MCN Blogs

By MCN Editor

BYO Yet Another Weekend In Holding Pattern

Be Sociable, Share!

118 Responses to “BYO Yet Another Weekend In Holding Pattern”

  1. leahnz says:

    i feel sorry for this empty byob, going to the pet sematary hope the wendigo beyond the deadfall gets me

  2. Pete B. says:

    Not sure why this weekend is a “holding pattern” with both Pet Sematary and SHAZAM! opening?

  3. movieman says:

    Who else thought Zachary Levi looked like Jon Hamm’s (less handsome) younger brother in “Shazam!”?
    Found the exposition-heavy first half hour a tad wobbly, but once Levi shows up things really kick into gear.
    I liked the (relatively speaking) low-tech/lower-budgeted look vs. the usual CGI perfection of most mega-budget comic book movies.
    A fun movie that should generate positive WOM, even among fanboy irregulars.
    My “All comic book movies suck!” screening partner–who I literally had to drag to a 4:50 screening yesterday–actually liked it.
    That was a mic drop moment for me, lol.

  4. JS Partisan says:

    I thought about it last night, after seeing Shazam, and it seems like DC movies take a moment to spin up. Marvel gets right fucking to it, but DC likes taking a good 20 to 30 to get everything going. Shazam, really takes too long to get going, but I understand the need to build up that world’s major villain.


  5. brack says:

    They’re too afraid to make another Superman movie anytime soon. Keep Snyder away and they should be fine. It’s a shame there’s no Marvel Studios equivalent for DC (DC Films doesn’t really count, am I correct with that assumption?). They probably would’ve done fine with a DCEU. I’m glad Shazam is well liked by critics and audiences alike. I plan to see it sometime this weekend.

  6. movieman says:

    I didn’t mind “The Best of Enemies” although it feels a bit like an overlong cable flick.
    Henson and Rockwell are both fine (of course), and I’m always a sucker for movies where characters evolve into better human beings.
    But if it wasn’t “based on a rue story,” I’d dismiss it as wish-fulfillment pabulum.
    And as someone who has spent considerable time in Durham, NC, it evinces zero location color. Might as well have been shot in Vancouver.

  7. leahnz says:

    the new ‘pet sematary’ is so dull and bland, lacking in even the barest semblance of style, ingenuity and flair, or sense of place, let alone tension and chills and god forbid, scares; blandly filmed, blandly paced, and quite dumb esp towards the end including annoying references to the OG film (plus it actually starts out ok, which gave me a false glimmer of hope before it falls into a flatline snooze, making it that much more insufferable somehow). i feel sorry for the cast in such a dirge — and this whole ‘getting back to the essence of the book’ gimmick they were selling, my ass, bloody hell maybe it’s time to give actual good writers and inventive, creative directors with a modicum of style that can take a risk and tell a compelling, well-paced story the opportunity to make this mainstream stuff and rage against the great blandening of commercial cinema, bad movies that at least try for something and fail are preferable to this bland, mediocre shit, so disheartening

    ************ SPOILERS ***********************

    church was ok i guess, and there was one good scene: the bathtub, otherwise the whole ‘character switch’ is just a useless wimper, as is pascow who is so critical to the plot (but not here of course, reduced to almost nothing) and the wendigo, might as well have just left it out altogether cuz that was some weak, sad film-making. the movie was so bland i don’t think it’s even worth this barracking but i’m peeved because i wasted my cash on a mediocre snoozefest.

  8. Pete B. says:

    ^ He may be a great guy in real life, but doesn’t “dull and bland” sum up Jason Clarke? He seems charisma-free to me. Are there really folks out there clamoring for the next Jason Clarke film?

  9. Sideshow Bill says:

    Say it ain’t so, leahnz! I’ll know in a few hours…

  10. Stella's Boy says:

    Hoping to see Pet Sematary soon. Watched the first episode of the new Twilight Zone. It’s realy bad. Way too long and repetitive and predictable and obvious. I like Kumail Nanjiani but it doesn’t work at all. I hear the next one is better. Sure hope so. Also watched The Highwaymen. It’s fine. I like the leads and it has some good moments, but it’s also pretty slow at times. Took me two sittings to finish it. Much better is Shudder bringing back The Last Drive In. So fun. Last night was Q and Society. Good times with Joe Bob.

  11. Sideshow Bill says:

    I liked Pet more than leahnz I think but still It’s a forgettable near-miss. The first hour is so rushed that themes and relationships don’t develop. Judd and Louis develop real warm relationship in the original. Not so here despite Lithgow being very good as Judd. Zelda in the original is still 10 times scarier than anything they did here. Also, aside from one moment, Judd’s wife is excluded again. No Timmy Baterman. And not enough Wendigo. Again. Pascow is wasted. The bait and switch scene is VERY well done that it makes me angry that it was revealed in the trailer. I remember nothing about the score, and visually it was very ordinary. Positives: excellent performances all around. Clarke is very good as Louis but Midkiff in the original sucks. And once the final 40 minute horror show kicks in and it deviates and surprises it was fun. Ending was creepy. The cat was great. C+ maybe. A disappointment but a strong ending and cheap tickets have me feeling ok. I don’t think we’ll ever get a proper adaptation. I needs some HEREDITARY level harrowing grief and shit. Few can do that.

  12. Sideshow Bill says:

    Clarke is very ordinary but I think he’s a solid actor. He’s fine here. He shouldn’t be center of a big franchise ever but he’s a decent character I think

  13. Sideshow Bill says:

    Oh yea. Last night I watched DRAGGED ACROSS CONCRETE. It’s one of the best crime thrillers I’ve seen in years. Craig Zahler has made 3 great films in a row. Whatever his politics he can spin a yarn. Mel Gibson…I hate what he did and said in the past. I don’t know if he’s changed. But it’s great to see him acting again and he is fantastic in this. Vince Vaughn is great, and Torry Kittles is even better. The movie tackles crooked racist cops, white male entitlement and the toll of violent crime. There are no heroes. Only survivors. And it’s funny as hell. Best movie I’ve seen in 2019 so far.

  14. movieman says:

    Thanks for the “Concrete” endorsement, Bill.
    You’ve helped make up my mind to watch it tonight.

    Just finished rewatching Bresson’s “Lancelot of the Lake” which has always been one of my two favorite King Arthur movies (the other being Disney’s “Sword in the Stone”). I love “Excalibur” and yes, even “Camelot,” but Bresson and childhood fave “Stone” remain my all-time champs.
    I can’t believe Monty Python didn’t study Bresson’s movie before putting their finishing touches on “Holy Grail.”

  15. Stella's Boy says:

    I agree Dragged Across Concrete is quite good.

  16. palmtree says:

    Sword in the Stone was my jam too. Rewatching it recently was a huge joy and I could recite huge swaths of it even with decades of not seeing it. Such a classic.

  17. Hcat says:

    Clarke is like a modern day Karl Malden.

  18. movieman says:

    “Concrete” was pretty damn epic. It wears its 158 minutes better than most films half that length.
    On the basis of his first three movies, Zahler is one of the most unique (and gifted) genre specialists to emerge since Michael Mann popped in the early ’80s.
    The entire cast is aces (w/ special props to Kittles: I only wish he’d had more screen time), but Gibson’s performance was truly a thing of beauty.

  19. Sideshow Bill says:

    Finally caught up with The Sisters Brothers. It was a really enjoyable little movie. Cast was great especially the already legendary John C Reilly. His range is really something.

  20. Sideshow Bill says:

    Why did Pet Semetary cost $21 million? I didn’t see it at all on the screen.

  21. Hcat says:

    Holding pattern seemed pretty prescient. Shazam opened for Warners right between Scooby Doo and Green Lantern. The high end is looking at around 160 given how the response seems gunienely positive. Shame about Pet Semetary, it will still make it to the black but it seems like a missed popularity.

    Not a good hold for Dumbo. They’ll be praying for foreign to deliver like Fox with Alita.

  22. Sideshow Bill says:

    The more I think about Pet Semetary the madder I get. The pieces were all there but they just blew it. And the cover version of the Ramones classic is piss-poor too.

    $21 million. Good cast. Promising directors. Amazing book. They just whiffed.

    Hope Hellboy is good. Love Neil Marshall and would be happy for him.

  23. Stella's Boy says:

    Neil Marshall yikes. I like him a lot too but apparently he ditched his family and ran off with the young woman at the heart of the Kevin Tsujihara mess and will only make a movie if she stars in it and no one wants to make anything with them. I know that’s just gossip but if true very unfortunate. Hellboy just looks bad to me. A CGI heavy dull mess circa mid 2000s.

    Bummer to hear so many tepid takes onPPet Semetary. Makes me think all those rapturous reviews out of SXSW was a case of festival hype taking over.

  24. Sideshow Bill says:

    That’s unfortunate about Marshall. I thought after The Descent, which is an all-timer IMO, he’d have a hell of a career. So far it’s been all downhill aside from some solid Game of Thrones episodes.

  25. Pete B. says:

    Much love for The Descent from me as well. I’ve enjoyed most of Marshall’s stuff: Dog Soldiers, Centurion, and even Doomsday. (Was really hoping Rhona Mitra would get some continuing adventures outta that one.)

    Hadn’t heard about him and Charlotte Kirk. Yikes, indeed.

  26. Sideshow Bill says:

    I don’t think I’ve even seen Centurion, but I forgot how batshit fun Doomsday is

  27. leahnz says:

    “$21 million. Good cast. Promising directors. Amazing book. They just whiffed.”

    well see here’s the thing, and i sound like the soundbite from ‘fury road’ on repeat at this point, but:
    while i haven’t seen much of his tv stuff jeff buhler’s previous film writing prior to PS (meat train and the prodigy, which i saw not long ago) is utterly unremarkable/mediocre-to-poor; likewise the directors kolsch and widmyer, how exactly are these ‘promising’ directors based on their previous feature films (i haven’t seen ‘absence’), the ‘holidays’ anthology segment and average ‘scream’ tv stuff? MEDIOCRE. not special. no style, no edge. not unique, not above-and-beyond. competent, maybe.

    it’s such such a mystery that these utterly ordinary and mediocre dudes without any discernible gift or above-and-beyond talent, creativity and artistic flair, freshness and ingenuity go forth to make mediocre, dull movies — and how they get this opportunity and get hired is a deeper mystery… (no not even, i wish. and they keep getting hired, in the case of buhler, who i see has a freakin’ slate of remakes coming up, lord help us all). if you want GOOD movies with an edge, reward and hire unique, creative film-makers, not the mediocre and competent.

  28. Sideshow Bill says:

    I used the word “promising “ because I really really like Starry Eyes a lot. It has some style that Pet Sematary is lacking. I was excited when they were hired.

    I haven’t seen any of their other stuff but I’ll stand by Starry Eyes.

  29. leahnz says:

    ok. i’m a fan of essoe and i’ll watch anything she’s in (my boy says should there be a movie about our PM ardern essoe should play her). ‘starry eyes’ is ok, but here’s the thing: kloche and whatshisface clearly trying to ape cronenberg-style body horror descend into cliche, tired genre tropes instead of doing something really fresh and original, for which there was an opportunity with ‘starry eyes’, and therein lies the problem

  30. Sideshow Bill says:

    Fair enough. They should have tried to ape somebody’s style for Pet Semetary because it had almost none. It’s a fantasy match that would never happen but what if Ari Aster had done it? He knows how to depict grief. I’d rather he do original work but still. It felt like the family grieved for 10 minutes before the shitshow

    What a waste.

  31. leahnz says:

    yeah i mean i’ve read the book maybe three times since i first read it as a teen (not for a long time though so just going on memory), and i recall seeing some interview thing with SK saying after he’d written it he was so freaked out by his own sick story that he wasn’t really even that keen to publish it — and i can relate, i can remember the very end with louis waiting for rachel and hearing her behind him like it was yesterday, so disturbing, it really is a dreadfully sad and disgusting tale of familial love and loss — and the excruciating thing is, a film adaptation is such a great opportunity to explore the complicated love of family and power of grief and denial with metaphorical and literal horror (king actually adhered to the proper stages of grief when writing the story). i think ‘hereditary’ managed somewhat similar thematic territory well recently so what a pity we didn’t get another incarnation worthy of the source material, something hardcore, a real gutpunch.
    (personally i blame buhler’s weak, uneven adaptation as much as the lackluster, poorly-conceived and executed direction, focusing too little on or leaving out all together the important aspects and spending too long on a payoff that doesn’t work because the proper build-up isn’t there; the writing doesn’t even begin to capture the love, pathos, loss, grief and horror of the book and there’s a freakin template right there to follow and translate into the visual medium. belly flop)

    i’ve got insomnia so getting riled up about this shit is not gonna help haha

  32. movieman says:

    This question is addressed to “Dragged Across Concrete” fans (spoiler alert for anyone else):

    Am I the only one who wondered just how Gibson and Vaughn were planning to monetize the gold bullion?
    Or how Kittles manages to do precisely that in the end?
    Considering the s**tstorm of a bank robbery with all those dead bodies, wouldn’t there have been a worldwide search for the pilfered loot?
    I’d have thought that anyone attempting to trade gold for cash in that climate would have immediately been turned in to the cops.
    Or am I just getting hung up on semantics?

  33. Stella's Boy says:

    I remember having a passing thought about how you get cash for all that gold and realizing I have no idea and then forgetting all about it by the time it was over. Part of it is those two not being as smart as they think they are but that doesn’t explain how Kittles pulled it off.

  34. movieman says:

    Thanks for sharing my confusion, SB.

    I know it’s not a “big” matter in the whole scheme of things–the movie works so well that pesky questions like that don’t really materialize until the closing credits–but I thought it was worth bringing up.

  35. Sideshow Bill says:

    Wondered the same thing during Concrete but it didn’t reduce my enjoyment one bit. And speaking of the bank robbery…Jennifer Carpenter’s character. Good lord.

    Leahnz, it’s my favorite King novel. It still scares me. And you’re right: he manages to depict genuine greed a familial trauma while still delivering a blood freezing horror show. The flash forward to what Gage would have grown up to be before the accident is brilliant and heartbreaking. It’s a great, great book. I think I will read it again to wash the bad taste away.

  36. brack says:

    The new Pet Sematary worked for me. Creepy throughout, some good scares. Takes time to develop compared to most horror movies these days. Every scene with the deformed sister were cheap scares, but they got to me nonetheless. And yes, I liked the story changes quite a bit.

    Shazam! was a lot of fun even if some of the fights, especially the last climax, went on a bit too long.

  37. Hcat says:

    Haven’t seen Concrete yet, but isn’t Gold the most movable of contraband? Diamonds can somehow be traced, cash is markable and unwieldy, but gold is durable enough to be stored but pliable enough it can be changed into new forms. There is probably a complete and lyrical speech about it in Mamet’s Heist.

    Off topic, but probably the most ingenious smuggling McGuffin was probably in Charade.

  38. amblinman says:

    I am a Jew, and a lefty, and I am SO ready to forgive Mel Gibson. He was my favorite actor prior to us finding out he’s a raging misogynist and racist. Interesting leading man who took interesting leading man projects. “Conspiracy Theory” isn’t necessarily a good movie, but is there any other leading man at the time you could see a) pulling off Gibson’s character and b) would be interested in playing that kind of character in a big budget blockbuster?

    Also, he had some directing chops.

    Anyway, he deserves to NOT have a career because he’s an awful human being. However, what I”m saying here is…I’m okay if it happens. It’s like a Pete Buttigieg quote about Chik fil a: hate the politcs, but they make some tasty chicken.

  39. palmtree says:

    Seeing Mel’s face in any project is pretty awkward since I’m confused how he got forgiven so easily. Having said that, if he’s spending his time now doing films of conscience, then maybe I shouldn’t be so hard on him???

  40. leahnz says:

    just wondering what is ‘politics’ about punching your girlfriend hard in the face, admitting it on tape and pleading guilty to battery in court resulting in a conviction? (with no jail time of course — money, it’s a gas). so weird how when dudes talk about gibson his being a physical abuser always seems conveniently left out

    (ETA ‘dragged across concrete’ being a ‘film of conscience’ is…highly debatable)

  41. Sideshow Bill says:

    Saw US tonight. Thoroughly enjoyed it. Yet I have no idea what he was going for. Maybe I’m getting dumber in my old age. Granted, it’s only been 45 minutes since the movie ended so it needs to stew but it was a bit of a mindscrambler for me.

    I forgot about Gibson punching his girlfriend. Sigh…I don’t have to like him to like his work. You’ll get my Road Warrior Blu when you pry it from my cold dead hands

  42. Hcat says:

    “I don’t have to like him to like his work”

    I’m not sure this is about liking him. We are not talking about Anne Hathaway being too perky, Baldwin being too temper mental, or Bruce Willis having murky political beliefs. He was a violent physical and mental abuser. Now how that makes you feel about his previous work (or current work) is of course up to you, but it can sometimes how it is covered in the press it is like people act like he is coming back from having an Ishtar like flop instead of threatening and abusing his partner. I am not saying people don’t get multiple chances, I don’t have a problem with Downey or others overcoming their demons, but violence is not a personal failing.

    If the gatekeepers allow Gibson back in, does this mean Singer will eventually slide back into work as well? Spacey?

    I’m not trying to be a scold and everyone can of course watch whatever they want. But at what point do you think an industry should say ‘alright, we’re done with you.’

  43. Stella's Boy says:

    Those are good and fair points Hcat. Same with what Leah said. I love Zahler and I think Dragged Across Concrete is very good but I also wonder if I’m in the wrong for watching it because of Gibson. Where is the line drawn? He’s never even really apologized for anything (Blood Father is more of an apology than anything he’s said publicly) and frankly he seems like a huge piece of remorseless shit. Yet I watched his new movie the night it was available.

  44. Dr Wally Rises says:

    I’d recommend Joe Esterhazs’ book ‘Heaven and Mel’ about his experience working with Gibson on the Maccabees project. This was AFTER the Oksana saga and the ‘what are you looking at sugar t**s’ incident, and it’s clear from reading it that Eszterhazs was not dealing with a penitent man, but a deeply troubled individual. Granted, it’s Eszterhazs, and this is a case of one person’s brand of crazy clashing with another’s, but it’s an eye-opening read.

    Ultimately, if you don’t find a way to separate the art from the artist, it won’t be long before you run into content that you just won’t feel comfortable watching.

  45. Js partisan says:

    Gibson, is two guys. He’s the guy from before divorcing his wife, that was a devout catholic, and apparently an around decent dude. No bullshit, but just a solid a lister. Who didn’t treat people like shit, and then he turned older. He got old, started drinking a lot, and became a bastard. He seems to have reverted to his old ways, and people love to forgive. It’s a tricky situation, but it’s not. He was violent and evil to the mother of his youngest kid, so fuck him. He’s rich, he succeeded in his craft on multiple levels, and he should just go away. He made his choice, and when you are rich and already successful, then your ass should just stay fucking gone.

  46. Sideshow Bill says:

    It’s a really yucky situation and everyone here makes good points. It’s a personal choice. What he did and who he is (was) will never far from my mind but I can separate him from his work. I do it with some musicians. Does that make me a bad person? I don’t think so but everyone can decide for themselves on that too.

  47. Bulldog68 says:

    We all pick our personal lines to cross. I can’t get over that line for Woody Allen and Roland Polanski.

  48. palmtree says:

    For me, it’s not a principled stand. It’s a feeling that I can’t suspend disbelief or enjoy myself because their image and/or voice remind me too much of something negative. And unless they do something redemptive (or I simply forget what they’ve done), then I don’t see that negativity really changing much.

  49. movieman says:

    I have a fast and loose–and probably amoral to some–rule with this:
    If I value your art (Allen, Polanski, Gibson, Spacey), I don’t really care what you do (or did) in your personal life.
    If I don’t (e.g., Bryan Singer), adios.
    I’ve never had a problem separating art from the (frequently problematic, sometimes icky) artist.

    I hated typing Woody’s name because the decades-old allegation (which I’ve always believed was cooked up by Crazy Mia in a “Woman Scorned Lashes Out” gambit) was legally debunked long ago.
    Anyone still punishing him (hey there, Amazon) for what was almost certainly a false allegation has been drinking too much of Ronan Farrow’s Kool Aid.

    I’m sure that I’ve offended a good number of Hot Blog regulars, but I felt like I had to get that off my chest.

  50. Dr Wally Rises says:

    “He’s rich, he succeeded in his craft on multiple levels, and he should just go away. He made his choice, and when you are rich and already successful, then your ass should just stay fucking gone.”

    I don’t agree with JS all the time, but that’s a banger of a post. It’s interesting that many prominent people who knew Gibson version 1.0 very publicly came to his support (Downey Jr., Jodie Foster, Richard Donner, even Roger Ebert) after his downfall, but really, he has been more or less finished as a major force ever since. He hasn’t toplined a major box office success since Signs a long seventeen years ago. Apocalytpo was great and did fine but was in production before his arrest, but he had to scratch around in the independent sector to finance Hacksaw Ridge, which has to be counted as a successful movie, but it’s interesting that his name was downplayed in publicity, unlike The Passion and Apocalypto which were sold on his name. The Maccabees never got off the ground. As an actor, Edge of Darkness and The Beaver weren’t hits. He was humiliatingly canned from The Hangover 2. Blood Father went to VOD. Daddy’s Home 2? Come on. All his contemporaries (Cruise, Willis, Costner) are all still either toplining major studio releases or at least still producing interesting work with prominent directors. Gibson is unlikely to ever be on that pedestal again.

  51. Hcat says:

    T tend to tack very close to where you are Movieman, its easier to separate things when you are emotionally invested in it. Now I admit that Gibson and Spacey’s careers were basically done as far as I was concerned so for them to drop off the map didn’t seem like a big deal. I am on the fence about Allen, I agree that he shouldn’t be lumped in with all the other METOO incidents (he addressed them in court which all others seem to avoid, and there is not the pattern of behavior that all the others seem to have, no one from any of his films have come forward), but honestly am fine with his forced retirement since he didn’t seem to have all that much left to say. Allen has secured his place in movie history and the Farrows have managed to smack a giant albatross onto it. If he was guilty I hope his life has been hell fighting these allegations. If he was innocent…well, if you are a Hollywood icon or live in a trailer park you do not break up with someone after a decade (and whose livelihood depends on you) and begin dating their daughter. There is going to be significant blowback. The heart wants what the heart wants, will the Farrow’s family hearts wanted to destroy him. It took decades to finally land, but wow their pursuit of Allen took down a lot of slimeballs in the last few years and hopefully changed the industry a bit.

    Dr. Wally you do make a interesting point on whether being in a direct to video release (or fourth billed in a Paramount movie) can be considered back. Though I would probably disagree with you that Willis and Costner are at all considered bankable stars at this point. Costner is either in a supporting role (and starring as) or has moved on to television and Willis has done like three dozen direct to video movies.

  52. Stella's Boy says:

    Almost certainly a false allegation? How is that so? Maybe liking someone’s work for decades blinds you to certain truths about them. Easier to believe the man and call the women scorned liars when you love his art. Hard for me to see Woody Allen as a victim.

  53. Movieman says:

    SB- The police and court dismissed the charges for insubstantial evidence, so I’d say there’s a good chance the allegations were false. Even one if Mia’s adopted kids—who was in the house at the time the incident allegedly occurred—has gone on record as saying they were baseless allegations.
    As Hcat said, there have never been any accusations of improper behavior brought against Woody from another source. That speaks volumes.
    And who’s to say Woody is dried up as an artist? Clint followed his worst film with his second best of the decade last December.

  54. Bulldog68 says:

    Taking nude photos of your 22 year old stepdaughter, whom you were a father figure to is creepy as fuck. If he was a carpenter, teacher, regular Joe Schmoe, I’d be just as repulsed. Because you’re an artist, you don’t get a pass. At least not from me. I honestly don’t know, and glad that I don’t, how one day somebody could be your daughter, and the next you’re sexually objectifying her.

    Also, apparently black actors can’t play fathers, or office workers, or even supporting roles in his films. His explanation, “Not unless I write a story that requires it. You don’t hire people based on race. You hire people based on who is correct for the part. The implication is that I’m deliberately not hiring black actors, which is stupid. I cast only what’s right for the part. Race, friendships means nothing to me except who is right for the part.”

    I’ll pass on Woody Allen thank you.

  55. Stella's Boy says:

    Good points Bulldog. I’ve never liked Allen or his movies. He’s always struck me as creepy as fuck and I have never had any trouble believing the allegations against him. Don’t miss him at all.

  56. YancySkancy says:

    I’m with movieman on Woody Allen. So he’s creepy. Doesn’t mean he molested Dylan. Doesn’t mean he didn’t either, but if you look at everything, it seems unlikely. I don’t know if he’s innocent, but have no trouble believing he probably is. Also, it’s easy to say “believe victims,” but Moses Farrow supports Woody and claims to be a victim of Mia, so let’s not pretend it’s a cut and dried situation. As for the lack of black people in his films, it used to be that “write what you know” was considered great advice for an artist. Now it can be considered borderline racist. But at the same time, if he wrote a film with a predominantly black cast (especially a biopic), he’d be vilified for being a white man telling a black story. Hard to win.

  57. Stella's Boy says:

    The only options are all white or all black casts?

  58. Hcat says:

    Yancy, by following that logic,

    Allen rarely casts black actors
    Allen writes what he knows
    Then Allen doesn’t know any black people. But hey, he’s been living in New York for over half a century so who knows if he has had the opportunity

  59. leahnz says:

    has it occured to the Allen defenders to actually read the court’s investigative documents/psychological profiles/statements incl that of the lead detective re the abuse case against allen? that allen was not charged was NOT because of a lack of evidence, far from it – the lead investigator’s public statement makes this clear – but rather the court, having found dylan credible and consistent also found that further psychological toll of a trial on the already traumatised child was deemed too much of a burden/possible danger to her health. most of it’s available in the public domain, maybe educate yourselves rather than parroting a bunch of nonsense

  60. palmtree says:

    Yancy, Woody would be praised for casting an all Black cast. I don’t see him vilified. Was Clint Eastwood vilified for doing an all-Japanese film? Was George Lucas vilified for doing Red Tails? Was Spielberg vilified for doing The Color Purple? The list goes on and on. I don’t see that point at all, except in the cases where perhaps their portrayals are stereotypical and regressive (see Crash, Green Book, etc.). I can’t speak for everyone obviously, but white directors casting black people in movies is usually a big feather in their cap.

  61. Bulldog68 says:

    “As for the lack of black people in his films, it used to be that “write what you know” was considered great advice for an artist.”

    And that’s the crux of the problem right there. Why does it have to be a “black story” to hire a black actor? As a black man I’m sick and tired of that fucking diatribe. Why can’t it be just a fucking story.

    I’m a black guy who got married, had 3 kids, then came out to his wife in my late 40s. I could be one of those guys on Grace and Frankie. Sure being black has some nuances to it, but that doesn’t have to be the story. How the fuck one of New York’s most famous citizens couldn’t find a role that actually could be played by a person of any ethnicity is beyond infuckingsane. What is it, if you hire a black actor he’s gotta start talking jive, complaining about “the man”, and everything has got to be about his blackness. It’s the people who keep saying they don’t see color most guilty of relegating people of color to particular stereotypes.

    I read once or heard once that Ernie Hudson said he won’t take roles specifically written for a black actor, (don’t know if it’s just rumour) but Woody’s attitude basically means he doesn’t see black people as just regular folk. Look at the extensive cast on a film like Everyone Says I Love You. Are you really saying that one of those roles could not have been played by a black actor, or Asian, or any other race. It’s based in New York for fuck sake.

    He is indicative of the old status quo of powerful white privilege in Hollywood who people will look the other way when they’re busy getting a boner while snapping pics of their naked 22 year old stepdaughter and gets chances over and over again. By the way, who does that shit? It’s bad enough that you want to fuck your stepdaughter, but let me also take advantage of my fatherly figure status and tell you to undress while I get my rocks off taking naked pics of a person I’m supposed to protect.

    Yeah, that Woody Allen. No fucking thank you.

  62. leahnz says:

    bulldog for the sake of your blood pressure/sanity don’t ever read princeton university library’s ‘allen papers’ collection (if you think you can stomach reading about reading about them, a few people have reported on the serious creep factor therein – richard morgan wrote a thing about them in the WA post for one, in a word ick)

  63. palmtree says:

    Bulldog, I second that. A constant struggle for this industry. I actually think US was really good at doing exactly that, being about a black family that didn’t really have to be black for the story. Of course, being a black family does add to the film’s meaning too, but if Woody Allen directed it, it would have been a white family for sure.

  64. Dr Wally Rises says:

    “Dr. Wally you do make a interesting point on whether being in a direct to video release (or fourth billed in a Paramount movie) can be considered back. Though I would probably disagree with you that Willis and Costner are at all considered bankable stars at this point. Costner is either in a supporting role (and starring as) or has moved on to television and Willis has done like three dozen direct to video movies.”

    Thanks, what you say is true but I’d counter with the fact that in the past decade (since Gibson’s fall from grace) that Willis has turned in some of the best work of his career working with the likes of Wes Anderson and Rian Johnson. His career has always assumed the outline of a rollercoaster, but every now and then he turns in something fantastic. Costner has matured intriguingly as an actor (I just saw The Highwaymen in which he’s fantastic, ditto his work in Hatfields & Mccoys), and his theatrical starring vehicles Draft Day and McFarland USA were successful if at a modest level. He’s also played a major part in the DCEU of course.

    Mel isn’t getting those privileges anymore.

  65. movieman says:

    Dr. Wally- You need to check out Costner in Taylor Sheridan’s “Yellowstone.”
    He’s fantastic. (And the show is pretty damn great, too.)
    Costner has officially achieved “National Treasure” status in my home…as has his “Highwaymen” costar Woody Harrelson).

  66. leahnz says:

    god forbid the convo should stray from washed-up white olds after bulldog’s searing comment about representation in the industry.

    so weird how, for instance the whitest of englishmen – tony scott – managed to often cast his flicks with a black guy as his ‘everyman’ and he wasn’t villfied or chastised for veering out of his lane, he just did it and at the end of the day it was just, whatever. be like tony

  67. Bulldog68 says:

    When you have always seen yourself onscreen, you really don’t know what it’s like to see Joe Morton play a renowned scientist in Terminator 2, or Ernie Hudson in Ghostbusters or Hand that Rocks the Cradle, or even Bad Boys that was originally a vehicle for Chris Farley and David Spade, and giving it to black actors and it be defined as just a straight up action movie, love it or hate it.

    Warts and all the Fast and Furious series is a testament to diversity, and I wish that more fantasy movies would do the same. If you believed in Hobbits and Elves and Gollum, would it have killed you to have a few non white actors in your cast of thousands??? Jeeez.

    Okay, rant over. Good to see Lando back. I have exorcised the demons. This house is clear.

  68. JS Partisan says:

    Fuck Kevin Costner. Putting his dick in some strange woman’s hand, who IS MASSAGING HIM, ON HIS FUCKING HONEYMOON! He’s not a national treasure. YOU KNOW WHO IS A NATIONAL FUCKING TREASURE? KEVIN FUCKING KLINE! Seriously.

    And fuck Woody Allen. Motherfucking Knicks fan, his entire fucking life, and he still has weirdness with people of color. Seriously. Fuck that motherfucker.

    Also, I don’t give a shit what anyone feels about Mia Farrow. Her daughter, Dylan, isn’t whistling dixie out of her ass. It happened to her. You can believe people supporting Woody, you can think a court case against a famous director in the early 90s, could hold any basis in reality, but guess fucking what? It happened to Dylan. That’s all that fucking matters, and fuck Woody Allen. Outside of his screwball comedies, that motherfucker sucks. It’s Sex, Bananas, and then it’s off a fucking cliff. Shit. MATCH POINT IS A FUCKING RIP OFF, AND FUCK PURPLE ROSE OF CAIRO! THAT’S RIGHT! I LOVED IT, BUT IT’S TOTAL FUCKING BULLSHIT!

    It’s just: you have to cancel some people after a while. You have to just walk away from their product, and hope people with money stop them from showing up. Outside of all of the Me Too men. Aziz Ansari, is the only who can show his head, because he was just a shit. The rest of them? FUCK OFF!

    When you get famous. You have a couple of jobs. One of the top ones, is to not be a FUCK. People look up to you, people support your work, and people finance your work. You stop being normal, and you have to be more. When these dudes fail. They failed at the job, and when you fail at a job? You got to fuck off. Seriously. Woody Allen succeeded, Spacey succeeded, and even Costner succeeded. Take your money, and FUCK OFF!

  69. palmtree says:

    Bull, even more troubling in LOTR is the way the orcs are depicted as having dark skin and grotesque features …especially when compared to everyone else. Not a good look now.

  70. movieman says:

    Decent opening for “Little;” terrible openings for “Hellboy” and “Missing Link” (poor Annapurna; they just can’t cut a break); and a shockingly good–relatively speaking–launch for “After.”
    Wondering just how top loaded it is, though.
    Thought “Shazam!” would have a slightly better hold.

    1 SHAZAM!
    Warner Bros. (New Line)

    4,306 $6,365,000

    +168.2% / $1,478
    $76,138,013 / 8

    2 LITTLE

    2,667 $5,370,000

    — / $2,013
    $5,370,000 / 1

    3 HELLBOY (2019)

    3,303 $4,930,000

    — / $1,493
    $4,930,000 / 1

    4 PET SEMATARY (2019)

    3,585 $2,930,000

    +138.9% / $817
    $34,051,660 / 8

    5 AFTER (2019)

    2,138 $2,900,000

    — / $1,356
    $2,900,000 / 1

  71. Hcat says:

    Leah, I never noticed that until you mentioned it. Though his debut was likely the most alabaster cast of all time, he directed Murphy, Damon Wayans, Wesley Snipes, Will Smith, and five Denzels. Even Mo’nique has a Tony Scott film in her resume.

    I love the poster for After. Reminds me of the Endless Loves and Fire with Fires of my youth.

  72. Sideshow Bill says:

    Haven’t seen Missing Link yet but Laika puts out quality every time and they can’t get any attention. Sucks.

    Saw Shazam yesterday and had a lot of fun. It has real heart and didn’t expect that all.

    Gonna brave Hellboy on $5 Tuesday because monsters and mayhem and gore.

    Also, I’m off oxygen and cleared to go back to work on Wednesday. What a hellish month. But I’m alive and thankful. I’m not my usual joke-a-minute self. I feel different. A bit more serious and determined. That’s probably a good thing.

    Have a great weekend!

  73. movieman says:

    “Link” is worth seeing, Bill, but I actually prefer 2012’s similar-ish “The Pirates! Band of Misfits:” it’s better and funnier.
    If you’re a Laika fan, definitely check it out. Probably won’t be around for very long after that blah opening.

    I’m seeing “Hellboy” on Bargain Tuesday, too.
    Bought an advance ticket last Tuesday when I saw “Pet Sematary” thinking it would be a bigger draw than it apparently is.
    Maybe I should have bought an advance ticket for “Little” instead.

    Has anybody seen “Under the Eiffel Tower”? It’s essentially a couple of “Veep” actors (Matt Walsh, Reid Scott and Gary Cole) on a paid vacation to France, but delightful just the same.
    Judith Godreche is fantastic (and gorgeous): I can’t believe she doesn’t work more often, and in more high profile movies.
    Surprised it didn’t make more of a splash theatrically: it’s really, really good.

  74. Pete B. says:

    $5 is about the right price for Hellboy. And you know there will be gore a plenty when 10 seconds in a crow is plucking out an eyeball. One review I read said it was like 4 episodes of a Hellboy TV show edited together and they were right. I still enjoyed most of it, but my biggest complaint was having trouble understanding Harbour when he spoke. Not sure if it was due to the make-up or what. A grade of C+ from me.

    I think Stella mentioned that Marshall took off with Miss Kirk, and that’s why there were issues. The Wrap has an article that the producers (of which there are 13) gave Marshall hell during filming and even fired his regular DP. Plus Harbour was refusing to do any extra takes and Ian McShane was making up his own dialog. (Guess he did that on American Gods too.)

  75. Amblinman says:

    I cannot for the life of me imagine watching Manhattan and not assuming Allen is a completely fucked up guy who is probably guilty of everything he’s accused of.

    But I will still revisit Crimes and Misdemeanors, Husbands and Wives, and Hannah and Her Sisters usually every or every other fall. And I don’t like the movie but I absolutely will watch the opening to Manhattan once a year.

    It’s not an easy answer for me pro or con. I loved Allen’s work but won’t support him anymore. However: those films I listed are *mine*. The thoughts and feelings they provoke in me belong to me, not Allen. I won’t give that up.

  76. leahnz says:

    also, film is a collaborative art form involving the work of many artists (and technicians) so it belongs to a collective and not any single individual at the end of the day. who a consumer decides to support monetarily with their cash going forward is a powerful agent of change, and a matter of individual conscience.

    y’all’s boxes are ticked. you’re gonna take us all down with you, aren’t ya

  77. Amblinman says:

    Leah: fuck no. We are gonna beat these fuckers. They are NOT popular. This is a media created and supported “movement”. And ironically is pushing the nation further left, faster than otherwise.

    Any one of the Dems running can beat him.

  78. Pete B. says:

    ^ Hate to disagree with you there, but as the Democratic candidates try to out-progressive each other and keep pushing the party farther left, Trump’s re-election chances go up.

    Biden has the best chance if he stays moderate.

    Also, not sure how it’s a media supported movement as with the exception of Fox News, it’s “Trump sucks” 24/7 on CNN, MSNBC, and the 3 major networks: ABC, CBS, and NBC.

  79. leahnz says:

    amblinman i dig your vigour and i hope you fight like hell for what is right and good, good on ya.
    multiple experts on authoritarianism – meaning people who have extensively studied, know, and lived and breathed authoritarian states, who are watching each step of what’s happening in the US – are warning, however, that you simply do not have that kind of time in terms of the 2020 elections in the face of consolidation of power that’s happening right now on several fronts, a flood of heinous corruption right out in the open with a complete lack of accountability and consequences for dumb corleone and his cabal of sadistic kleptocrats, enabled by his cover-up lackeys, now the new normal (these experts in authoritarianism have also correctly predicted exactly what is happening because autocracy has a playbook and you are living it).
    also, the US is officially in a *completely fabricated* “state of emergency” (which is only one step away from martial law, legally speaking, fwiw) in which the use of the military is authorised — the only time in modern US history apart from 9/11. assuming you’ll have free and fair elections at this point (after the travesties of 2016, with 2000 paving the way) or that frumpolini and the snivelling craven GOP will abide by them – even lackey cohen has warned of this very possibility specifically – is just crazy.

  80. lazarus says:

    It’s amazing how much misinformation people keep repeating over and over again, and dig their heads into the sand whenever something that may contradict it comes along. Mia Farrow’s history of disturbing behavior puts everything that’s come out of that family’s camp under a skeptical light. One can believe Dylan was traumatized and abused and still question who the actual perpetrator was. Let’s keep in mind, TWO of Mia’s children have accused her of psychological and physical abuse, and there may have been more had two others not killed themselves.

    If you haven’t read Robert Weide’s interview posts from last week and are content to merely sign off on anything Maureen Orth reports on behalf of the Farrow camp, at least admit that your vengeance is wholly emotional and not based on a full knowledge of all available information, and that you are stubbornly ignoring any facts that have been distorted or ignored to make it less open and shut.

    While there are many points worth highlighting here, the one I hasn’t seen mentioned before is that Dylan Farrow still has the option of a civil suit against Allen. I find it quite revealing that with all the hell the Farrows have raised on Twitter, including indimidating actors who hadn’t denounced Woody fast enough, they for some reason don’t want to punish him financially, as that money could at least be donated to other victims.

    Anyway, here are the links, if anyone is interested in speaking from a more informed place:

  81. leahnz says:

    “I do have a life and career outside of advocating for Woody Allen”
    lol an objective source!
    (lots of people have probably read this hack already, after all it was posted on the MSN main page – along with what would seem all the other old white dude’s blinkered defences of a creepy guy they clearly relate to – and they all link to each other as ‘sources’)

  82. Hcat says:

    Pete, not sure I ever see a Trump Sucks headline. White House in Choas, sure seen that. Trump contradicts party/cabinet/self, seen that quite often. Trump pick results in scandel is pretty steady too.

    Do you find this inaccurate? Is all this reporting just a load of bias out to ‘get oarngish/whitey?

  83. palmtree says:

    It’s not the media saying “Trump sucks.” It’s just that, by accurately reporting his lies and cover-ups and blatant disregarding of law, what inevitably emerges is that Trump does suck. (You can even draw that same conclusion from Fox News when they have those moments of real reporting, not the opinion shows.)

    As far as Dems going too far to the left….Many people on the right find common ground with people like Bernie Sanders, not based on left or right but just because he stands up for people and is authentic. I’m not a Bernie bro, so don’t get it twisted, but I highly doubt appeasing the right with some lukewarm moderate is really going to work as a strategy.

  84. amblinman says:

    ^ Hate to disagree with you there, but as the Democratic candidates try to out-progressive each other and keep pushing the party farther left, Trump’s re-election chances go up.

    Biden has the best chance if he stays moderate.

    Also, not sure how it’s a media supported movement as with the exception of Fox News, it’s “Trump sucks” 24/7 on CNN, MSNBC, and the 3 major networks: ABC, CBS, and NBC.”

    1 – I’m familiar with conservatives’ wishcasting. THe country is moving left. GOP lost 2018 because of healthcare. THe Dem candidates are all talking about healthcare, climate change, and the economy. While Trump is promising “more wall” and “loony socialists”.

    2 – Biden gives the GOP the best chance, which is why all conservative and conservative-leaning pundits are so helpfully “warning” Democrats that they’re gonna blow it unless they select Biden. In reality, Biden defines down the election so that it’s just another contest between two entitled gropey white guys. People tune out, and vote party lines. He depresses Dem turnout, which is key to any GOP victory. God knows Republicans can’t win on actual policy and governance.

    3 – The media covered Trump nonstop in 2016 because they thought it was fun. They defined down every word out of his mouth so as to reduce his virulent racism/misogny/xenophobia/etc etc to just a “disagreement between sides”. I.e. Donald Trump could call someone the n-word, Clinton could call him out, and the media’s headline the next day is “Candidates clash over race”. It’s disingenuous and the opposite of journalism. To this day, the way the game is played is Trump drops some nugget of insanity, and the media spends days asking if there’s any merit to said nugget.

    His base is small and unpopular. HE is small and unpopular. He couldn’t even win the popularity contest portion of the election vs someone many consider to be the most unpopular candidate in modern history.

    He’s a loser who is going to lose. Bigly.

  85. amblinman says:


    I understand those concerns, and I’ve read them too. But no, we are not anywhere near what they’re afraid of. THis isn’t denial or lack of diligence on my part or anyone else’s.

    These are the facts on the ground:

    -Donald Trump is remarkable unpopular with the majority of Americans. We have had what is considered a booming economy, and his approval ratings have been underwater since day one regardless. Do you have any idea how hard you have to fuck up to be an UNPOPULAR potus during a good economy and NO new major war? It’s virtually impossible, but he’s the miracle man.

    -Trump’s been beaten back in our courts over his racist immigration polices non stop. Even his supposedly newly minted GOP supreme court has kicked his ass since the start of the new session. He’s had a couple of victories, but most of what you’re seeing from him now is complete RAGE at his own impotence to effect the kind of atrocity he would prefer.

    -Keep an eye on Mayor Pete Buttigieg! 😉

    *My* greatest concern with Trump isn’t an autocratic takeover before 2020. My greatest concern is that one of the dumbest people on the planet has demonstrated to not-dumb people just how far you really can push our government to your will. The point is: what does this look like in 2024 or 2028 when a smart version of Trump comes along? Someone or a bunch of someones out there most certainly have been taking notes.

    THAT bothers and scares me. It’s why I”m praying for a political sea change between now and…whenever.

  86. palmtree says:

    Amblin, spot on.^

  87. leahnz says:

    insomnia sucks, and i always appreciate reading the american’s political interactions here, but am i out on a limb to say:
    i see this same ‘omg progressives are pushing the party left and the consequences will be dire’ crique of ‘liberals’ from all quarters and NEVER see anyone in the mainstream question repubs about the fact that the ‘conservative’ party has veered hard right into anti-constitutional christian dominionist white male supremacist anti-science open bigot territory, why is there endless commentary and critique and proclamations about movement in the dem party when the reality is that the overton window has been sliding right for a while now – bloody nixon had policies that would be considered ‘liberal’ now – and NOBODY seems to talk about or ask people this question. it’s crazy

    (amblinman bless you, but this is a very white male take on where things are, the state of the courts and who is being hurt/likely to be hurt in the near future – for instance a number of states have now essentially criminalised woman’s reproductive rights and the issue will likely head to SCOTUS – which is now a bastion of conservative catholicism – and transgender troops are now no longer eligible to serve in the US armed forces, so you may need to rethink a few things there. )

    ETA to fix this shit up, major typos

  88. Amblinman says:


    All of that is true to a degree. But that’s the point: anyone painting any overly dire or overly optimistic picture for the short term is assuming an awful lot of slippery-slope type of events.

    And stop Americasplaining, lady. What do you know about any of it?

    (This is a joke. If anyone takes this as leaping off point, go fuck yourselves. Leah and I have shit on each other enough plenty on here, to which I’ve learned she’s usualy right. Except about Wonder Woman.)

  89. movieman says:

    April 12-14, 2019

    1 1 Shazam! WB (NL) $25,140,000 -53.0% 4,306 +89 $5,838 $94,913,013 $100 2

    2 N Little Uni. $15,499,000 – 2,667 – $5,811 $15,499,000 $20 1

    3 N Hellboy (2019) LG/S $12,015,000 – 3,303 – $3,638 $12,015,000 $50 1

    4 2 Pet Sematary (2019) Par. $10,000,000 -59.2% 3,585 – $2,789 $41,121,660 $21 2

    5 3 Dumbo (2019) BV $9,186,000 -49.6% 3,706 -553 $2,479 $89,945,162 $170 3 ….

  90. Christian Hamaker says:

    That “Peterloo” number is horrendous. Guess I better see the film in the next five days, before it completely disappears from the big screen. (I won’t get to it, but pretending I might makes me feel better.)

  91. Christian Hamaker says:

    But hey, in better news, maybe I’ll have an extra week to get to “Amazing Grace”!

  92. YancySkancy says:

    Been away for a few days, so maybe I should let the Woody Allen thing lie, but since I was called out a bit, I’ll clarify the main point I made.

    Woody Allen apparently has little personal experience with black people. My guess is that if he suddenly decided to do a story that centered on black characters, he’d be at sea. It wouldn’t come naturally to him, and this is a guy who rarely seems to do extensive research or rewriting on his scripts. He writes what he wants to write — every writer’s dream, in a way. He deals with the things that concern or interest him. So odds are he’d do a poor job trying to create rounded, believable black characters, and that would lead to him being vilified. Like I said, it’s a guess, but it doesn’t seem like a great leap. It’s moot, I’m sure, because at best he may just add a random black character here and there, like he did with Chiwetel Ejiofor in Melinda and Melinda. One exception might be if he took an interest in tackling a biopic of one of his beloved jazz musicians, but I wouldn’t hold my breath for that.

    As for the molestation issue, I agree with Lazarus that the Weide article he linked to is about as comprehensive a look as we’re going to get at the full picture of the case. Sure, he’s a Woody fan, and it’s easy to claim objectivity whether it’s there or not, but if you actually read the thing, he shows his work. He links to pertinent documents and articles, he discusses both sides of every aspect in order to show why he comes to his conclusions. He doesn’t make anything up, and he cuts through the myriad of misinformation (including the usual fudging of details, such as referring to Soon-yi as Allen’s “stepdaughter,” as Bulldog did above). I don’t care what anyone thinks about Allen’s guilt or innocence, but let’s not pretend it’s obvious that he’s guilty just because we’re creeped out by his relationship or the one movie he made that features a barely legal leading lady. Mia’s clearly no saint either, as Moses has made clear, and it hardly beggars belief that a scorned lover would be manipulative in a contentious custody case. Doesn’t mean it’s true, of course, but it’s no less likely than anything Allen’s accused of. Is that diplomatic enough?

  93. YancySkancy says:

    lazarus: Weide admits in the interview that people who’ve made up their mind won’t read it. Most people make their mind up on the case based on headlines or poorly reported brief articles. I believe leahnz when she says she’s read a lot of stuff about it, but I honestly don’t see how anyone unbiased can read *everything* about the case and confidently believe in his guilt. There has to be at least a nagging suspicion that Dylan was coached or has a false memory. As Weide says, there are still a few of the McMartin kids who believe they were abused, despite the proof to the contrary and the verdict.

  94. movieman says:

    For anyone who cares, my favorite movie scene of the decade (s0 far anyway);


  95. lazarus says:

    Thanks for the backup, Yancy. When I see foaming-at-the-mouth posts from J.S. Partisan (truly living up to his name) and only slightly less-tempered ones from Leah, I felt obligated to try and insert some kind of clearheaded thinking here. You can call Weide a cheerleader all you want but that still doesn’t answer questions he’s raised (and that’s most of what he’s doing, because he admits he doesn’t know for sure what happened).

    Again, why has there been no civil suit against Allen? Why did two of Mia’s adopted children die under mysterious circumstances? Why aren’t stories of her child abuse taken more seriously? Why does part of Dylan’s story sound oddly similar to lyrics written by Dory Previn, who was backstabbed by her husband Andre and Mia?

    You can still be grossed out by Woody’s amoral behavior re: dating Soon-Yi behind Mia’s back and understand that it’s not grounds for him being convicted in the court of public opinion for a heinous charge, or him being blackballed in Hollywood when the justice system already vindicated him.

  96. Pete B. says:

    Hcat, the Media Research Center did a 4 month study last year and 92% of news coverage on Trump was deemed negative. That’s not saying “Trump sucks” verbatim, but only 8% positive coverage says something in itself.

    Palmtree, not sure why it would matter if you’re a Bernie Bro or not. Saunders seems authentic. It’s just that ‘Free Stuff for Everybody’ doesn’t work because nothing the government does is ever free.

    Amblinman, you got me started with your comment that any one of the Dems running could beat Trump. If you really think someone like Gillibrand or Swalwell have a chance, good luck. As for your points – the Democrats best bet is to campaign on healthcare. That’s their bread & butter. But what they’re talking about is democratic socialism, reparations, open borders, banning assault rifles, and their latest – the Equality Act. Not sure you’re going to win over Middle America with that one. Also not sure how they can campaign on the economy, which you yourself said is booming, and is Trump’s ace.

    Getting back to the actual topic of movies, nice to see that SHAZAM! righted the ship after a slow Friday. It’s a fun film and a 53% drop is far better than a 68% one.

  97. Stella's Boy says:

    Pete I don’t mean to be a dick but you’re like a Fox News talking point come to life. And the Media Research Center? That’s a rabidly partisan right-wing organization. Looked at their home page and I see they are pushing a Soros as the boogeyman agenda among other things. Not sure why you’d expect anyone to take them seriously.

  98. Hcat says:

    Hey that is 8% better than the press that Weinstein got in those months. Is he being railroaded as well?

    With the constant parade of firings and investigations, adverse court rulings, cabinet scandals etc etc. I can certainly see a four month period of nothing but bad news. But the Trump Sucks statement makes it sound like it’s the press out to get him instead of just reporting.

  99. brack says:

    The economy isn’t booming. Just because the unemployment rate is better doesn’t mean that people aren’t underpaid or underemployed. A recession is actually more than likely to happen. And Trump cannot be credited for a “good” economy. All the dems have to do is point out where Trump lied about every single thing he claimed he’d do. But for certain topics, Dems really don’t need to go heavy left on, because the goal right now isn’t to get good policy made into law, the number one goal should be to get Trump out. Period. Passing something like the New Green Deal and Universal Healthcare, while ideal, isn’t something to use to earn the votes of independents, who have all but decided to find almost any reason to drop Trump.

  100. leahnz says:

    “Except about Wonder Woman.” WHAAA!
    haha amblinman i’d forgotten about that (WW is so great tho, a lovely little movie, we watch it heaps)
    ftr i’ve probably never wanted to be more wrong about anything tbh, and if somehow this gathering fascist nightmare soon turns around and people are held accountable i will gladly eat crow and sing to the high heavens about being wrong, gloriously wrong, do a ‘i was wrong, thank goodness’ jig, the lot. i’m not holding my breath though, but fingers crossed. i’ve got close family all over the US and i was born there, so it’s deeply personal to me – not to mention it’s not just the US destabilised by this growing fascist movement of transactional RW-aligned criminals (led by putin), climate disaster looming and the ever-present nuclear threat.
    (also, this idea that the US economy is ‘booming’, haha, for whom? yes if you’re a large corporation or already well-off and reaping the benefits of the greatest redistribution of wealth in generations, perhaps; other than that from what i see and hear, for most average people it’s pretty hard yakka, lots of part-time (which count in employment figs) and super low-wage jobs with no security or benefits at all, several economic indicators point to slowing/looming recession due to dumb corleone’s stupid policies, so weird how the corporate news isn’t really covering this stuff)
    ETA i see brack’s mentioned this a bit as well

    as for the rest of this allen thing…yuck. the dismissal of dylan and her clear recollections, testimony and statements about very specific things is disappointing but typical. funny how it’s always a one-way street with the allen apologists: you must admit that dylan could be lying/has been coached into false memories!
    oh really? does that ingrained benefit of the doubt dudes give other dudes actually extend the other way, do you also admit it’s very possible that allen is a liar and as big a skeevy creep as he appears from several angles? because i reaaaally don’t think you do.
    (also, this thing about people can’t remember things that happened as young as seven clearly and it must be coached/false memory: when i was seven my best friend was being sexually molested by her older cousin and she told me, eventually told the grown-ups – most of whom did not believe her – and i remember every awful day of that time, everything that happened to my friend and her family and our family in the process as clearly as if it was yesterday. don’t make assumptions about abused children.)
    allen has never been ‘cleared’ of anything, he simply wasn’t charged, and that is not even remotely the same thing.
    also, just in general to the dudes who seem mighty hung up on this: ‘innocent until proven guilty’ is a criminal standard, the strictest application by a court of law wherein one can be imprisoned and lose one’s liberty. if you believe that no person out in the world is guilty of anything because they have not been sent to prison for it and therefor consequences are unwarranted – or that not meeting a criminal standard makes reprehensible behaviour somehow less objectionable and actionable – well this is just flat out ridiculous and maybe it’s your moral compass that needs adjustment

  101. palmtree says:

    Pete, we have a system of taxes. Paying for things to better the lives of citizens is how governments should work. What we can’t afford are corporations and people who dodge taxes, which is something Dems are trying to rectify.

    Funny thing is the above concept should be bi-partisan since it’s literally just a fact of how government works. Except now we get GOP people saying things like they don’t want healthy people to pay for the sick, as if that isn’t EXACTLY what it’s supposed to be doing.

  102. amblinman says:

    “But what they’re talking about is democratic socialism, reparations, open borders, banning assault rifles, and their latest – the Equality Act. Not sure you’re going to win over Middle America with that one. Also not sure how they can campaign on the economy, which you yourself said is booming, and is Trump’s ace.”

    Democrats are talking about healthcare, immigration, and gun control for sure. Trump and the GOP tried to make “open borders Democrats” stick. Didn’t work.

    And we had a good economy before Trump. So that’s an even better argument against him: “Remember when you had a good economy WITHOUT the racist lunatic forcing you to live in his Twitter feed 24/7?”

    Trump is straight up a loser. He’s potus because of an antiquated system that the GOP is desperate to preserve because they can’t compete on ideas anymore.

  103. amblinman says:


    “ftr i’ve probably never wanted to be more wrong about anything tbh, and if somehow this gathering fascist nightmare soon turns around and people are held accountable i will gladly eat crow and sing to the high heavens about being wrong, gloriously wrong, do a ‘i was wrong, thank goodness’ jig,”

    WHOA WHOA WHOAAAAA lady. I didn’t say aaaannnnything about anyone being held accountable. Nope. Trump and his shitbag admin of goons will probably skate because America’s elite isn’t going to let an ex-potus be indicted.

    I’m looking forward to good, progressive candidate to win in 2020, and the Dems to take the senate. If it’s someone I love, like Warren or Mayor Pete, then it’s a dman good start.

  104. Js partisan says:

    I’ve thought this for a while: trump could have easily had a second term, but he’s too much of an asshole. He is so obsessed with being tough, being a man, that he keeps pushing shit, that makes people uncomfortable. He keeps on pushing, and it just turns people fucking off.

    You can’t go full asshole, and that’s all he got. He’s a full asshole, he’s screwed over so many people in short time, that it will require a lot more than racism to get him re-elected. Hell. He can’t even depend on Pascale to bail him out, because social media are still reeling from the last election.

    Again, people have to vote, and they did last time. You think people don’t want to take this dude out of office? It’s going to be ridiculous, it always is, but there’s not much love for trump… outside of the people he keeps in trying to kill, in various ways.

  105. leahnz says:

    bless your heart you guys (and not in the way my auntie says it that makes you want to crawl into a hole) but this belief that your situation or this election cycle is in any way normal is a bit naive at this point.

    US in fake ‘state of emergency’
    barr (highest law enforcement in the land) another dumb corleone lackey protecting the mob boss, not you
    bolton’s been hankerin’ to nuke iran for a donkey’s age and the war drum is banging (beware the reichstag fire)
    most every critical position incl secretary of defence is ‘acting’ so as to bypass the vetting/confirmation process – loyalty to the mob boss and party, not country and the people
    oil execs in charge of energy and the environment
    religion over science
    guns and NRA over people
    protections for the public rolled back in favour of corporate greed
    fed courts packed at unprecedented rates with unqualified rw extremists
    women’s reproductive rights being quickly dismantled
    scotus is lost, corporations over people and enforced bigotry
    US corporate media utterly useless or complicit in the face of consolidating authoritarian power
    more troops amassing at the border (border patrol has been having ‘drills’ practicing shooting into crowds, yet another grossly under-reported story)
    and dems are in a polite round of sternly-worded letter-writing with fancy fountain pens

    it DOES NOT MATTER that the deranged fungus isn’t ‘popular’ because y’all and the Rethugs know they can’t win without cheating, what makes you think this time’s going to be different, with so much at stake?
    and the kicker: not a single thing has been done to protect your elections (after the blatant assault on voting rights with large-scale voter suppression following the gutting of the VRA — and possibly far worse with hacked voter rolls confirmed in several states and russian intrusion confirmed now in all 50, with no forensic audit on the election performed and absurdly insecure voting apparatus and online vote tallying still in use across the country) except the body tasked with protecting the US against election interference has been defunded.

    you are being dismantled, the waters tested, boundaries pushed, dis-loyalists purged, the rule of law disregarded, constitution laughed at, no accountability, no consequences, dumb corleone’s emboldened with each unpunished crime and offence. the roller coaster car is going UP brace yourselves accordingly

  106. palmtree says:

    To bring the discussion back to movies, Idiocracy was wrong, because it didn’t take vast stupidity to destroy the country. For the most part we still respect and admire smart people with fancy degrees. We just needed to have really effective propaganda that either distracts us or just flat out lies.

    The recent Bernie appearance on Fox News was a fascinating look at what happens when you break through the propaganda BS for a little bit. Democrats have to keep popping those bubbles.

  107. Js partisan says:

    Leah, that’s all well and good, but he’s fucking over his people. This has nothing to do with me, but what his administration has done to just farmers. Seriously. The hatred is fucking palpable, and that overrides everything else. Keep thinking the sky is falling, because it’s still up there. We just go to go through it.

    Fuck idiocracy. Libertarian bullshit, and come on! He’s a racist shit, but people got caught up in bullshit, and the person they believed would help them is trying to take away their healthcare, their jobs, and their farms.

  108. palmtree says:

    “Fuck idiocracy. Libertarian bullshit, and come on! He’s a racist shit, but people got caught up in bullshit,”

    Trump is racist, no doubt about it, but without Fox News, his message wouldn’t be nearly so accepted or pervasive. I mean, even Nixon would have survived Watergate if Fox News was on the beat. In fact, it was Nixon aide Roger Ailes who took that experience and created Fox News.

    And yeah, I used to think Idiocracy was terrifying, wrapped in poop jokes but yes terrifying. But now, I think what we have is worse, con men who have figured out how to con people in broad daylight and then get away with it.

  109. YancySkancy says:

    “the dismissal of dylan and her clear recollections, testimony and statements about very specific things is disappointing but typical. funny how it’s always a one-way street with the allen apologists: you must admit that dylan could be lying/has been coached into false memories!”

    I really don’t want to get into a point-by-point thing here, because Weide covers it all in that interview, but I’ll wade back in a bit. Dylan has contradicted herself multiple times over the years, both during the original investigations and in more recent statements. She seems a lot clearer about what allegedly happened nowadays than she did then. And there’s ample reason to suspect she was coached (the videotape Mia made, for starters). Doesn’t mean she WAS coached, and doesn’t mean anyone has to believe she was, but I don’t think it’s outrageous to believe it’s possible.

    “oh really? does that ingrained benefit of the doubt dudes give other dudes actually extend the other way, do you also admit it’s very possible that allen is a liar and as big a skeevy creep as he appears from several angles? because i reaaaally don’t think you do.”

    I always take pains to admit that neither I nor anyone else besides Allen, Mia and possibly Dylan can know for certain what happened or didn’t. And I never deny the creepiness of the way he and Soon-yi got together. But the whole “He was a creep in this situation and therefore a pedophile in that one” is potentially as specious a connection to make as “She dressed slutty so she’s lying about being raped.”

    “(also, this thing about people can’t remember things that happened as young as seven clearly and it must be coached/false memory: when i was seven my best friend was being sexually molested by her older cousin and she told me, eventually told the grown-ups – most of whom did not believe her – and i remember every awful day of that time, everything that happened to my friend and her family and our family in the process as clearly as if it was yesterday. don’t make assumptions about abused children.)”

    So sorry for your friend. I’m also very close to someone who was abused in more ways than one. My doubts about Dylan’s story have nothing to do with making assumptions about abused children (though I do assume she was abused; the only question being by whom?). This case is well documented, and there are lots of inconsistencies in the purported facts. That’s simply true. If it weren’t, there’d be no debate about this case, ever. It sucks for Dylan if her allegations are true, and it sucks for Allen if they aren’t. Blindly believing one or the other is anyone’s prerogative, and a lot of people take it. You and I and many others base our opinion on how we interpret the evidence, including court records, investigation reports and statements from all those involved. Reasonable people can come down on either side, and either of us can be wrong.

    “allen has never been ‘cleared’ of anything, he simply wasn’t charged, and that is not even remotely the same thing.”

    Sure, but it ain’t hay.

    “also, just in general to the dudes who seem mighty hung up on this: ‘innocent until proven guilty’ is a criminal standard, the strictest application by a court of law wherein one can be imprisoned and lose one’s liberty. if you believe that no person out in the world is guilty of anything because they have not been sent to prison for it and therefor consequences are unwarranted – or that not meeting a criminal standard makes reprehensible behaviour somehow less objectionable and actionable – well this is just flat out ridiculous and maybe it’s your moral compass that needs adjustment”

    Sorry, this is frankly condescending. Any idiot knows that not all criminals are brought to justice, just as we all presumably know that not everyone who’s charged with a crime is necessarily guilty of it. My doubt about Allen’s guilt isn’t tied to the lack of legal consequences. If it were, then sure, that would suggest a broken moral compass on my part. And as I said above, he’s definitely engaged in creepy behavior that was objectionable, if not actionable, in the case of Soon-yi. But since it wasn’t actionable, I’m not sure what the consequences should be. If you’re referring only to the Dylan allegations, then obviously consequences are warranted if he’s guilty and can be proven to be so. That’s how it works, legally. Otherwise, the only consequences possible are those meted out in the court of public opinion, in terms of his reputation, ability to work, etc. That stuff is happening. Unless Dylan files a civil suit, that’s probably where things will stand.

  110. leahnz says:

    good grief yancy that’s a lot, i don’t think i have the gumption (and i don’t have access to any of the research i did with saved links to/downloaded court docs, state’s attorney docs, new haven court psychiatrists reports etc, all that stuff was on my old laptop, which is now property of my calabash-daughter and i’m not doing it all over again — i purposely didn’t copy over my kazillion random bookmarks from that device because i wanted a clean slate and then i gave the laptop away, not sure if she completely wiped it but she’s living in melbourne so it’s a mute point for the time being)

    however you might benefit a great deal from doing this research first hand, because i’m not sure that you’ve actually read these documents in context based on your comments here, which appear heavily reliant on Weide as a major source, which is simply unacceptable.
    his methodology is poor and one-sided, providing cherry picked documentation, omitted context and most opposing evidence, opinion rife with conjecture and a seeming uncanny ability to see into allen’s mind. he starts with the assumption that allen is a truth-teller and is almost completely reliant on smearing farrow as THE LIAR to bolster his hypothesis while ignoring clear evidence against allen, including allen’s own words/testimony, clear inconsistencies, a pattern of lying to m farrow and evasive tactics, including refusing to submit to the court’s polygraph and instead doing one administered by someone he picked, rendering it utterly meaningless and yet ironically used by his defenders as ‘proof’ of his innocence, which about sums up his sketchy defence. weide presents evidence in allen’s defence that can also be explained by allen being an adept liar and manipulator who uses his power, money and influence to get people to say what he wants, which is not addressed by weide and renders him not credible on the subject of allen in this case.

    i notice once again in this ‘rebuttal’ you STILL did not say: “i admit allen could be a liar and a manipulator.” s’up with that.
    and this (which is why i decided to respond actually, because it’s disturbing):

    “But the whole “He was a creep in this situation and therefore a pedophile in that one” is potentially as specious a connection to make as “She dressed slutty so she’s lying about being raped.”

    woo boy no, it’s not. i kinda hope you don’t even realise it but the comparison you’re making here is twisted and typical apologia: a man’s actual exhibited and quantifiable creepy behaviour towards a barely-legal young woman that then potentially makes additional alleged creepy behaviour more conceivable IS NOT IN ANY WAY COMPARABLE to a woman who has dressed in a revealing manner being accused of asking for it and therefor lying about being raped.
    your first example uses a person’s ACTUAL immoral behaviour towards a young woman who was part of his extended family; your comparative example uses a woman who’s done nothing even remotely morally sketchy or wrong then being blamed for her own assault. claiming these two are comparable – the possible false accusation of a man who has behaved in a reprehensible manner somehow in the same league as a woman who’s actually intimately physically assaulted, victimised and then blamed for it is patriarchal bullshit used to excuse and minimise men’s appalling behaviour while painting women as liars since probably year dot — and in a bitter twist of irony this was pretty much allen’s tactic – paint the victim as the liar. that you conflate these two scenarios is fucked up, please use your brain and critical thinking skills.

    a couple things FTR, that have been addressed to high heaven but perhaps bear repeating:
    the court found zero evidence that m farrow coached dylan, this was part of the judge’s ruling going on all the evidence presented to the court. it’s on the record, and it’s fact. maybe stick to these.

    mose farrow’s account means nil. the presumption that he can say with any authority what did and didn’t happen to dylan is patently ridiculous – and the mitigating circumstances of his financial dependance on w allen and clearly bitter relationship with his mother makes him a highly problematic ‘witness’ under any circumstances.

    “Dylan has contradicted herself multiple times over the years, both during the original investigations and in more recent statements.”

    this is simply not accurate. i don’t think you actually know what you’re talking about in this regard and you’d benefit from learning about child sexual abuse victims and also reading the actual court filings.
    it is true that in the original investigation dylan’s initial account, when she was very first examined and questioned by THREE male doctors at length (completely unacceptable in terms of sexual abuse victims in terms of what we know today, because of the fear/intimidation factor for children in these situations) varied from what she subsequently told more qualified psychologists in greater detail, which is not at all out of character for child abuse victims. from the court docs to subsequent accounts she does not contradict herself or change her story drastically, and several professional experts not involved in any way with the case have written using the actual testimony and accounts that what dylan has alleged, and how, IS CREDIBLE.
    this is one article i’d linked to previously, i remembered the name perion though i think his piece was on another site when i saw it, a child abuse investigator who sheds some light on the way the testimony of child victims can change and does not mean they are lying, as allen’s defenders claim, especially if the initial investigation is handled poorly.

    apart from the court documents, which are essential, there are numerous well-researched pieces out there – or at least there used to be, christ knows now with the bizarre state of things – that contradict or refute much of the biased case weide presents (and presents again, gotta sell that woody doc, $$$)

    finally this:

    “also, just in general to the dudes who seem mighty hung up on this: ‘innocent until proven guilty’ ”

    did you not see the words ‘in general’? i was not speaking specifically about the allen case here but in general about what i see on the internet day in and day out (and i’m just a casual browser at best) in case that wasn’t clear.

    ETA for a lot of booboo’s, i should try to type slower and then i probably wouldn’t ramble so long to boot

  111. YancySkancy says:

    I admit Allen may be a liar and manipulator. Happy? I thought that was covered by saying he might be guilty of the allegation, but if that wasn’t specific enough, there you go.

    My analogy about a rape accuser dressing slutty may not be primo, but I was trying to come up with something equally extreme. Your rebuttal assumes a lot — I said nothing about this fictional woman being one “who’s actually intimately physically assaulted, victimised and then blamed for it.” The analogy is simply based on people making assumptions in both cases based on emotion or pure opinion, not evidence. But I suppose even thinking in such terms for an analogy makes me a patriarchal asshole. As for Allen painting Dylan as a liar (which I’m not sure he does; I think he blames Mia), that would be quite natural if he didn’t molest her. Just making sure both possibilities are covered.

    Sounds like you have read more complete court documents than I have, so obviously I can’t argue some specific points you address. But I think it’s safe to say that with all the investigating, interviewing, reporting and armchair analysis out there over the course of more than 25 years, there is plenty of data and opinion on both sides that make the case hopelessly inconclusive in legal terms. As I said, the best we can do is look at everything (scratch that, “everything” seems impossible at this late date) and develop as informed an opinion as possible. Neither of us has a smoking gun. And yes, I’m sure we filter it through our personal experiences, assumptions and fears — being a woman, you want to believe Dylan is telling the truth and wasn’t coached by her mother; being a man, I put myself in the shoes of someone possibly being wrongfully accused of a heinous act. If Allen is guilty, I want him to go to jail and then to Hell. For you, there appears to be no “if.” But we are both working from generalizations about such cases to come up with plausible scenarios about why Dylan is or isn’t lying, and why Allen could or couldn’t have molested her.

    At the very least, I hope it’s finally clear that I concede I could be entirely wrong to be skeptical of Allen’s guilt (not the same, by the way, as convinced of his innocence). But I remain skeptical of anyone who confidently assumes his guilt.

    You can call into question the motives of Moses, Weide, and other Allen defenders, but raising questions and eyebrows is not the same as refuting anything. Moses claims to be a victim of Farrow’s abuse, and I’m not sure why he isn’t given the same benefit of the doubt that you give Dylan. I concede that Dylan could be telling the truth; I also believe it’s possible she was coached. I concede that Moses could be lying about Mia; I also believe it’s possible he’s telling the truth about what he experienced and saw in that household. The classic “he said, she said” in this case is not between Dylan and Allen, but between Dylan and Moses, with each claiming one parent was abusive and the other innocent. This takes it out of the strict realm of “believe accusers.” One of these abused kids is lying or has come to believe a lie. It’s truly tragic.

  112. Js partisan says:

    Blue Eyes 2 is an amazing investigative journalist, and has explained his brother’s issues. Seriously, Woody Allen is a shit version of fucking Neil Simon, and always will be. He still fucked his step daughter, who he knew since a child, and if you don’t think that’s fucked up? Get the fuck out of here.

  113. YancySkancy says:

    Sigh. Not his stepdaughter, JS. When she was around 20.
    And yes, it’s fucked up. Doesn’t mean he molested a 7-year-old.

    EDIT: Oh, and Ronan “explained” his brother’s issues? Well, case closed, I guess.

  114. Bulldog68 says:

    What do you mean “not his stepdaughter.”
    If you marry someone, and they already have children, they become your stepchildren. What the fuck am I missing and why are people still looking for the rosy part of that fucking relationship. They went to ballgames together as father and stepdaughter when she was a minor. Please stop trying to excuse this shit.

    As for the other fucktard who I see is making news, Roman Polanski, child drugger and rapist, is suing the Academy for kicking him out. According to him ““The Academy committed a prejudicial abuse of discretion in that the Academy failed to proceed in a manner required by law.” Did he think about whether it was a manner required by law to be raping a thirteen year old? I don’t fucking think so.

  115. leahnz says:

    “being a woman, you want to believe Dylan is telling the truth and wasn’t coached by her mother; being a man, I put myself in the shoes of someone possibly being wrongfully accused of a heinous act.”

    ok yancy i’ve been trying to distill my issue with your whole aggrieved attitude re this dealio, and this insidious bit of sexism underpinning it about nails it, so cheers.

    FACT: the court found zero evidence – in what was a fairly extensive investigation – that dylan was coached/’brainwashed’ by m farrow. ZERO. and this is a typical component of any investigation of this type. in this entire matter there’s not a scintilla of evidence that farrow coached dylan or brainwashed her, confirmed by the court. and yet you stubbornly persist in ignoring this entirely. why?
    because this is WHAT W ALLEN CLAIMS. full stop. there’s simply no other reason for you to be so entrenched in this belief and susceptible to it.

    “being a man, I put myself in the shoes of someone possibly being wrongfully accused of a heinous act.”

    yes, clearly. FACT: this is a knee-jerk reaction based on myth, not reality. actual fabricated accusations of sexual assault and abuse are rare statistically, and tend to follow similar patterns and behaviour that are detected – usually early on – by an investigation wherein false claims fall apart because of their nature. perhaps educating yourself on this subject would be prudent.
    that THIS is the sentiment you admit drives your feelings on this matter is purely a construct of male aggrievement in a culture of male entitlement wherein men’s feelings are centred over women’s actual safety, and exaggerated claims of false accusations a cornerstone of a culture designed to protect men. patriarchy. you are steeped in it. so am i. we all are.

    FACT: no. i do not “want to believe dylan” because i’m a woman, this attribution is sexist and insulting (i’m not easily insulted so i’m not personally insulted, just tripped out at how you don’t even seem to realise the sexist nature of your beliefs).
    on the contrary, i’m looking at this case logically and with a critical eye and skepticism, as well as a cultural context, which is what you are failing to do. what i do NOT do when an allegation of sexual abuse comes to light is have a knee-jerk reaction to give instant credence to the man’s denial/allegation of a false accusation. what i do not do, in a case where the court has specified finding no evidence that a child has been coached, is assume the man making this claim is credible.

    your understanding of these matters appears simplistic. the fact is, m farrow may have been an abusive parent, and that has nothing to do with what happened to dylan. moses may feel rightfully bitter about his treatment, and is also lying or greatly inflating his perceived knowledge of things to express his pain about/to his mother. two things can be true at once, life is not so clean.
    once again you seem quite willing to look at things from allen’s perspective re the benefit of the doubt but this is clearly not the case when it comes to the other side of the case

    ETA re the polanski thing above, ewwwwww honestly what is even happening

  116. YancySkancy says:

    Bulldog: Mia and Woody never married, ergo Soon-Yi wasn’t his stepdaughter. I don’t claim that this should mitigate anyone’s feelings about the situation (I agreed with J.S. that it was fucked up); just clarifying a fact.

    leah, I thought I was just admitting the cultural context re a possible explanation of the general male/female split on this issue (though of course many men believe Dylan and many women defend Allen). I don’t think it’s sexist to suggest that women may be more likely to sympathize and empathize with a girl who claims abuse, because women are more likely to have suffered abuse or have knowledge of another’s abuse. By the same token, most accused are men, and therefore men are more likely to fret about the possibility of a false accusation. That’s all I meant by it. But my opinion that Allen MIGHT be wrongfully accused is not “knee-jerk.” I take everything I’ve read about the case into account, and I see questionable stuff on both sides.

    As for the court decision, I know about that. I also know that the Yale/New Haven team (two female interviewers) did not believe Dylan was assaulted, and the NY child welfare office found no credible evidence either. The custody case judge wasn’t convinced, but he also admitted the evidence wasn’t likely sufficient for a conviction. His decision was therefore based on Allen being in a relationship with Dylan and Ronan’s sister. Again, none of this means Allen didn’t molest Dylan, just as the investigations’ findings don’t mean Dylan lied. I keep trying to make it clear that I don’t see any certainty in this case. Any informed opinion on it is valid, but even an informed opinion ultimately includes supposition, gut feelings, and, sure, can be tinged by whatever personal experiences or biases we bring to the table. (And yes, as you brought up, the investigations are tainted in some eyes for various reasons, but not in ways that definitively prove that they were actually compromised.)

    “your understanding of these matters appears simplistic. the fact is, m farrow may have been an abusive parent, and that has nothing to do with what happened to dylan. moses may feel rightfully bitter about his treatment, and is also lying or greatly inflating his perceived knowledge of things to express his pain about/to his mother. two things can be true at once, life is not so clean.”

    Sure, but the concept works both ways, by definition. But I’m wondering why you seem so certain that Moses, who claims to be as much a victim as Dylan claims to be, is so obviously “lying” or “conflating,” while Dylan’s claim is unassailable. I’m sure giving Moses the benefit of the doubt means I’m sexist, whereas your opinion is untainted by that and therefore more pure and true. I at least admit that Dylan was abused, whether by Allen or Mia — I just don’t admit that I know any more than that.

    “once again you seem quite willing to look at things from allen’s perspective re the benefit of the doubt but this is clearly not the case when it comes to the other side of the case”

    Again, thought I was clear about this, but here you go: I can’t really look at it from Allen’s perspective exactly, because I don’t know if he’s guilty or not. So I look at it from both possible perspectives. From the perspective of a guilty man, it’s easy — he’s horrible and deserves anything that comes his way. From the perspective of an innocent man — it’s horrible if he’s the victim of an orchestrated scheme against him, even if his own creepy actions precipitated the rage behind it. Similarly, I look at Dylan from both sides too: If she’s telling the truth — it’s horrible and Allen deserves anything that comes his way. If she’s lying or believes a lie she was coached to tell — she and/or Mia are horrible and should be ashamed of this whole thing.

    I really don’t think I can say much more about this (everybody now — “Thank God!”). As I said, I’m sure I’ve missed certain facts or suppositions that you’ve seen, and maybe I’ll wade back into it all before this comes up again (and of course it’ll keep coming up as long as any of the parties are alive). But short of a smoking gun or admission of guilt, I don’t see how this ever gets out of the realm of “who do you believe?” and into the realm of “now we know exactly what happened.”

  117. YancySkancy says:

    The Polanski thing is a head-scratcher. The big question is why they didn’t boot him eons ago, solely on the basis of the rape case against him and his flight from justice. If they wanted to give him Best Director for The Pianist, fine, separate issue. I don’t even know — was he a member before he won, or was he inducted after that? If after, it seems like there would’ve been a whole can of worms at the time.

The Hot Blog

Leonard Klady's Friday Estimates
Friday Screens % Chg Cume
Title Gross Thtr % Chgn Cume
Venom 33 4250 NEW 33
A Star is Born 15.7 3686 NEW 15.7
Smallfoot 3.5 4131 -46% 31.3
Night School 3.5 3019 -63% 37.9
The House Wirh a Clock in its Walls 1.8 3463 -43% 49.5
A Simple Favor 1 2408 -50% 46.6
The Nun 0.75 2264 -52% 111.5
Hell Fest 0.6 2297 -70% 7.4
Crazy Rich Asians 0.6 1466 -51% 167.6
The Predator 0.25 1643 -77% 49.3
Also Debuting
The Hate U Give 0.17 36
Shine 85,600 609
Exes Baggage 75,900 62
NOTA 71,300 138
96 61,600 62
Andhadhun 55,000 54
Afsar 45,400 33
Project Gutenberg 36,000 17
Love Yatri 22,300 41
Hello, Mrs. Money 22,200 37
Studio 54 5,300 1
Loving Pablo 4,200 15
3-Day Estimates Weekend % Chg Cume
No Good Dead 24.4 (11,230) NEW 24.4
Dolphin Tale 2 16.6 (4,540) NEW 16.6
Guardians of the Galaxy 7.9 (2,550) -23% 305.8
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 4.8 (1,630) -26% 181.1
The Drop 4.4 (5,480) NEW 4.4
Let's Be Cops 4.3 (1,570) -22% 73
If I Stay 4.0 (1,320) -28% 44.9
The November Man 2.8 (1,030) -36% 22.5
The Giver 2.5 (1,120) -26% 41.2
The Hundred-Foot Journey 2.5 (1,270) -21% 49.4