POLANSKI - Good Riddance

[Meini Again]

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, the organization behind the Oscars, said in a statement Friday that "the procedures taken to expel Mr. Polanski were fair and reasonable."
Earlier Friday, lawyers for the 85-year-old Polanski filed papers in Los Angeles Superior Court asking that a judge restore his membership because he was not given a fair chance to make his case to the academy.

The 13 year old girl, he was alleged to have had sex with..... her mother present or in the proximty at all times by the swimming pool...was a 'potential' star in his future films. (Mother and Daughter thought)

Both mother and daughter withdrew complaints in the ensuing years
... as Polanksi had fled US Justice and ... according to some jourons.... they both received payments over the years as Polanski rebuilded his earnings in Europe.Mainly hiding in France, and later in Switzerland.

AS A WRITER /DIRECTOR:

I think he was brilliant.
From the 'Wardobe" short - to - "Knife in the Water'.......to.....'Repulsion' with Deneueve ~ ~ I'd seen his star rise in the 60s in the UK.

Then Hollywood called, and I think he went a bit mental and wasn't protected as he thought he would be with the lifestyle he he flaunted.

That he ran away from US Justice is an explanation for his cowardice.
That other Countries allow him 'freedom' explains their honourability.

That Polanski wants, pays for and supports such a ludricrous endeavour.... shows that at 85 years old the ego is wanting... imo

I still think he was a brill Director/Writer in the UK and Poland.

But the guy was a Paedophile,,, even if that was accepted in Hollywood at that time......

[Nightjar]

In order to understand Polanski better you need to factor in his experiences as a Jewish child growing up in the Kraków Ghetto during WWII and the general air of dread, horror and death he experienced directly throughout his upbringing during this period.

You need also to remember that his wife, Sharon Tate was - amongst others - gruesomely murdered and mutilated in one of the most shocking, notorious and well-publicised crimes ever committed.

Just a quick scan of his Wikipedia biography makes for pretty hair-raising reading...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Polanski

Of course, these don't excuse what he did to the 13 year old Samantha Gailey in '77, but it should also be acknowledged that after she sued Polanski in the '80s (settling out of court) Gailey stated in 2008:

"I don't wish for him to be held to further punishment or consequences."

Again, I'm not to try to put Polanski in at all a good light here, but there are more factors at play than simply the flip assessment that "Hollywood called, and I think he went a bit mental" when a reckoning is made of the man's general state of mind during this period and throughout his life.

What's more, the idea that "Hollywood called" and that was an irreversible direction he took in regards to his career isn't exactly true either as he followed his first two mainstream films (The Fearless Vampire Killers and Rosemary's Baby) with a series of quite oddball, non-Hollywood films (Macbeth, What? , the F1 documentary Weekend of a Champion etc) before making the magnificent Chinatown in '74 - six years after Rosemary's Baby.

He then made The Tenant, which is about as uncommercial as a film can get.

So, anyway, my point is, with Polanski, nothing's all that simple and the man and his life are, just like his films, singularly bizarre, dark, perverse and profoundly disturbing.

[Meini Again]

A Peadophile is a Peadophile Is a Peadophile.

Im not bothered with his alleged childhood traumas

I'm bothered with actions TAKEN as an ADULT against a child. BY HIM



And, yes, the seeming compliance of the child's mother, should
have brought charges for her. They didn't... as we know this was "Free and Easy Hollywood"

A Peadophile is a Peadophile Is a Peadophile.
I'm bothered with actions TAKEN as an ADULT against a child.

BY HIM

Yep, he made good films... so did Weinstein / Spacey etc

Their abuses are ongoing Court Cases... BUT- that Polanski has the gall to reconsider being "rehabited" speaks to me of money.
Royalties and Fees and release of his bank accounts.... seized when he ran away.

I'm bothered with his actions TAKEN as an ADULT against a child.

You @nightjar...... seem to think it's excusable..... or explainable..... through his childhood..... and subsequently Low Financed Films....jeez....

[haroldeye]

Erm it's spelt paedophile. Just saying.


My nieces range from 4 to 17. If some adult tried to shag one of them I would be quite happy to explain my actions in a court of law.

[Sir Honkers]

What always sickened me about that case was how many notable celebrities fell over themselves to praise him for being a great film maker. As if that should be a reason to forgive him his sins. The only one who had that right was his victim.

[sea-man]

Originally Posted by loosegoose

What always sickened me about that case was how many notable celebrities fell over themselves to praise him for being a great film maker. As if that should be a reason to forgive him his sins. The only one who had that right was his victim.

Well said, he was a revolting excuse for a human being.

[Nightjar]

Originally Posted by Meini Again

You @nightjar...... seem to think it's excusable..... or explainable..... through his childhood..... and subsequently Low Financed Films....jeez....
[/B]

Christ almighty.

Wind your neck in, chum.

Where do I make any excuses for Polanski in my post?

I'm more concerned that your 'biography' of him and his career as a director in the OP is sketchy at best and fails to go anywhere near explaining his abhorrent behaviour during the late '70s (and possibly at other times as well).

My point was to provide further non-subjective information about the man.

For example, the quote from Samantha Gailey is merely a matter of recorded fact that throws another shade on affairs.

In truth, I'm not sure what your point was in creating this thread:

- To condemn him outright?

In which case you didn't.

- To explain and understand him and/or his actions?

In which case you didn't.

- To explain and understand paedophiles in general?

In which case you didn't.

- To condemn paedophiles outright and without debate?

In which case you didn't.

Your assessment seems to merely that "Hollywood called, and I think he went a bit mental", which, for such a grave charge seems to me to be inadequate.

My assessment is that you are conflicted about your love of his earlier films and his later repulsive actions and that you'd like to square it in a frankly inaccurate and half-baked fashion.

Personally, like you, I'm also highly conflicted - I really like a number of his films (just like I like Off The Wall and The Usual Suspects and I Spy etc etc) as I'm sure many of us are since the revelations about multiple high-profile (and in may cases well-liked) celebrities in the last decade or so.

I mean, what's to do?

It's a complicated and difficult debate - and one that, IMO, deserves discussing.

For example, do we turn our back on all the work these now-disgraced, formerly-lauded paragons of the arts?

If you like "Billie Jean", is it possible to unlike it in light of what's now known (and frankly was always tacitly known) about Jackson?

Or do we look at his life and background and try to understand the monster he, and many others, became?

To me, the threat that paedophiles pose can only be dealt with effectively in the long run by analysis and understanding of the problem - y'know, like AIDS or Smallpox or Asbestos or Thalidomide?

Forewarned is forearmed and all that.


Anyway, if you really want a really nasty director-as-child abuser story, check out the guy who directed the Jeepers Creepers films...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victor_Salva

I don't see any of the TV networks banning his films either.


PS - I always knew Jimmy Savile and Rolf Harris were wrong-uns.

In fact, in the '90s, my Mum even vetoed the official renaming of the youth club in West London where she worked "The Savile" (he'd opened it in '80s).

During that meeting the others present seemed to think she was being irrational and overreacting.

She simply said that the guy was a fucking paedophile and all-round weirdo and that she'd quit if they renamed it after him.

They didn't.

[Mal Hombre]

Let's all wind in Our necks,That little pervert is not worth falling out over.

[Nightjar]

Incidentally...

And in case anyone's not seen it and wishes to, I don't mean to create any SPOILERS!

...but what's one of the most significant, underlying and disturbing themes of the film Chinatown?

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by Meini Again

The 13 year old girl, he was alleged to have had sex with..... her mother present or in the proximty at all times by the swimming pool...was a 'potential' star in his future films. (Mother and Daughter thought)

I remember reading that Mr Polanski pleaded guilty to the offence of unlawful relations with a minor in return for five other more serious charges being dropped - they call it "plea-bargaining" in the States. When it became apparent that he was likely to receive a lengthy custodial sentence Mr Polanski had it on his toes and was next heard of in France - he has been evading various attempts to extradite him ever since. I don't think we need to say "alleged". He pleaded guilty and then ran away from justice, so his crime is "alleged" in the way the US media used to pretend that the My Lai Massacre was "alleged."

The really notable fact of the story is that all the facts about Polanski have been in the public domain for over 40 years and the Motion Picture Academy has taken until this year to revoke his membership, having repeatedly called for charges and proceedings against him to be dropped, because he's such a great artist. He is in a way a collateral damage arising from the Weinstein case, because it became toxic to be known to have assisted offenders against the cry for justice of their victims, and people who had defended Polanski were no longer willing to be seen to still be doing it.

Polanski's victim has asked for the case to be dropped. Presumably she would like to resume living her normal life in quiet obscurity and not have it periodically interrupted by law enforcement and media people who don't necessarily have her best interests at heart. Were I the US Attorney General I would be inclined to grant her this wish, provided it really is what she wishes, and on the caveat that Polanski must never travel to the United States or via the United States and will be arrested at once if he does. Now that so much time has elapsed, the best interests of his victim should be the first consideration, I think. However it is an extremely good thing that he has been excluded from the Motion Picture Academy and they should be made to explain why it has only happened now, though we all know the answer anyway - let them bear the humiliation of being forced to say it.