 posts)So its not the same as saying Charles Manson plays ok guitar and writes some decent songs that are bootlegged from prison.
me b zola
(19,053 posts)This creep married his daughter! WTF is not clear about that?!
Fuck his movies, and anyone else whom wants to kiss his ass~
countryjake
(8,554 posts)After reading this entire thread, I do think it stands as the most appropriate comment.
Waiting For Everyman
(9,385 posts)I couldn't care less about the personal background and never pay any attention to it.
That said, I was never a fan of Woody Allen's films. They have a good moment here and there, but mostly bore me silly. I don't like him as an actor in his own movies. I also think Diane Keeton is annoying and overrated as an actress, for that matter so is Mia Farrow, so their acting is another thing for me to get past in most of his movies... added together, it's just too much to overcome for me to like. I did like Midnight in Paris, and maybe it was because all of those negatives were out of the way in that one.
As to these allegations, it's inconclusive. I doubt that he's a great guy, but I have no particular confidence in the child either, so I neither believe nor disbelieve either of them.
I'm not impressed with Ronan Farrow's behavior either. I think it indicates that he, too, has a screw loose.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)Boom Sound 416
(4,185 posts)Botany
(70,524 posts).... I have never watched or will I watch any of his stuff again. The man is a creep.