|
|
Post by iluvtexas on Oct 1, 2009 22:02:11 GMT -5
I just know for myself any crime against a child is to me the worst of the worst out there. Also any mistreatment of an animal or pet also ranks up there too. A child depends on an adult, parent or otherwise to protect them, teach them, love them unconditionally not drug and rape them.
I am curious however if any of the folks willing to let bygone crimes be bygone crimes such as those who have signed the petition have done; do they have a 13 year old daughter? Or a daughter of any age? Would they feel the same way if this were their child?
Obviously, this child did not have responsible parents for a 13 year old to be attending a party such as one with drugs etc. From the victims comments in the news article she forgave her mother as well. I think it is safe to assume she did not have anyone standing up for her throughout this ordeal.
Well, 30 years later I think standing up for this victim in saying "No way is this considered acceptable or justifiable or anything"able" by not supporting the movies, TV shows or events of anyone who signed the petition is one way to let Hollywood see first hand they do not live by separate laws outside the laws every other person on the planet lives by. There are boundaries and consequences if you break the law, cross the line. abuse a child, kill someone etc. you have to accept the punishment.
To pay money to see a movie of any one of those folks who signed the petition so they can earn big salary's when obviously by signing the petition they condone the actions of drugging and raping a child well I repeat not me... There are more interesting things in life to do than go to a movie or sit in front of a TV...I don't personally watch a lot of Television so that won't be hard to walk away from and there are more actors/directors who have not signed the petition than have signed it so maybe there will still be movies to enjoy...For example you don't see Clint Eastwood's signature on that petition or Ben Stiller's or any of the Wilson Boys....I admire and respect them for that.
Polanski knows it was wrong and he has had 30 plus years to turn himself in but no he is a coward and any other despicable word out there as well. As for as the type of punishment he should receive, a chain gang or Alcatraz is too good for him. He should get the worst penalty out there and in the mean time rot in his own cowardness....
Good grief he should not be rewarded with a lifetime achievement award and supported with a petition signed by Hollywood folks who think they are above the law.
|
|
|
|
Post by tinalouise on Oct 1, 2009 22:09:00 GMT -5
|
|
Vera
Ned Coleman's Partner
Posts: 172
|
Post by Vera on Oct 1, 2009 22:37:08 GMT -5
Anyone who feels sympathy for Polanski would not if they read the victim's entire testimony, which is here: www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/polanskicover1.htmlIt absolutely does not matter that the victim wants to forget about it--who blames her? But Polanski ran without serving his full sentence, and justice in this case has not been done. Many states have laws where they can prosecute domestic violence cases without victims' consent, because so many victims of domestic abuse are afraid to prosecute. In this case, it is completely out of the victim's hands because he was already through the prosecution process and was about to be sentenced when he fled like the slithering coward that he is. Also, yes, Polanski survived the Holocaust. If Hitler had survived and been captured after 30 years, would Polanski want to let him off the hook? I think not. Would he want to free Manson on compassionate grounds because he's getting older? I think not. I am absolutely flabbergasted that Wes and all the others would sign this petition. They only did it because they so honor his work. His directing skills, however, do not excuse anally, orally, and vaginally raping a 13 year old after plying her with champagne and Quaaludes. I certainly will NOT be seeing Mr. Fox--a children's movie of all things! Wes, please retract your support of this sick monster! |
|
|
|
Post by texasgal on Oct 2, 2009 6:12:58 GMT -5
Iluvtexas, I had asked the same question: Would the signers of the petition still have done so if it had been their 13-year-old child? I wonder. In fact, it could be asked if they should be allowed around children since they have such a glitch in their morals.
But what do we do if a petition signer collaborates with a non-signer? For example, no, I don't feel like seeing Mr. Fox either. But if Wes collaborates with the Wilsons again, should one boycott that movie because of Wes or see it because of the Wilsons?
The petition list is so long that maybe a list should be made of the people who have not signed. That way, one could have a better idea of whether or not their work is worthy of our purchase.
It's interesting that this should come up now when I'm considering cancelling my cable service to save money. I'd still get two networks and PBS but they might be fuzzy. I've been without TV before and was surprised by how much I didn't miss it.
As for the French, well, that's one French person's opinion. But, generally speaking, the French have always looked down their noses at Americans anyway, haven't they? That's been cliche for as long as I can remember. But Polanski has supporters in many countries.
|
|
floot
Archer Avenue Resident
Posts: 356
|
Post by floot on Oct 2, 2009 6:30:05 GMT -5
Still, I'd like to ask Whoopi Goldberg that if that wasn't rape, what does she think rape is? And I'd ask Debra Winger: in what way does the art world "suffer" I'd like to ask a few of those questions myself. It wasn't "rape-rape"??! Was that the quote from Whoopi? What the heck??! I'm kind of gobsmacked by a quote from the Telegraph article - his lawyer claims that; "There is no reason in law, or regarding the facts or in terms of the most basic justice, to keep Roman Polanski a single day in prison" HUH!?!?!? I would have thought that "the most basic justice" would suggest there has been no reason why he hasn't already spent a lot of days in prison, bar his cowardice in running from the law and his wealth, clout and dual citizenship allowing him to live openly despite being effectively a fugitive. What does that say about justice? How much of a UK TV license would go to Hollywood producers I have no idea, but as I haven't had TV for five years, it's neither here nor there for me. (I almost never go to the cinema either (haven't been for years) and 95% of my DVDs are bought 2nd hand; frankly, there's not much for me to boycott.) The forgiving viewpoint I have the most sympathy with is the victim, but I still don't think it is, or should be, her place to say that's it's OK for him to just run away from his crime and never face justice. I don't consider not being able to visit the US and being "snubbed" as one article put it to be "justice". Like I said before, I just hope no one else who I would like to be able to respect appears on that list. I hope that some of the potential signees will ponder what they would feel if it was their 13 year old daughter before adding their name and their weight. It makes me sad that anyone can think it's OK. |
|
|
|
Post by texasgal on Oct 2, 2009 6:41:30 GMT -5
No, it isn't up to the victim whether or not a case goes to trial. She is free to forgive him all she wants but it really isn't her call. The thing she dreads is that if he is extradited and goes back to trial (which he surely would if he gets extradited to U.S.), that she may have to testify all over again. She has said she really doesn't want to go through that all over again. It's a shame she will have to but that is Polanski's fault, not the justice system's. To drop this case and let it go would send a terrible message to children and society in general.
|
|
floot
Archer Avenue Resident
Posts: 356
|
Post by floot on Oct 2, 2009 6:49:59 GMT -5
Yeah, exactly - I really feel for her, and it's understandable why she would feel that way. She is about the only person I can understand toeing the "let's forget about it" line, as she has good reasons to want to put it behind her. Others, I just can't fathom what they are thinking.
But as you say, that is Polanski's fault, and it doesn't mean it's OK for him not to face justice. I'm appalled and disappointed that others are using her generosity in forgiving him as an excuse for what he did.
|
|
|
|
Post by iluvtexas on Oct 2, 2009 8:56:44 GMT -5
"But what do we do if a petition signer collaborates with a non-signer? For example, no, I don't feel like seeing Mr. Fox either. But if Wes collaborates with the Wilson's again, should one boycott that movie because of Wes or see it because of the Wilson's?"
Texasgal, I can only answer your question as it pertains to my personal conviction. If it is a Wes Anderson movie I will not give it any attention, I won't pay to see it, I would not watch it for free even if a "Wilson" is in it.
"Mr. Fox" is a good example, it is a Wes Anderson movie and Owen has a part in it....Up to this point I was interested in seeing it because Owen has a part in it. But not anymore.
I will also go as far to state my additional opinion about Wes Anderson....
I think by signing the petition he has shown his "true colors" in that he views drugs and rape against a child unimportant.
Yet he just made a movie which children would watch. One can assume from his actions that it is not about the "art form" any longer it's about the money....and what would have the widest appeal to the general public....a movie for kids and family.
It is sad to think that by signing that petition (in my view) Wes Anderson signed away a part of his integrity, that I do not think he will ever completely recover even if he were to remove his name from the petition and offer an explanation as to why he chose to sign it in the first place.
That said he owes no explanation to anyone it's his choice to express his views etc. etc. but I wonder how much thought he put forth before signing his name and if there would be any indirect repercussions for doing so.... Maybe at the end of the day, odd as it would seem, he just does not care what anyone thinks one way or another.... #unsure#
|
|
Vera
Ned Coleman's Partner
Posts: 172
|
Post by Vera on Oct 2, 2009 10:51:44 GMT -5
I agree with what everyone is saying against Polanski and your disappointment in Wes.
I do think that the victim would not have to testify again...the litigation has already taken place...it is just the sentencing left at this point. Polanski served his 42-day psych eval and the judge was about to sentence him when Polanski ran, fearing the judge was not going to honor the plea agreement, which a judge has a perfect right to do under the law.
The other thing is that Wes has always struck me as a snob. I know Owen felt that way when he first saw Wes in class wearing some pretentious outfit and duck boots. Also, Wes long ago abandoned Texas and seemed embarrassed about being from there and moved to Paris. He has probably done a lot of hanging out with Polanski while living there, which may have been a partial influence on him in making the decision to sign the petition. I bet Fox (the studio behind Mr. Fox) is sweating bullets wondering if the movie attendance will go down because of Wes' ill-advised choice in signing the petition.
|
|
|
|
Post by meowencrazy on Oct 2, 2009 11:47:31 GMT -5
The other thing is that Wes has always struck me as a snob. I know Owen felt that way when he first saw Wes in class wearing some pretentious outfit and duck boots. Also, Wes long ago abandoned Texas and seemed embarrassed about being from there and moved to Paris. He has probably done a lot of hanging out with Polanski while living there, which may have been a partial influence on him in making the decision to sign the petition. I bet Fox (the studio behind Mr. Fox) is sweating bullets wondering if the movie attendance will go down because of Wes' ill-advised choice in signing the petition. I understand you're angry, I even understand your dislike for Wes. But I don't see why you need to insult him so openly in a forum dedicated to him. Please don't forget the fact that this is a fan forum. I didn't wanna comment here because of the controversial topic, but I will say this: I don't agree with Wes. I think it was wrong. But I like Mr. Anderson for being the filmmaker he is and not the man. I don't see how my view is gonna make a difference to him. There must be some reason why he acted the way he did. Even if I stop watching his movies, he is still gonna stand by his decision. I don't care about Polanski, but I do care about the woman going through all of this. She has suffered enough. I just hope all of this doesn't last too long, and she gets her "Justice"*. She has faced enough humiliation already. |
|
|
|
Post by iluvtexas on Oct 2, 2009 12:28:36 GMT -5
Nala
I think you make some very good points...
SP
In my opinion what has been voiced thus far regarding Wes has not been insulting. He made his decision thus the comments made toward him regarding his decision are just part of the indirect repercussion(s) he should have considered before he made his choices.
Mr. Anderson the director/filmmaker is still the same man. Those ideas and stories he directs all come from his perceptions. What has changed is now we know he condones the actions of a man who used drugs on a child and raped the same child. Wes Anderson is not the man/director I once perceived him to be. Furthermore, if he has stepped aside from his Texas roots .... Good.... "and don't let the door hit ya on your way out of town...."
I don't think one opinion is more valuable than any other I stated mine based on my conviction(s) regarding this topic and I learn from reading others point of view as well. What I think everyone on this forum has in common regarding this one subject and Wes is that no one expected his signature to be on that petition. I know I would have lost "my last dollar" betting he would not have signed it if you had asked me before I knew.... #unsure#
|
|
Vera
Ned Coleman's Partner
Posts: 172
|
Post by Vera on Oct 2, 2009 13:25:17 GMT -5
SP--I didn't mean to be insulting, I was just picking up on Owen had said once in an article: ' "The first time Owen Wilson met Wes Anderson, at a college playwriting class in Austin, the future director made an immediate impression. “He walked in wearing L.L. Bean duck-hunting boots and shorts,” Wilson recalled, “Which I thought was kind of obnoxious.”'
I don't think Wes is reading this, but I wish he was because I'd tell him to read the smoking gun transcript and give him the chance to change/modify his position. I think he has a chance to redeem himself to his fans if he does so, because I think we all would try to find a way to forget about this if he would back away from Polanski and take a strong public stance against child rape.
|
|
|
|
Post by lonegazer on Oct 2, 2009 13:37:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by rach on Oct 2, 2009 16:02:29 GMT -5
when ppl say europe is supporting polanski,this does not mean great britain, we r disgusted with polankski and his fan club.i hope justice is finally served.as 4 wes anderson i am finished with him,hope luke wilson never works with him again
|
|
|
|
Post by rach on Oct 2, 2009 18:38:49 GMT -5
when i posted this topic i thought i would get a blacklash.so happy that fellow wes fans r disgusted with him too.
|
|
