jaedmc Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 SHILL~! My newest column on the cinematography of Wim Wenders' Paris, Texas: http://www.soundonsight.org/through-this-lens-wim-wenders-paris-texas/ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curt McGirt Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Jae: I'm confused. L.M. Kit Carson is listed as the screenwriter and Sam Shepard the playwright for Paris, Texas on its Wiki page, then I look Sam up there and it says he's the screenwriter. Which is it? Wait now I see he won a BAFTA Award for best adapted screenplay... I'm confused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ultimoDANK Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 I really, REALLY never want to hear anyone drone on and on about how brilliant Woody Allen is ever again. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaedmc Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Jae: I'm confused. L.M. Kit Carson is listed as the screenwriter and Sam Shepard the playwright for Paris, Texas on its Wiki page, then I look Sam up there and it says he's the screenwriter. Which is it? Wait now I see he won a BAFTA Award for best adapted screenplay... I'm confused. I'm not entirely sure, but from what I understand Sam Shepard wrote the first half of the movie, and they filmed chrologocially. So as Wenders approached the second half of the film, Shepard was hella busy with another movie in Canada(or around Canada), which made communication tough. I would assume Carson helped out in some fashion. I'm actually confused about the adapted part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 I really, REALLY never want to hear anyone drone on and on about how brilliant Woody Allen is ever again. Reading over everything, I think he's probably guilty, but there's at least some doubt. Basically, I might not convict him if I were on a jury, but no way am I going to be able to see his films again or look at them the same way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaedmc Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 I really can't figure out one way or the other about how I feel. The first article I read, just before the Open Letter was the one from the Daily Beast that explained some misconceptions about his relationship with Soon-yi. For example, I thought it was his adopted daughter daughter and that she was under aged when it started, but those are both false. He wasn't even living with Mia Farrow. So the my feelings on that situation is that he's still a total asshole for dropping Mia Farrow for her daughter. That's an epic shitty move. The Dylan stuff I'm very perplexed about, and I can't really say one way or the other about it. Having a penchant for younger women (say 19) is a lot different than molesting a seven year old. Apparently the court said she hadn't been molested back then. And now her brother says it's bullshit. So it sounds like there's a lot of dysfunction all around. So I honestly have no idea what to believe, and until something more concrete about it comes out, I don't think it'll really affect how I watch his movies. At least not anymore than him being skeezy has already. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 I think Dylan 100% believes it happened, and since allegations like this are usually true, I lean towards Allen being guilty. The "Mia brainwashed her" theory, that even the brother backed up, is interesting. As is the lack of any physical evidence when the authorities investigated in 1992. But, really, can you convince a child something happened when it clearly didn't? To the point they can still graphically remember it 20 years later? Farrow would have to be some sort of cult leader/psychological genius to pull that one off. It's too far fetched. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaedmc Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 But, really, can you convince a child something happened when it clearly didn't? To the point they can still graphically remember it 20 years later? My response would be, how do you know she's graphically remembering it now? I can't say if she was brainwashed, but it's possible she's making things up now. There's so many bizarre issues here, that picking a side is almost pointless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Probably the only mildly amusing thing to come out of this whole sorry debacle is that Moses Farrow is a family therapist. Talk about having a lifetime's experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgundy LaRue Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 To make up something of that magnitude and to keep said fabrication going for over 20 years would be a feat. That's not to say that it can't happen. But it would be really difficult to maintain for so long. It's clear that both Woody and Mia are fractured people. Even if he did wait until Soon-Yi was of legal age to date her, she's still Mia's daughter. He watched her grow up, parental influence or not. That's sleazy, no matter how you look at it. Mia appears to be wound up too tight. I understand being devastated at what happened between Woody and Soon-Yi. But IIRC, she sent Woody a card with slash marks through her and the childrens' chests, signifying that he had stabbed them in the heart. Which he did, but that's not how to express her frustration. She also now claims that Frank Sinatra fathered her son Ronan--never mind that Frank was married to someone else at her son's conception. I feel bad for Woody and Mia's kids. They're caught between two people who were too messed up to become parents, but did so anyway. There's just no way this will end well for anyone involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caley Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 I really can't figure out one way or the other about how I feel. The first article I read, just before the Open Letter was the one from the Daily Beast that explained some misconceptions about his relationship with Soon-yi. For example, I thought it was his adopted daughter daughter and that she was under aged when it started, but those are both false. He wasn't even living with Mia Farrow. So the my feelings on that situation is that he's still a total asshole for dropping Mia Farrow for her daughter. That's an epic shitty move. Let's also not forget that the Daily Beast piece was by Robert Weide, who has a picture of himself with Woody Allen as his Twitter profile, made a doc. about Allen etc. etc. so it's not like he's an impartial third party or anything. This piece also does an interesting job of attacking said article and author. http://www.slate.com/articles/life/culturebox/2014/02/woody_allen_s_biggest_defender_robert_weide_s_attack_on_mia_farrow_and_her.html To me, the whole thing is fascinating in the realm of the cult of celebrity. You give me just about any movie star, current or old, and level a child molestation charge against them and everyone would pile on about what a monster he is. But, for some reason, when it's Woody Allen, there seems to be a lot of blind denial (Stephen King basically called the Farrow's daughter a bitch for writing it) around it. Why is that?! I mean, if someone came forward tomorrow and said "Michael Bay molested me when I was 7!", there would not be near the level of defence of his character, except by those currently working with him, nor would be there a huge amount of "Let's wait and see..." and "I don't want to say she's lying but..." arguments, there would be a lot more "I always knew he was a pervert..." and "He should be locked up" comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 Just because people aren't going after Allen with torches and pitchforks, doesn't mean they're blindly worshiping the guy. I guarantee if this were some sort of Sandusky/Saville, situations and you had loads more people coming out and claiming they were abused by him, Allen's career would be over, no questions asked. This situation is a bit more murky because there is genuine doubt. There is probably some element of people wanting to believe the allegations are false, sure, but I really believe if the evidence was more concrete it would be a different story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 That said, Stephen King's comments were totally unforgivable. Is he back drinking again, or what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaedmc Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 I'm not a fan, his work has no influence over me. If anything I’m a bigger fan of Mia Farrow. I just don't know what to believe, because everyone in the situation has acted so strange. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Fowler Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 I guarantee if this were some sort of Sandusky/Saville, situations and you had loads more people coming out and claiming they were abused by him, Allen's career would be over, no questions asked. Tell that to Bill Cosby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgundy LaRue Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 I'm just learning about how far the accusations go with Cosby. Reading about them will make your skin crawl. I knew there had been accusations of adultery and SOME misconduct in the past, and that Cosby is no saint, but there's a lot more to it than that. Vile stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Fowler Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 There is such a collective amnesia to it (and that totally includes me, before Gawker ran a piece about this week, I didn't remember that it had happened at all.) Point is, a whole lot of people can accuse you, but if you are famous enough, and beloved enough, it will just kinda vanish from the public memory unless you get convicted (or plead guilty and then leave the country.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivpvideos Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 I think Dylan 100% believes it happened, and since allegations like this are usually true, I lean towards Allen being guilty. The "Mia brainwashed her" theory, that even the brother backed up, is interesting. As is the lack of any physical evidence when the authorities investigated in 1992. But, really, can you convince a child something happened when it clearly didn't? To the point they can still graphically remember it 20 years later? Farrow would have to be some sort of cult leader/psychological genius to pull that one off. It's too far fetched. Up until I was 20 I thought I was at a family function that had happened two years before I was born. I heard enough stories about it growing up I was convinced I was there. Years later when some relative died I found out the truth. Our memories can never truly be confirmed to be ours or just stuff we pieced together. If she pushed it hard enough I believe she could convince her it happened. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Dave Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 Saw Monuments Men tonight. MUCH better than I thought it would be. At heart, it's a caper film. Think National Treasure meets Saving Private Ryan, and I mean that as a compliment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 Honest trailers do Robocop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivpvideos Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 Had a free ticket to see Jack Ryan from buying a Blu-Ray. Was 20 minutes late so I used the ticket and saw I, Frankenstein instead. I found out tonight that even if they don't sell a single ticket for a movie they still play it as I was the only person in the theatre. Movie was exactly what you thought it was. Decent action but terrible otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bustronaut Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 I've been reading reviews for the new ROBOCOP, and it seems like 1) It might actually be good and 2) it may be too ambitious for a crowd of Robocop fans. It's weird that so many remakes/adaptations are SOOOOO divisive among reviewers nowadays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antacular Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 Thank god someone else said it, because I wasn't going to stick my neck out for this, but the new Robocop doesn't look like the shit sandwich one would assume. But I also have no attachment to the originals (saw each of them once years back), so that might be a factor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig H Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 The new Robocop is elevated by Michael Keaton. Honestly though, it doesn't look that bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lawful Metal Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 Apropos of nothing, but there is a gigantic ad for Nurse 3D featuring a naked, bloody Paz de la Huerta on Stereogum right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts