floot
Archer Avenue Resident
Posts: 356
|
Post by floot on Oct 3, 2009 16:58:36 GMT -5
blaming Polanski's behavior on the fact that he had survived the Holocaust (what an insult to Holocaust survivors) and the fact that his wife was murdered. Many people have trauma in their lives but don't go out and rape children because of it! Harvey Weinstein clearly doesn't have a brain. Ack. Idiot. That is so incredibly insulting to the many hundreds of people who have been through horrendous trauma and yet have not gone out and raped minors.  |
|
|
|
Post by iluvtexas on Oct 3, 2009 17:45:00 GMT -5
Folks on this forum are not the only ones who strongly oppose the petition and see through the sick "Hollywood" mentality....
******************************
Huffington Post ---- Keli Goff Author, commentator and contributor to TheLoop21.com Posted: September 30, 2009 12:47
"Wonder Why Middle America Doesn't Trust Hollywood Liberals?
Three Words: Weinstein and Polanski
I used to think that when conservatives denounced the so-called "Hollywood liberal elite" as being essentially amoral and out of touch with real Americans, they were being a bit harsh. And when Sarah Palin implied that middle America was somehow more sensibly American than those of us sin-lovin'-anti-religion-anti-America-fancypants-big city folk -- I genuinely wondered what gave her (and some of my extended family in Middle America who appear to agree with her) such an idea.
Thanks to Harvey Weinstein and Co., now I know.
While our country is engulfed in two wars, struggling to climb back after falling off of an economic cliff last year and trying to find a way to provide health care for nearly fifty million uninsured Americans, I am glad to see that some of Hollywood's elite, (including Mr. Weinstein and Woody Allen, among others) have found a truly important cause worth fighting for: defending a pedophile.
My first thoughts upon learning that Mr. Weinstein was circulating a petition on behalf of Mr. Polanski were:
1) Finally! Hollywood finds a cause the average American can get behind.
2) Shouldn't Mr. Weinstein be more focused on saving his troubled studio than saving an aging fugitive?
3) When Woody Allen is coming to your defense in a case involving sex with a teenager...well, that's a punchline that writes itself.
I have been beyond baffled at the bizarre rationale (or lack thereof) used to defend this movement to save Roman Polanski -- including on this very site.
His defenders seem to alternate between three primary lines of defense:
1) "He may have done it but it was a really long time ago."
I'd never really looked at crime that way but Mr. Weinstein and his buddies may be on to something. With that in mind maybe we should stop pestering all those Nazi war criminals we have insisted on harassing for the last half century. I mean, after all, it was a really long time ago.
2) "He is really, really talented."
Also a good point. Maybe it would be easier if we just created a set of penalties specifically for "really talented" people so we can avoid this kind of confusion in the future. I know some amazing pantomimes and jugglers. Should we give them free reign to sexually assault adults? I'm assuming you actually have to win an Academy Award to be given a free pass on children. It's just too bad we already executed serial killer Ted Bundy because according to the judge who sentenced him to death, he was a talented attorney.
3) "The victim is ready to move on."
Having to endure the pain of revisiting an assault of any kind, particularly in a public forum, is something I would not wish on my own worst enemy. I can understand a victim's desire for privacy and closure, but thankfully in this country that does not trump the public's right to justice -- and protection from potential re-offenders. It is worth noting that a number of states have laws in place that give district attorneys the power to prosecute batterers even when victims of domestic violence refuse to testify, for this very reason. They may have a variety of reasons why they would rather "move on" than face their assailant in court (or perhaps more terrifying, chance facing him outside of court). But thankfully for the greater good and safety of society, it's not always up to them.
Hollywood hypocrisy is one thing when it takes the form of a celebrity touting their environmental consciousness while globetrotting in a fuel-guzzling private jet (ahem, Madonna.) But when people like Mr. Weinstein, who supports a plethora of liberal candidates, and was the producing arm behind Michael Moore's iconic, cinematic Bush takedown "Fahrenheit 9/11," seem content to paint the former president as harmful to Americans but Roman Polanski as merely misunderstood, they are proving Sarah Palin and every other anti-Hollywood conservative's point for them.
It is not for me to say that Mr. Weinstein and his cohorts have no moral compass but I will venture to say that they are certainly out of touch and maybe out of their minds. Because in the parts of America that so many of us in big cities think of dismissively as "flyover country," they may not know that Le Cirque is a restaurant, but they do know that pedophiles are a bad thing -- regardless of how rich, talented or influential they may be.
Writer, director and Polanski acquaintance Luc Besson provided a welcome measure of clarity on this whole mess in a recent radio interview when he said, "This is a man who I love a lot and know a little bit... Our daughters are good friends. But there is one justice, and that should be the same for everyone. I will let justice happen...I don't have any opinion on this, but I have a daughter, 13 years-old. And if she was violated, nothing would be the same, even 30 years later."
Even if the violator in question is really, really talented."
|
|
|
|
Post by tinalouise on Oct 3, 2009 17:59:11 GMT -5
So in reading the petition you could also say that the people who signed were not protesting against him being held accountable for this crime or for being extradited, but the manner in which he was arrested and now being held? This is a question not a statement. This is the first time since it happened that I believe all of the details have really been published. All the people that I know that I have asked about it thought that it was a case of "consensual" sex with a minor and therefore statutory rape. I myself did not understand how seedy the whole thing was and thought it was a 17 year old or something. I will give the people who signed this the benefit of the doubt that they did not really know the full details of the case and hope they change their stance in the near future. Wes will be doing press for FMF, so lets see what he has to say. Boycotting Harvey Weinstein would mean never seeing a Miramax film again. He also has Weinstien company which produces such shows as Project Runway. His list of films produced is most impressive. It would include Inglourious Basterds, The Reader, Rambo, Halloween, The Scary Movies, The Aviator, The Kill Bills, Cold Mountain, Chicago, Gangs of New York, Lord of the Rings, Chocolat, Shakespeare in Love, Good Will Hunting, The English Patient, Pulp Fiction.. the list goes on. IMDB list 221 movies produced and 20 in the works. www.imdb.com/name/nm0005544/ |
|
|
|
Post by iluvtexas on Oct 3, 2009 18:27:24 GMT -5
It has been stated on this forum over and over that this child was 13 years old. **************************************** As for Miramax & Weinstein Co. according to recent reports both are in big, big financial trouble and fading fast....  **************************************** Here is some Excellent News.... The backlash is growing in Hollywood and around the world against Polanski....Actress Kirstie Alley wrote on Twitter "JUST FOR THE RECORD....RAPE IS RAPE...this is one HOLLYWOOD STAR who does not CELEBRATE or DEFEND Roman Polanski..his ART did not RAPE her." Thank You Kirstie!  *************************************************** On Wednesday, the BBC reported that the French government had dropped its public support for the release of Polanski stating that the director "is neither above nor beneath the law." Thank You to the French Govt. for finally seeing the light! & Thank You to the BBC for reporting it! |
|
|
|
Post by tinalouise on Oct 3, 2009 18:31:39 GMT -5
I realize that. I am talking about the day of and a few days after the arrest. The details have been made clear since then.
Miramax has been in financial trouble for awhile. It has nothing to do with this.
And as with the French government, I am wondering if more people will end their support now that more of the facts have been made clear.
|
|
floot
Archer Avenue Resident
Posts: 356
|
Post by floot on Oct 3, 2009 18:38:21 GMT -5
I myself did not understand how seedy the whole thing was and thought it was a 17 year old or something. I will give the people who signed this the benefit of the doubt that they did not really know the full details of the case and hope they change their stance in the near future. Wes will be doing press for FMF, so lets see what he has to say. I hope you're right. There are people on that list whose opinions I don't give a toss about, but others who I'd be sorry to think could support Polanski if they knew the details of the case. I really hope anyone on it who finds they are in that position will have the guts to stand up and say they were wrong. edit: I read an article which claims Polanski "faces a sentence as low as probation and as high as 16 months in prison for pleading guilty to having sex with a minor". If he's looking at *up to* 16 months in prison, considering the charges, then I think he'd be getting off pretty lightly and should think himself lucky. |
|
|
|
Post by tinalouise on Oct 3, 2009 18:58:38 GMT -5
I want to add a comment about the attitude of "Yeah! Mirimax is fading fast!". So your new contempt of Harvey Weinstien makes you happy that because of the recession people that have nothing to do with the Polanski petition are losing their jobs? www.variety.com/article/VR1118009482.html?categoryid=13&cs=1 |
|
|
|
Post by texasgal on Oct 3, 2009 22:29:51 GMT -5
I find it difficult to believe that all these industry insiders are now claiming they didn't know the facts of the case. Puh-leeze! I knew enough of the facts (such as the victim's age) when the crime first happened(!), and I'm a Nobody. I think it more likely the signers of the petition have become aware of what schmucks the public have discovered them to be, and are now scrambling for damage control.
I resent Ms. Goff's reference to them as "liberals." I think "a$$holes" is the accurate word. I subscribe to an alternative news service that Ms. Goff might consider far left-field liberal, and that service has an article posted denouncing Roman Polanski.
|
|
|
|
Post by iluvtexas on Oct 3, 2009 23:17:51 GMT -5
I want to add a comment about the attitude of "Yeah! Mirimax is fading fast!". So your new contempt of Harvey Weinstein makes you happy that because of the recession people that have nothing to do with the Polanski petition are losing their jobs? Did I say that I was happy about folks being laid off? I don't remember that in my earlier comment and I offer an apology if my comment gave that impression. However, if you mean am I contented to see someone such as Harvey Weinstein lose his self absorbed, egotistical power in Hollywood then yes, as the saying goes "what goes around comes around" If you put bad "Karma" (meaning the force generated by a person's actions) out there then most likely that is what your going to get back...By supporting Polanski to me that is very bad "Karma." Do I wish ill will for him? No I do not.I do hope for him that he will realize/learn that Hollywood celebrity is not above the law and that condoning the rape of a child is not just unlawful, it is absurd, it is bad, very bad.....On another note I am curious and bewildered in part by your question to me. Why would you ask me if I am happy to see folks lose their job? Perhaps it is that you just want to spark more discussion on this topic. Perhaps you disagree with my comments. Maybe you just enjoy movies and enjoy the ones Harvey Weinstein produces which is fine. I am a fan of movies too. It's just that for me personally I will not support the movies and such, of the folks who signed the petition. I am not asking anyone else to do the same. In fact my conviction(s) against the petition and Polanski have spurred me to contribute more comments to this topic on this forum than any other topic since I became a "Wilsonette." I do not expect other folks to hold the same opinion as mine but I will say it is nice not to be alone in feeling that support of Polanski via a petition or otherwise is wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by tinalouise on Oct 3, 2009 23:31:17 GMT -5
You said : 'As for Miramax & Weinstein Co. according to recent reports both are in big, big financial trouble and fading fast.... ' Which reads to me that you are happy that the company is failing ...which made me point out that the company is failing would not only affect Mr. Weinstien but a whole array of people not connected to the thing you are angry about. Oh and no, I do not question you to spark more discussion about this topic. It is a valid question. I am pretty much sick of this topic. |
|
|
|
Post by iluvtexas on Oct 3, 2009 23:52:10 GMT -5
Simply put I feel compassion for anyone who works for his company(s) now knowing they work for someone who condones rape against a child.
|
|
Vera
Ned Coleman's Partner
Posts: 172
|
Post by Vera on Oct 4, 2009 10:39:49 GMT -5
Weinstein's company is barely keeping its head afloat, and then Weinstein sends this letter, badly miscalculating public opinion. Maybe he will now learn a lesson and keep his nose out of controversial issues until he has all the facts. He also needs to learn a lesson that rape (especially child rape) is a horrendous, unspeakable crime not, as he put it, a "so-called crime." He owes his employees an apology for perhaps putting the final nail in his company's coffin. No one else is to blame except Harvey himself. Wes needs to learn that same lesson as I'm sure there will be at least some people who will boycott Mr. Fox.
|
|
|
|
Post by tinalouise on Oct 5, 2009 17:37:27 GMT -5
I was VERY done with this topic and was never going to post on it again, but I have to say that I feel that it could only be someone from this site who posted on my IMDB profile:
"You are a total scumbag and loser for still supporting the pro child molesting nerd/geek Wes Anderson... and I hope you both rot in hell"
YOur comment has been deleted and I hope you are banned.
|
|
Vera
Ned Coleman's Partner
Posts: 172
|
Post by Vera on Oct 5, 2009 19:03:09 GMT -5
Tinalouise, That is horrible that someone would say that to you. I think they have completely misinterpreted your position (in that you are supportive of Wes, but not necessarily Polanski) and to say to someone to rot in hell is just immature, mean, and taking it way too far. My guess that it would be a lurker to this board because I don't think that anyone here that I know of would say such a thing--at least I hope not. At any rate, perhaps it's time to end this discussion here in light of this development.
|
|
|
|
Post by Remi on Oct 5, 2009 19:51:50 GMT -5
This thread is getting completely out of hand. Tinalouise, I'm sorry someone said that to you, but I think it's inappropriate to post about it here and accuse someone here of doing it. Any further discussion regarding the post should be taken to PMs or taken back over to IMDb.
|
|
