TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Roman Polanski, would you see his movies?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Roman Polanski, would you see his movies? - Page 3

post #61 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosemite View Post
I feel very bad for you, but I honestly don't see this as being the same thing as a mother allowing a daughter to go to a photo-shoot unchaperoned at the age of 13. I don't expect anyone to chaperone their 16 year old daughter everywhere they go, but I think anyone in the free world has heard of the old casting couch scam and wouldn't dream of letting their 13 year old audition or do a photo-shoot alone.

As I've already said, what he did wasn't right but I don't think one can put all the blame on him. If someone is on a diet and you place 3 or 4 beautiful donuts in front of them and they looove donuts, do you expect them to not touch them? The smart thing to do would be to either not offer up the donuts or have the donuts guarded (supervised) so that person cannot touch them.

When a man is his 40's has sex with a 13 year-old it is rape, it is not "sleeping" with her. I doubt very much if he slept.
Plus, he drugged her before he raped her. How can it not be rape when
1. you drug someone
2. have sex with the person you drugged.

Earlier in this very thread, you seemed to blame the 13 year old girl herself by saying "she probably wasn't a virgin anyway" and insinuating she may have agreed to sex with him or words to that effect. I feel like I have stepped back into the dark ages here, when rape was everyone's fault but the perpetrator himself.
Roman Polanski plead guilty, does that mean nothing?

As far as your comparison to donuts in this post of yours I have quoted, I am appalled and extend my heartfelt sympathy and apologies to anyone on this forum reading this that has suffered sexual abuse. To those people I say,
It was NOT your fault, it is totally the rapist's fault.
post #62 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
When a man is his 40's has sex with a 13 year-old it is rape, it is not "sleeping" with her. I doubt very much if he slept.
Plus, he drugged her before he raped her. How can it not be rape when
1. you drug someone
2. have sex with the person you drugged.

Earlier in this very thread, you seemed to blame the 13 year old girl herself by saying "she probably wasn't a virgin anyway" and insinuating she may have agreed to sex with him or words to that effect. I feel like I have stepped back into the dark ages here, when rape was everyone's faul but the perpetrator himself.
Roman Polanski plead guilty, does that mean nothing?

As far as your comparison to donuts in this post of yours I have quoted, I am appalled and extend my heartfelt sympathy and apologies to anyone on this forum reading this that has suffered sexual abuse. To those people I say,
It was NOT your fault, it is totally the rapist's fault.
It's unfortunate that my argument pro and con has been twisted so out of shape that it is made to sound as though I have no sympathy or feelings for people who have truly suffered sexual abuse when in fact I do. Some of you have "put words in my mouth" that I did not say and, of course, you have the right to interpret what I've said in whatever way you wish to - that is your prerogative in a free-speech society. It saddens me, however, that such negative and inaccurate assumptions have been made.

So I'll leave you to your foregone conclusions. I will, however, continue to see Mr. Polanski's movies for his talent and not his personal life (as sad as that is).
post #63 of 80
I found this http://www.theage.com.au/articles/20...540066443.html

Its about the girl who was raped by him. This was written in 2003 when all the Oscar hubbub was going on.

In part, ""It was not consensual sex by any means," wrote Geimer in her article. "I said no repeatedly but he wouldn't take no for an answer. I was alone and I didn't know what to do. It was very scary and, looking back, very creepy.""

This is the very definition of rape. Imagine any 13 yr old girl in our lives in this position. Yes, her parents/guardians failed her but ultimately every single one of us is responsible for what we do. No one forced him to have sex on this child's body.

As one reads more, we see classic signs of an abused person trying to put it all behind her. "I don't have any hard feelings toward him, or any sympathy either. He is a stranger to me.""

With all the media surrounding the case, she had to have felt brutalized all over again.

If perversion and brutality is what it takes to be awesomely talented/artistic, I will choose a bland/artless life.
post #64 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bonnie1965 View Post
If perversion and brutality is what it takes to be awesomely talented/artistic, I will choose a bland/artless life.

Nobody has said that's what it takes to be a talented artist, but if you dig into the lives of famous artists throughout history you will find drug abuse, alcoholism, having relations with prostitutes, underage girls, etc. In general, things that were just as wrong during their time as we see rape today (whether or not what they did on today's standards was so bad, it was when they did it). And no, not all artists have this type of nature, but my point was that it doesn't stop anyone from viewing VanGogh's work that he was an alcoholic who had relations with prostitutes and committed suicide.
post #65 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by whiteforest View Post
but my point was that it doesn't stop anyone from viewing VanGogh's work that he was an alcoholic who had relations with prostitutes and committed suicide.

lol never liked vangogh anyway.
but really if the artist wants melt there Brain cells, i dont care.
if they want to save time and trouble by picking up prostitutes, dont care
if they want to cut there own ear off and eat it in a omelette i dont care,

however if they choose to rape little girls, kill people,
then i want no part of them, or there "art"
post #66 of 80
That's fine if you don't like VanGogh, I was using him as an example because there's nobody who doesn't know who he is. What VanGogh did was as bad at the time as having sex with a minor is now.
post #67 of 80
I have read this thread off and on since its start. Have I seen some of Polanski's movies yes I have. Will I see his movies in the future propbably if he comes out with something I want to watch. To put simply I do seperate personal life from art.

Husband won't listen to GNR because he hates Axl as a person. Where as I listen because I like the music even tho I don't like him.

I listen to Michael Jackson's music even with his past and current issues. Do I like him? No Do I like what he has done? No but do I like his music yes.

Yes I seperate personal life from business (art). Because I am sure if I dug enough into a artists or business man's life I could come up with 100's of reasons to never watch a show again, listen to music, read a book, drive a car, get gas or do anything in life.
post #68 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by whiteforest View Post
That's fine if you don't like VanGogh, I was using him as an example because there's nobody who doesn't know who he is. What VanGogh did was as bad at the time as having sex with a minor is now.
How does one compare VanGogh having sex with a prostitute, whom I am assuming said prostitute was not a child,

with drugging and raping a 13 year-old child and the life long trauma that child has had?
post #69 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ping View Post
I have read this thread off and on since its start. Have I seen some of Polanski's movies yes I have. Will I see his movies in the future propbably if he comes out with something I want to watch. To put simply I do seperate personal life from art.

Husband won't listen to GNR because he hates Axl as a person. Where as I listen because I like the music even tho I don't like him.

I listen to Michael Jackson's music even with his past and current issues. Do I like him? No Do I like what he has done? No but do I like his music yes.

Yes I seperate personal life from business (art). Because I am sure if I dug enough into a artists or business man's life I could come up with 100's of reasons to never watch a show again, listen to music, read a book, drive a car, get gas or do anything in life.
I'm surprised Toughie.
Michael Jackson was never convicted of anything, Roman Polanski plead guilty.
To me, sometimes you just have to make a stand and this is one of those times. I'm sure you are right that if I dug enough ........ but my point is, we all know about this, it is out there and public knowledge.

Isn't anything taboo anymore?
post #70 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
I'm surprised Toughie.
Michael Jackson was never convicted of anything, Roman Polanski plead guilty.
To me, sometimes you just have to make a stand and this is one of those times. I'm sure you are right that if I dug enough ........ but my point is, we all know about this, it is out there and public knowledge.

Isn't anything taboo anymore?
Michael Jackson and Woody Allen were never judged guilty. That's true, but does that make them any less reprehensible than Polanski? O.J. was also found "not guilty" in a criminal court.

I still believe that Polanski's personal history should be taken into account when weighing his flight from justice, and the sentence he believed he was facing.

I'm rather surprised that nobody has started a thread about the Supreme Court reviewing the death penalty some states are imposing for the rape of a child.
post #71 of 80
I don't beleive Polanski's personal history should have any bearing, whatsoever, on his rape of a child. No passes for being in a concentration camp from me. To me, it would be a huge insult to the thousands of concentration camp survivors.
post #72 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
I don't believe Polanski's personal history should have any bearing, whatsoever, on his rape of a child. No passes for being in a concentration camp from me. To me, it would be a huge insult to the thousands of concentration camp survivors.
I disagree - I believe that any possible mitigating circumstances should be reviewed, even if they're not given much weight in the final decision. You're not taking the bait, Cindy. Should the death penalty be imposed on child rapists, and what role does the "official verdict" play?

Acceptance or refusal of plea bargains might very well depend on the defendants' faith in his/her attorneys, and the U.S. justice system. Just because the system "usually" works doesn't mean it's perfect. Cf. O.J..

I followed the Polanski rape case at the time, and personally felt that a lot of prejudice came into play, #1 because he directed "Rosemary's Baby", which led to accusations of Satanism, #2 because his wife was murdered, and many people thought it was because he was absent from the house, and somehow had attracted the Manson Family's attention because of his films, which totally ignored the fact that Manson probably had a grudge against the owner of the estate, Terry Melchior, who understandably didn't promote Manson as a musician. #3, Polanski is Jewish, and I'm not naive enough to believe that one's faith doesn't play a role in public opinion, especially in the U.S., where people are highly religious, in comparison to other countries.

None of that "excuses" Polanski's behavior, but it does serve to some extent to explain his subsequent behavior. Your pregnant wife, and several close friends, are slaughtered in a bestial manner, and serve 20 -30 years, and you face 50 years in prison for sleeping with a minor, whose mother may have manipulated the whole "encounter" for financial gain?

There are too many murky elements here to actually make proclamations about crime and punishment.
post #73 of 80
Nope, I don't believe in the death penalty. Better to let them rot in prison.

I followed it too and do not remember any of the bias you mention against Roman Polanski. I felt he got much sympathy over the murder of his wife
and no blame.

I don't consider being in a concentration camp as a child a "mitigating" factor for raping a child thirty years later. I think it is just another way for people to escape personal responsibility for their actions, which seems to be the norm in today's society. I think it is pathetic. Personal responsibility is becoming a thing of the past and I think our nation is suffering because of it.

Thousands heroically endured and survived concentration camps and did not become child rapists.

And he plead guilty, but I guess that doesn't make any difference either.

I don't, for one second, believe he would have been sentenced to 50 years, no way. I would have been content with 5 years but he was a coward and ran.
post #74 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcat View Post
I disagree - I believe that any possible mitigating circumstances should be reviewed, even if they're not given much .

hmm No.

his personal history has nothing to do with it in this case.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jcat View Post

There are too many murky elements here to actually make proclamations about crime and punishment.
sometimes yes this is true. But not in this case.
people are just making excuses for him cause he made some good movies.
thats it.

jcat
Quote:
Michael Jackson and Woody Allen were never judged guilty. That's true, but does that make them any less reprehensible than Polanski? O.J. was also found "not guilty" in a criminal court.
as of right now, i am not sure of jackson gulit accept for the being crazy part.
Allen is gulity, of making bad movies, and having sex with kids. The same way every one knows OJ is gulity.
post #75 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by esrgirl View Post
I don't know if I can quite put into words how sick this makes me feel- physically sick. And to say it wouldn't happen to your daughter... I have an amazing, loving, caring, concerned mom but even she couldn't stop me from being raped at 16 and molested in elementary school. She was very strict and very involved, but things happen. To this day she doesn't know, and she never will. I know it would kill her. Never, ever assume this won't happen to your daughter. That kind of belief is the thing that keeps rape and molestation alive and kicking. I just hope you talk to your daughter about this issues, because it wasn't until the 'good touch bad touch' talk in second grade that I realized what was happening to me was wrong.

I'm not going to get down on anyone for watching his movies. My husband likes a couple of them (that Johnny Depp movie for one)- he just doesn't watch them in my presence. I will explain why I don't watch them and my reasons apply to me only. I don't expect someone else to live by my set of rules, just as I didn't when I was vegan and refused to buy anything made by Proctor and Gamble or that contained refined sugar. I'm not going to judge someone by the movies they watch, but I am going to judge someone who claims that raping a 13 year old isn't raping anyone and isn't fully responsible for his actions. Her mom may have been a world class idiot, but it doesn't matter if she paraded her daughter around naked- even person is responsible for his or her actions . Leaving my house unlocked may be stupid, but it doesn't mean someone should rob me.
I'm so sorry you had to live through this. You seem to have developed some insight that has helped. Continue to live your life like the brave person you have become.

I, too, don't understand the excuses that are being made for this man. He had sex with a 13 year old when he was a grown man who knew it was wrong. Her mother's failure to protect her doesn't mean he should be given a pass. He still should have known better. Even if the little girl had sex before, it still isn't okay. Even if the little girl was willing to use her sexuality to get him to like her, it still wouldn't have been right. He admitted he was guilty, but never that he was wrong and he has continued to use his childhood and his wife's murder as excuses. NOTHING excuses what he did. Running from the courts makes it worse. He's a coward who is unwilling to face up to what he did.

I believe Michael Jackson is also guilty. That's why he's moved out of the US. He knows he's being watched now. He's just as guilty as Roman Polanski, even if the courts didn't think so.

Most of the examples, except Woody Allen and Michael Jackson, are not really parallel. They are different in important aspects. Either they are not sexual, or the victims are not children. In fact I am not sure how old Soon-yi was when Woody seduced her.

Still if you are a person who can compartmentalize these things -- the artists's life and their art -- I can understand seeing their art without feeling bad. I can't. I haven't been able to enjoy a Woody Allen or Roman Polanski movie since I found out their histories. Especially when the movie deals with having sex with underage girls.

I can overlook some aspects of artists lives that have been dead for a long time. It seems to make the stories lose their vitality. They become drier and stiffer with age. Not as painful.
post #76 of 80
Katie I had to look this up because I did not have an exact age. I knew she was young but how young I was unsure. Soon-Yi was 17 when her mom found nude pictures of her taken by Woody. So she was at least 17 but possibly quite younger when it started and Woody was 35 years older then her.

As a side note on Woody and Soon-Yi they got married in 97. Still married today from what I have read and they have 2 adopted daughters together.
post #77 of 80
I'm usually very much a live and let live liberal.
However, I don't think I could see one of his films. It probably wouldn't be a defiant stance, so much as a personal aversion. It reminds me of Eric Clapton's racist speech, which makes me feel slightly ill. And what Polanski did is much worse.

Does the US gov not care that he's in France? He's a famous film director, he's not exactly hiding out in a secret cave. Why haven't they brought charges against him in France?
post #78 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ping View Post
Katie I had to look this up because I did not have an exact age. I knew she was young but how young I was unsure. Soon-Yi was 17 when her mom found nude pictures of her taken by Woody. So she was at least 17 but possibly quite younger when it started and Woody was 35 years older then her.

As a side note on Woody and Soon-Yi they got married in 97. Still married today from what I have read and they have 2 adopted daughters together.
He wasn't investigated because of Soon Yi, but on suspicion that he'd molested one of Mia Farrow's much younger daughters, Dylan, who was 7 at the time. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woody_Allen#Mia_Farrow
post #79 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ping View Post
As a side note on Woody and Soon-Yi they got married in 97. Still married today from what I have read and they have 2 adopted daughters together.
I really worry for his other adopted children. I can't imagine allowing a man who takes pornographic photos of his seventeen year old daughter to have access to any other children. What makes her think he won't try it with them?

I can't watch any of his movies either- it's just too hard for me to separate out his movies from him as a director. Then again, I don't like Woody Allen movies at all, so that helps- whereas Rosemary's Baby was one of my favorite movies.

I also do not support the death penalty, even if in my gut I feel people sometimes deserve it.
post #80 of 80
NO!! I do not watch Roman Polanski movies - there are plenty of other great films to entertain me that will not be lining that criminal's pockets!! why separate art from the lifestyle??
For me, Roman Polanski has yet to be brought to justice - the sin against that girl as a child is greater than any entertainment he brings to the screen. A million satisfied thoughts of his fans will not erase even one iota of pain and humiliation that she suffered during that terrible crime.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Roman Polanski, would you see his movies?