Feb. 25, 2010, 4:09 a.m. CST
I will take my chances by sitting this one out.
Feb. 25, 2010, 4:34 a.m. CST
"The Ghost Writer is a movie about systemic lack of respect for women and the urgent need to extradite criminals. And guess who directed it? Roman Polanski."<p> New York Post above, only gave it 2 out of 5 stars. Reviews for this one so far seem to be pretty uneven - perhap's Harry's summation that it's a "truly fantastic movie" could be a wee bit prejudiced by his unshaken respect for the director and the fact that he organized a big local screening of it?<p> Hard to shit on a film once you've invited 250 odd people to come watch it with you.
Feb. 25, 2010, 4:38 a.m. CST
i would just retire. and get it over with.
Feb. 25, 2010, 4:53 a.m. CST
because he revealed 'the truth' in rosemary's baby
Feb. 25, 2010, 5:10 a.m. CST
forgave him. anumber of years ago.
Feb. 25, 2010, 5:11 a.m. CST
polanksi can go suck a dick. and that review was shit, so harry can go suck it too.
Feb. 25, 2010, 5:42 a.m. CST
The New York Post review showed itself for the closed-minded approach rubbish it was clearly, that quote is a perfect example. There are some that seem incapable of assessing art separately from the artist. NYP has clear (and previously stated) opinions about Polanski and those evidently colour their review (they basically state so in the copy) so to use them as a rebuke to Harry who takes the film as it is not for who made it is to hoist yourself by your own petard. Many US critics can't divorce their feelings about the director and his criminal activities from his filmmaking. Polanski is simply one of the best directors there is. Repulsion, Knife In The Water, Chinatown, Rosemary's Baby, The Pianist. He is a master filmmaker and The Ghost looks fantastic. Sure he may be a disturbing and disturbed nasty individual but the man makes great movies and i'll be flocking (like most Europeans i suspect, who understand the difference) as soon as it releases here in March.
Feb. 25, 2010, 5:45 a.m. CST
I.. can't.. believe.. this.. review.. was written.. like this... Harry, lay off the ellipses for a while.
Feb. 25, 2010, 5:45 a.m. CST
Oh yeah, and he ass raped a 13 year old girl after he drugged her.
Feb. 25, 2010, 6:08 a.m. CST
...is NOT the artist. End. oh.. and I think you get a bum rap for your reviews, H. I appreciate them and mostly agree with you.
Feb. 25, 2010, 6:17 a.m. CST
....but some old man slipped me a mickey and stuck himself in my heinie hole. C'mon, Harry. Try to be objective. It won't kill you. Hell, maybe it might.
Feb. 25, 2010, 6:34 a.m. CST
by Lost Jarv
gets on a fucking plane and "doesn't know where it's landing". <P>I call shenanigans on that.
Feb. 25, 2010, 6:37 a.m. CST
Whether movies are art or entertainment is a whole debate unto itself, but i'll go with 'art' anyway...<p> Now one of my favorite artists is Caravaggio - a man who killed another over a heated game of tennis and who was a famous gaylord, perhaps even a sodomizer of young boys. But he has been dead for centuries - I can walk into a gallery or look on the internet and see his work for free.<p> Polanski on the other hand is a walking, talking, convicted child-rapist. You are going to pay to see his film. You are funding him. And in a small way you are validating him. 'You may be a disturbed nasty individual who rapes children but i'll still support you and put money in your pocket'.<p> Filmcoyote I don't want to hoist you by your own petard and I hope you enjoy the film. Just try not to think about that young child's terrified screams and pleading while you chew your popcorn.
Feb. 25, 2010, 7:04 a.m. CST
Feb. 25, 2010, 7:09 a.m. CST
Would you hire a very good plumber to fix your toilet, if you knew he was a rapist? Would you hire an excellent accountant to do your books if you knew he was a child abuser? Would you work with one, simply because they are good at their job. I wouldn't. But that's what separates good human beings from twisted shits with no moral standing. He committed child rape, admitted to it, and the when he realised he was getting a long jail term instead of counselling (which is what he wanted), fled the country! Had he done is time and undetaken the therapy, we could have believed he was rehabilitated. But he didnt. He committed two crimes: sex with minor, and running from the law. That can not, and should not be forgiven. I don't care how good you are at painting, rape a kid and I'll cut your fucking head off.
Feb. 25, 2010, 7:10 a.m. CST
was havin it off with 13 year olds in the 70's
Feb. 25, 2010, 7:10 a.m. CST
...not making films. everyone involved in this film should be ashamed of themselves.
Feb. 25, 2010, 7:11 a.m. CST
errors...I was typing quickly and this isn't an english essay....and don't say anything about my gramma - god rest her soul..
Feb. 25, 2010, 7:14 a.m. CST
Feb. 25, 2010, 7:19 a.m. CST
MGregor has been a sleepwalker lately. Nice to see him work for a change.
Feb. 25, 2010, 7:26 a.m. CST
by Lost Jarv
Just fuck off with that. That doesn't make it OK. And "every celebrity" was not drugging and sodomising them.
Feb. 25, 2010, 7:27 a.m. CST
...the artist formally known as Moriarty. Talk about jumping the shark. Child rapists Ain't Cool and neither are an endless slew of shitty remakes. Bye Bye.
Feb. 25, 2010, 7:33 a.m. CST
Feb. 25, 2010, 7:42 a.m. CST
hitfix has a piece about this shit on it too. anyone know of any good movie sites these days? i guess there is always the sterile environment of the imdb!
Feb. 25, 2010, 7:46 a.m. CST
the art is the artist.you can not separate these two things.
Feb. 25, 2010, 7:57 a.m. CST
This place ain't cool anymore.
Feb. 25, 2010, 8:07 a.m. CST
robert harris cutting all ties with blair and new labour. Harris supported the new labour project and was very close to blair. as was the owner of New York post, one rupert murdoch.
Feb. 25, 2010, 8:07 a.m. CST
Harry, I tried to read this. I tried but you have absolutely no clue how to actually write. For some reason you have this ability to make what you're trying to say so confusing, I need a trail of breadcrumbs to find my way home. Once again you've proven that you are nothing more than a blood-sucking parasite hanging from the scrotum of Hollywood. You have no journalistic integrity whatsoever, your opinion is easily bought by producers and directors in the industry, and you have actually no legitimate ability to make a coherent thought come through your writing. Stick to your DVD reviews because that's what you're really good at and leave the film reviews to people who actually understand film.
Feb. 25, 2010, 8:09 a.m. CST
he should sell up or quit completly. or better yet he should do garth franklin.
Feb. 25, 2010, 8:20 a.m. CST
It was an incoherent babble of nonsense words strung together by a child who has gotten hold of a thesaurus.
Feb. 25, 2010, 8:42 a.m. CST
Shame of those who do, especially the actors in this movie.
Feb. 25, 2010, 9:02 a.m. CST
But let me try to clarify. People have a knack of complicating an issue possibly in the name of justifying behavior. "don't hate the art because of the artist" yada yada yada. It's all noise. Just know that it is each and everyones own decision as to whether or not to see his films. Personally I have loved most of his work but can no longer justify contributing to his success. He did not pay his debt to society. I never knew the extent of his crime and whether or not the victim has forgiven him is only relevant to her. You can not Justify this simple fact: he drugged an underaged girl and had anal intercourse with her. That is all, carry on.
I've got no problem missing GHOST WRITER but I really wish I could have been at the Zurich Film Festival when Polanski finally got arrested, just so I could have worn an Admiral Ackbar mask and shouted out "IT'S A TRAP!" as the cops bundled a startled Polanski.
Feb. 25, 2010, 9:17 a.m. CST
listens to Charles Manson covers? You know, it's really about the art. Not the artist at all.
Feb. 25, 2010, 9:26 a.m. CST
to serve time. The 2 are not mutually exclusive.
Feb. 25, 2010, 9:35 a.m. CST
I think if somehow Osama bin laden was a gifted director and gave Harry a toy or a set visit, he would love the movie... then he would be directly involved in supportin terrorism, right? so, in that sense, Harry supports child rape...
Feb. 25, 2010, 9:39 a.m. CST
buy a ticket for another film but actually watch GHOST WRITER. Then you haven't put money in Polanski's pockets.
Feb. 25, 2010, 9:40 a.m. CST
but i dont see putting them in the museums.only rich collectors have them.
Feb. 25, 2010, 9:49 a.m. CST
I didn't understand a goddamned thing from that, other than it was a creepy movie and you liked it. Which I guess is the bottom line. But what's all that bullshit about ghosts and real ghosts and ghost's ghosts and not being Casper? What the heck are you trying to say?
Feb. 25, 2010, 9:52 a.m. CST
I mean, look, okay, so he drugged and raped a 14 year old girl, and that's really bad, I get it. But at least she was a teenage girl! MJ was doing that shit with little 5 year old boys. How does he rate a Viking Funeral, then? And even if Polanski is a drooling, weirdo pervert who should be locked up, does that make his movies any less awesome? No. So stop the self-righteous moralizing.
Feb. 25, 2010, 9:54 a.m. CST
Feb. 25, 2010, 9:56 a.m. CST
CheeseGrommit.....I am in total agreement. It still kills me that I love The Ninth Gate and watch it whenever it's on TV, but I refuse to buy it. I will not contribute to his running money. he has not paid for the crime, that is it. Cobra Kai......I love it. I might've been next to you as Billy Dee dressed in Han Solo garb to announce "What do you mean the Zurich Police is doing security? How could they be doing security if they don't know Polanski is.......PULL UP! POLANSKI, PULL UP!!!!" Sonny Williams......great idea. i might actually go buy a ticket to Valentine's Day or some other monstrosity and go and see this fuckerall with a clear conscience......
Feb. 25, 2010, 10:48 a.m. CST
I repeat, the kid you all say was molested by Mike ADMITTED HE LIED... but then again, people will just stick wit the negative info instead of facts
Feb. 25, 2010, 10:53 a.m. CST
...he just wanted to be one and couldn't close the deal. Besides the new Alice is a brand new sequel based on his previous works, created by people who are not Carroll, did not know Carroll, have never worked with Carroll, have never met the little girl Carroll wanted to cornhole or her parents and/or friends of family, will not be paying Carroll and will not be supporting his actions through the support of his chosen vocation. So fucking suck it, fag.
Feb. 25, 2010, 11:04 a.m. CST
And what StepDaddy said. His conscience was clean, unlike Pedanski.
Feb. 25, 2010, 11:24 a.m. CST
by The Funketeer
In film, you can't separate the art from the artist. This movie might be fantastic. It might be the best movie ever made. But if I spend money to go see it, I'm putting money in Polanski's pocket and telling the studios that I think it's ok for them to work with him. That's wrong. You seem to think that we all think his movies are bad because he raped a child. No, we think HE is bad because he raped a child and we're not going to financially support his work as a result. Whether or not this is a good movie is completely beside the point.
Feb. 25, 2010, 11:28 a.m. CST
by The Funketeer
You want him to serve time and yet you provide him with the finances that have kept him from doing so for so long. If you really think he deserves to do his time, man up and spend your money somewhere else.
Feb. 25, 2010, 11:31 a.m. CST
since i don't even remember. I believe he isn't the most versatile of actors. Even though his films vary in genre, his performances do not vary with them. i find him to be a very average actor with little appeal or charisma. i say this because since the 90's he's churned out so much crap it beggars belief, starting obviously with his extremely stale Obi Wan in the Star Wars prequels. i can almost forgive him this because almost every performance from every actor in these prequels were poor, perhaps the effect of working with constant green screen. i thought the island was terribe and i thought Ewans american accent was awful. i know that Ewan cannot do american accents very well because i saw him in 1997's Nightwatch and his accent in this has to be heard to be believed. I thought Ewan was horrible miscast in Big Fish. A scotsman in Tim Burtons world playing aN american with a deep southern accent??? He's also churned out the likes of Deception, Cassandras Dream, Down with love and Miss Potter, all box office failures, all quite shit. It really suprises me that with this level of quality he's still being hired for major hollywood roles and is still a major player, in admitedly lower budget arthousy fare with a few big budget exceptions (angels and demons) I feel he's lost his passion. I havn't liked him in a movie since Young Adam in 2003. He was obviously great in the 90's with Shallow Grave and Trainspotting, but if you look at his C.V he's churned out so much shit since (eye of the beholder being one of his worse) Obviously his defenders will quote Moulin Rouge and Black Hawk Down etc, and yes these films are good and he's good in Moulin Rouge, as good as i've seen him in the noughties with Young Adam, but too often he rests on his laurels and seems more concerned with other things like riding his motorcycle around the world. I hope the Ghost Writer is as good as it's ratings suggest and i'd love nothing more than for Ewan to impress me again because it's been too long since he has.
Feb. 25, 2010, 11:33 a.m. CST
by D o o d
The rich have always found ways to get around the law. However, this crime that Polanski committed, he knew it and his lawyer knew it, that there was no getting around. As far as I'm concerned, he has not paid his debt to society and therefore I will not watch his movies. I can live without movies just as much as I can live without criminals. Justice needs to be served!
Feb. 25, 2010, 11:39 a.m. CST
You don't need to gauge our "line" you only have to gauge for yourself. Plus why the need to defend Polanski by comparison to another illegal act? Lastly um ... why am I a "fag" ? just trying to gauge your motives.
Feb. 25, 2010, 11:43 a.m. CST
Juliet was thirteen years old, and Romeo was a few years older.<p> Fuck you, Shakespeare! I'm never watching or reading anything that's been influenced by you again.<p> I like paranoia. Paranoia is fun. And seeing a Tony Blair figure get his comeuppance will probably finally scratch that itch that's been bothering me for a while. Can't wait to see this. I've heard the TV miniseries mentioned. In every case so far, I'd say the miniseries has been better than the adapted movie: Edge of Darkness, State of Play and it looks like House of Cards is being turned into a movie. Unless the guys who brought the program up were talking about that kid's show that has nothing to do with this.
Seppu, was Juliet drugged and ass raped by 'the fiery Tybalt'?<p> I don't think anyone here has a problem with teenagers making out with one another... what Polanski did is very different.
Feb. 25, 2010, 12:16 p.m. CST
Anyway, all this shit has been covered over and over again. If you want to picket outside the cinema, then go right ahead. But right now you're sounding like a bunch of whiney old maids.
Feb. 25, 2010, 12:18 p.m. CST
Feb. 25, 2010, 12:19 p.m. CST
And you're better than that.
Feb. 25, 2010, 12:34 p.m. CST
about a 13 year old girl without harbouring some kinda closet desire to be Romeo himself.<p> Anyway, I know I'm being pretty fucking glib here, but these hickbacks just piss me off. If you have a problem with Polanski, I can grok that. But it's just the same backwoods mouthbreathers whining over and over again. It gets tiring.
Feb. 25, 2010, 12:36 p.m. CST
by Liberty Valance
Yes The Wolfman, a movie that manages to make every mistake a movie can make; a complete misfire on every conceivable level. For a dude with such film *knowledge*, you are the worst reviewer this side of Armond White.
Feb. 25, 2010, 12:49 p.m. CST
he is not a pedo. 'pedarest', or however you spell it, is pretty different. i hear she was very mature for her age. not saying that's ok! but not unheard of. nevermind celebrities in the 70's, 200 years ago. EVERYONE was doing it
Feb. 25, 2010, 12:52 p.m. CST
Do we have proof everyone was doing it? Or are we just assuming? <p> You can't diminish the crime by suggesting "everyone" (without proof) was doing it. <p> Sure, it was okay to discriminate against blacks back then, *everyone* was doing it.
Feb. 25, 2010, 12:54 p.m. CST
My grandma was well racist, but she was still a nice person. She didnt know any better. We do now. sure Roman does too.
Feb. 25, 2010, 12:56 p.m. CST
Because discrimination wasn't a crime then (but still wrong). But statutory rape was on both counts.
Feb. 25, 2010, 12:59 p.m. CST
If he took responsibility and served his time, maybe, but the guy drugged and raped a 14 year old girl and then fled the country. Never going to support this asshole's movie and I think it's horrible that movie news sites like this one even review his films.
Feb. 25, 2010, 1:04 p.m. CST
'it wasnt "rape, rape"'
Feb. 25, 2010, 1:08 p.m. CST
But still "rape" of a sort and still a crime.
Feb. 25, 2010, 1:13 p.m. CST
but everyone is getting way more worked up than they should. what 'justice' did you really need being served? she forgives him, he's been exiled for decades, we really shouldnt care this much
Feb. 25, 2010, 1:15 p.m. CST
And should have nothing to do with it in a case like this. <p> And exile is not a punishment in his case either.
Feb. 25, 2010, 1:19 p.m. CST
does R Kelly still get this much grief? surely his crime is easily as bad
Feb. 25, 2010, 2:16 p.m. CST
..and I have never contributed money to either of those people or their families. It comes down to this: It's just one movie and it will not kill me to miss it. I refuse to put hard earned cash into the pockets of either a child molester or the companies that support him. Simple. And Harry, I read your "review" and you should be ashamed that you gave me such a tough time about my review for your boyfriend's "The Expendables" when you can't even write. Whether you agree with the review or not, I could at least maintain a coherent thought..
Feb. 25, 2010, 2:29 p.m. CST
I mean, thats all I really need to say. All you have to do is kiss Harry's ass and you're golden.
Feb. 25, 2010, 2:39 p.m. CST
Feb. 25, 2010, 3:13 p.m. CST
by Adelai Niska
Oh, wait, not this time. Deliberately avoiding someone's name to trick people into going to a movie? Classy, Knowles. <p> I'll watch it on TV for free, but I have never paid a cent to Roman Polanski and I'm not starting now.
Feb. 25, 2010, 3:20 p.m. CST
Why are you all surprised Roman Polanski has his way with them?
Feb. 25, 2010, 3:32 p.m. CST
by Dave I
And probably deserves as much flack for nailing (and I believe urinating on, classy R.K.) a minor. I don't support him either, though, much less approve what he allegedly did and got off for.<p><p>And rasALclart, what does your racist-but-still-a-nice-person Grandman have to do with this? Did she get convicted of a hate crime back in the day and then flee to Canada or something? Your logic is all Swiss Cheese.<p><p>-Cheers
Feb. 25, 2010, 4:03 p.m. CST
How these 30 year old rape charges come in to light when Polanski's about to release a movie showing the 'the powers that be' in a negative light, or possibly alluding to secrets of national security. I smell conspiracy..
Griefo, yes I think you're onto something there. You should spend more time researching along those lines and less time posting here.
Feb. 25, 2010, 4:57 p.m. CST
...once to watch it, and again, every time I go to the theater to catch a different movie, just to fund Polanski, in the hopes that he breaks out of the handcuffs and goes on a nationwide buttsex spree that might possibly (hopefully) include one or two of you perpetually outraged blowhards.
Costner would agree to a part in a Polanski movie. But only so he could perform a citizens arrest.<p> Polanski, you been COSTNERED!
Feb. 25, 2010, 6:42 p.m. CST
Say it ain't so.
Feb. 25, 2010, 7:03 p.m. CST
I wonder if he will invite Polanski round his place for a bar-b-que? "Roman, do you mind playing with my kids while I cook the steaks?" "Sure, Ewan. Take your time. I'll keep an eye on your two lovely young daughters..." No, I didn't think so either.
Feb. 25, 2010, 7:25 p.m. CST
Feb. 25, 2010, 8:52 p.m. CST
Looks crazy good!!!
Feb. 26, 2010, 7:57 a.m. CST
Just amazing how people are trying to find some loophole, some way out, to justify watching this movie. It's a move. If you don't see it, it will not affect your lives in one bit. But if you do see it, you vindicate a child rapist. Surely even an idiot would NOT see this movie. Are there really no morals anymore? Do people really not take a stand against what is wrong anymore? I mean, why do we even have laws? This man does not deserve your praise. If he raped your sister or daughter, all of you would be singing a different song. And you know it. And to the dweeb that implied how Polanski had served his time because he was in exile. This isn't the fucking 1500s with him exiled in some cave. He was born in France and ran away BACK TO FRANCE!! That ain't exile - THATS GOING BLOODY HOME!!! He is a rapist - and it is rape because he was CHARGED with STATUTORY RAPE - and that is all that matters. DO NOT SEE THIS MOVIE.
Feb. 26, 2010, 8:20 a.m. CST
I love early Polanski, but I'm afraid I've not been much of a fan of anything post THE TENANT. This, however, is a terrific little paranoid thriller, with a lot of touches that conjure up some of his real classics - the claustrophobia of the island where most of the film takes place, the sense of someone beginning to inhabit a dead man's shoes, the creeping paranoia that overtakes the protagonist as everyone starts to appear to be a threat. Great performances across the board, and a wonderful Herrmann-esque score by Alexandre Desplat that cheekily acknowledges the Hitchcockian tone. Nice to have the old Polanski back again!
Feb. 26, 2010, 1:19 p.m. CST
Polanski is perhaps the most difficutl people to analyze. I mean he rapes a 13 year old girl, but he also lived thruogh the trauma of is his pregnant wife being brutaly murdered and lived through the holocaust. i dunno, shit like can fuck with your brain. I don't condone what he did but he isn't your regular showbiz guy with money. hell, his victim forgave him, which is something no one has mentioned here! If his victim has forgiven him, then maybe we shouldn't be so harsh! to change the subject: Ghost Writer kicks ass. better than shutter island. nice to see a film that doesn't give away the ending so clearly. Harry left out alot of things in this review. For you Rushmore fans, Ms Cross is excellent in this film!! The the Prime Minister himself, Pierce, did an awesome job, and how eerily the similarities to Polanski that character is.
Feb. 26, 2010, 1:22 p.m. CST
I think you know I respect you. However, I'm disturbed if you consider all of the anti-Polanski people hicks and mouth breathers. I'm one of them. Two people I love dearly were molested serially when very young. Several other women I know were raped as teenagers or young adults. I would happily break the knees of any of those involved, were I to meet him. No matter how gorgeous and transporting the art, I have trouble separating it from the sins of the artist unless the person in question is an historical figures. McGooCain, though Lewis's acts are morally questionable, they were consensual and legal in his locale. Do I think he's a bastion of morals? Hell, no. On the other hand, I don't get the feeling from him that I do from Don Henley - though his incident wasn't coerced.
Feb. 26, 2010, 1:46 p.m. CST
I was more eloquent ten or twenty Polanski talkbacks ago, so I'm sorry if you got caught up in my general putdown. Like I said, I can 100% understand personally not wanting to see a Polanski film. However, what we're seeing here is people being attacked for daring to enjoy or even talk about a movie made by Polanski. I can't tell you the amount of times someone with a username like "Jewkiller" or "ColonelDickHard" has made a statement on here that would make a Twitter update seem locquacious, in which they called out anyone who sees this movie as not just being a pedophile-supporter, but perhaps being a pedophile themselves. I guess fighting fire with fire just means everyone ends up with third-degree burns, but it's tiring to read. I know I don't have to read them at all, but I'm genuinely interested in this film. I haven't seen a good, meaty '70s style conspiracy thriller for a while, and this looks like it might be one of them.<p> My dad and his six sisters were each raped by my grandfather when they were children, and I'm the only one in my family who refuses to see the old man (even now he's on his deathbed). But I don't think Polanski is a monster or an animal deserving of prolonged torture as some of the people here seem to think. I think he's a troubled man who found himself in a tempting situation and fell prey to his weaker instincts. Other than that, I don't know enough about the case to comment. I do know that the surfeit of "teen porn" and Google searches for things like "jailbait" and "nymphettes" implies to me that a lot of men are just naturally curious about post-pubescent girls. That will no doubt include some of the guys most vehemently against Polanski. I don't find that in and of itself appalling. It's the rape that's unforgiveable. If it means you can't watch his films, that's perfectly acceptable. But please don't act as if your set of values holds to everyone else. I'm sure there are several things you find perfectly alright that I find appalling.<p> (Those last couple of lines weren't directed at you, Dennis).
Feb. 26, 2010, 1:47 p.m. CST
who the hell is ANYone to judge the cleanliness of ANYONE else's conscience?
Feb. 26, 2010, 1:57 p.m. CST
surrounding myself with well educated people for so many years that I forget a large part of the country is made up of complete idiots who can somehow defend child rape. Congrats on being part of the reason the US is falling behind in everything. And McGooCain, you are the leader of the morons...you had an actual family member be a vicitm of rape, yet can still support Polanski? I can see why you got divorced, she couldn't stand your level of "support". It's just a movie, so skip it...you'll live. But seeing it supports not only Polanski, but the producers who support him as well. I promise, the movie might be good, but it will not change your life in any positive way unless you really have no life at all.
Feb. 26, 2010, 2:07 p.m. CST
Call me a Commie or whatever, but money really isn't the thing that drives me on from day to day. I don't care who gets a few pennies royalties from my cinema ticket. Even if that included Idi Amin or someone who goes around kicking puppies. My money isn't invested with a little piece of my soul. It's just not that big a deal to me. If you really do a King Solomon every time you spend your money on anything, you must come back from the supermarket with almost nothing every time you go shopping. If it were a bigger deal for me, I'd be more wary of spending it on the produce of Chinese sweat-shops than anything.
Feb. 26, 2010, 2:08 p.m. CST
This creep's people must be really kissing their asses for this much positive coverage. <p>Hey, I hear Ed Gein painted some really terrific clown portraits--will you be covering his oeuvre next?
Feb. 26, 2010, 3:25 p.m. CST
Your quote was "My ex-wife was raped and imprisoned by a pimp for several months when she was 12. I am not making this up. I have no problem seeing a Polanski film." ... if you have no problem seeing a Polanski film despite your ex-wife's history, then you are condoning his actions. Perhaps you mispoke when you wrote this so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you're not that low of a human being. And you were either divorced or she died...maybe you also support whatever killed her too..
Feb. 26, 2010, 4:06 p.m. CST
I'm sure some things I like, you might find appalling, regardless. I don't blame anyone for liking post-pubescent girls. It's doing something about the liking that I find distasteful. To be clear, I'm not calling anyone who likes Polanski pro-kiddie-fiddling. They just have a different view of things than I do. <P> McGooCain, I thought you were referring to Lewis's relationship with his young wife, given that this TB has been addressing such matters.
Feb. 26, 2010, 4:10 p.m. CST
I'm NOT saying you like post-pubescent girls. However, many who do like to look at them would never touch one. "Bad men do what good men dream," whomever said that. <P> I don't count every penny against moral crusades. I'm not that righteous. I'd prefer the already rich who exploit others not grow richer on my money, but as you say, I'd have to boycott nearly everything.
Feb. 26, 2010, 5:36 p.m. CST
Can the irony get any deeper?
Feb. 26, 2010, 6:58 p.m. CST
I understand being a lover of cinema, but you have to hate movies that are actually worthy of being hated. Stop just reviewing movies that you like...you need to review something that sucked. No one cares about your reviews because you always talk like it's the greatest movie ever made. Review some crappy movies so it actually looks like you're not just a huge fanboy.
Feb. 26, 2010, 9:43 p.m. CST
FRANTIC is an incredible little thriller, high and tight. Please insert Polanski punchlines for that comment here.
Feb. 26, 2010, 10:47 p.m. CST
by Anything But Tangerines
Feb. 27, 2010, 12:43 a.m. CST
by andrew coleman
It really was a breath of fresh air.
Feb. 27, 2010, 6:38 a.m. CST
by Steve T
Polanski is a great film make, his rep tells you that, the only film of his I have seen (Chinatown) tells me that. Personally I can't wait for the child fucking cunt to die so I can watch his films and not worry about my money going to him. I don't really care what the legal outcome is of his current situation, we all know what he did, he's admitted it. The legal outcome is just down to whose lawyer is more expensive now.
Feb. 27, 2010, 9:50 a.m. CST
Feb. 27, 2010, 9:51 a.m. CST
Feb. 27, 2010, 10:38 a.m. CST
but I can't stand the way so many Hollywoodists seem to give this guy a pass on his criminal, and I hate to use the word, but evil, behavior. He may have all the talent in the world, but I personally will not watch his movies anymore at all. You don't drug and sodomize a thirteen year old girl and still get my respect for your art. I don't care if his victim does want to move on from this, I don't blame her for wanting to cultivate the high road, good for her. I think RP needs to be punished. Hard.
Feb. 27, 2010, 1:38 p.m. CST
Honestly it seems both sides of this debate are doing their fair share of masturbatory moralizing and self vindication. The defenders just seem to be basing their position on moral convenience, while those looking to crucify him seem more interested in demonstrating moral outrage. All this talk of him escaping justice is fairly meaningless since it seems all you want is for him to get punished. It won't make what he did not have happened, it probably won't do much for the victim since she apparently "forgave" him. (Though honestly that seems rather bizarre to me, but what the hell do I know.) The only reason you want him punished is that it will make you feel better, and that doesn't really help the problem. Rationalizing it as justice just makes you as much a slave to moral convenience as the defenders. Will I be seeing the movie? Probably not. Should he be jailed? Definitely. Does it have anything to do with punishing him? No, but he needs to demonstrate his ability to work within society, and a justice system more focused on fixing the problem as opposed to making moralizers feel better about themselves by making "Bad guys" pay is the only rational move to make.
Feb. 27, 2010, 6:52 p.m. CST
Give me a loaded sniper rifle, a P90 with at least five mags and £30k. I'll clear this up.
Feb. 27, 2010, 7:08 p.m. CST
Then shut up. People are shitty. You know this. Unless you are personally involved bleating on and on about one guy is akin to complaining about a microbe on a fly's back while it's crawling on shit. If you are going to take the personal actions of strangers so personally you had better have a way of dealing with everyone equally at the same time. New rule.
Feb. 27, 2010, 10:53 p.m. CST
by Chief Joseph
Wow, like, everything you said was wrong. A true ignoramus. Michael Jackson's accuser never "confessed", yes it was "rape rape" (she pleaded for him to stop several times), and no, not everyone was doing it back then. And if "mature for her age" means her looks, then no. She looked even younger than her age.
Feb. 28, 2010, 1:26 a.m. CST
The first act is excellent with masterful atmospherics and a genuine sense of dread. Polanski is in top form, and the acting is excellent all around.<p> And that's why the second half is such a disappointment. The revelations are cliche (a speech where the conspiracy is exposed elicits chuckles in its silliness) and don't build to any genuine climax. Some of the problems are inherent in the thriller genre, but at least Hitchcock had the sense to end with a chase scene on Mt. Rushmore to distract us from the plot holes.
Feb. 28, 2010, 9:49 a.m. CST
by Le Phantom
maybe Roman can do a movie about a diminutive Polish director who drugs, rapes and sodomizes a 13 year old girl! He can then flee to europe where he is punished by making films and winning an Oscar! The actors and Oscar numb nuts who want to forgive Polanski are the same lefties who wouldn't stand or applaud for Elia Kazan! Bunch of hypocritical dip shits!
Feb. 28, 2010, 11:32 a.m. CST
...to separate a man from his art? Many of your favorite artists may have been despicable human beings; the only defining difference being that they were not caught. Polanski the man committed a crime and was caught for it. Polanski the artist continues to make films of merit and esteem. If the private lives of celebrities are of such concern there are other outlets to indulge in one's whims. If, however, film itself, regardless of the private (or very public) lives of the people involved, are of higher concern, then it shouldn't be a problem to separate the art from the artist. TMZ is only a few key strokes away. I'd rather read Ain't It Cool News.
Feb. 28, 2010, 3:35 p.m. CST
If Polanski had committed acts as a member of a radical leftist group like Red Army Faction, than maybe you might have a point, but this isn't political. And to turn this into some sort of Big Hollywood-style rant just makes you sound like a bittter reactionary in the Hannity mold. The kind presidents are accused of talking down to. But hey, when you're dealing with a room full of politicians who act like children, or a poster like Your StepDaddy, who implies that Harry would defend Osama Bin Laden, or a Glenn Beck type who points out to you the "Socialist" sculpture of Rockefeller Center, then, well, someone has to wear the daddy pants.
Feb. 28, 2010, 3:59 p.m. CST
If you are going to get political about it, to echo an earlier post, where is the outrage about bringing Dick Cheney and John Yoo to justice for war crines, with their admitted support for a policy of torturing other human beings? I think what is actually interesting is how many people here had no problem watching "The Hangover", which provided a no-doubt hefty paycheck to a certain covicted rapist/pugilist. And, I know, youre response, will be, "But Tyson did his time!" Actually, Polanski DID do his time, at Chino, in agreement, with LA District Attorney's Office. It was when the judge presiding over the case, seeking a celebrity feather in his cap, decided to welch on the deal, and, so, Polanski fled. The real question is: Why now, brown cow? Polanski has an address in Switzerland. The authorities could have knocked on his door at any time. So, was someone running for re-election? Who knows? But I will say this, I'm going to see "The Ghost Writer", which will probably end up occupying a space on my shelf next to my "Ninth Gate" DVD. Now watch, folks, as some dope makes the suggestion that I am a supporter of rape, as they watch "The Hangover" yet again. You are the losers, and you are the ones missing out. People will be watching "Chinatown" and "Rosemary's Baby", while you go the way of the dodo.
Feb. 28, 2010, 5:18 p.m. CST
Another pathetic loser who probably can't fuck his wife right, and, as a result, feels like he can go around dumping on other people's family members. Which will still not enhance his ability with the ladies. What a putz.
Feb. 28, 2010, 8:39 p.m. CST
by Dark Knight Lite
but that doesn't excuse rape. Polanski apologists really need to review the facts of the case and ask themselves an important question. If this were "Ron Polanski" from Hollywood, Florida, would they still defend the guy?
Feb. 28, 2010, 8:47 p.m. CST
by Dark Knight Lite
You hit the nail on the head: IT'S ALL BUSH'S FAULT!!! Bush - the boogeyman strikes again, with his eeeeeeeevil sidekick, DICK CHENEY! Fuck, I can't stop laughing.
Feb. 28, 2010, 11:48 p.m. CST
Remember? The one with all the lame kids and the ghost who communicates with them through anagrams?
March 1, 2010, midnight CST
Good times, good times...
March 1, 2010, 12:47 a.m. CST
Is this true? Seriously, I heard this happened when he was younger.
March 1, 2010, 5:30 a.m. CST
Human beings are complex. We all know right from wrong. Some choose to follow the law, others will not. The vast majority of us try to follow the law but will still drive 55 where there is a 50 limit, or park in a no parking zone despite it being against the rules. What Polanski did was a real crime. Him being rich, or a film director, or having his wife murdered, does not take away from the fact that he is a criminal - one that escaped the law. I have said this before, you would not let a carpenter anywhere near your house if you knew he had raped a child. And if he told you: "Hey man, its okay. She forgaaaave me." Would that make you welcome him into you house where your children live? You are brainless twits for even allowing any sympathy for a child rapist. 1. You can not separate the art from the artist. You can not! That is why we do criminal background checks on people teaching our children. They may be awesome Maths teachers - the best in the world - but a rapist is a rapist. 2. If Polanski said he was donating his entire fee (and a percentage of the film's profits) to child abuse charities, maybe you could believe he was making amends. But none of this has happened. He has no remorse, no guilt, and even worse, is playing the victim. I find it scary, that people are literally attacking us for being sickened by the actions of a child rapist. I find it scary, that people here are actually supporting this man, and justifying him but applauding his work. And I find it mind-boggling that the AICN staff have NO MORAL CENTRE at all!!! Shame on you Harry. I hope to God you or your wife do not suffer from crime. I hope that if you have children, they are protected from the child rapists in the world. But if someone you know is abused, or raped, or murdered, lets hope the attackers aren't singers, or actors, or directors because then you will never get justice. "Members of the jury, this man is innocent! Why? Because he made Porkys 4. Yes, great movie. Discussion over. Justice served!" Really, what has this world come to, when a criminal can be forgiven, simply because he makes 'good' movies?
March 1, 2010, 5:35 a.m. CST
I think Polanski is a rapist and he's avoided jail long enough. That being said I havn't watched any of his movies in ages. I don't agree with Harry at all,but man he is getting cremated on this one.
March 1, 2010, 5:39 a.m. CST
After Polanski kissed her, the victim alleged, he began to engage in oral sex. A: … I was ready to cry. I was kind of — I was going, ‘No. Come on. Stop it.’ But I was afraid. Q: And what did he say, if anything? A: He wasn’t saying anything that I can remember. He was — sometimes he was saying stuff, but I was just blocking him out, you know. The victim testified that Polanski began having sex with her, but sodomized her when he learned she wasn’t using birth control. A: He asked, he goes, ‘Are you on the pill?’ And I went, ‘No.’ And he goes, ‘When did you last have your period?’ And I said, I don’t know. A week or two. I’m not sure.’ Q: And what did he say? A: He goes, ‘Come on. You have to remember.’ And I told him I didn’t. Q: Did he say anything after that? A: Yes. He goes, ‘Would you want me to go through your back? And I went, ‘No.’ The victim testified that after the sex, she got dressed and waited in the car for Polanski to drive her home. Before driving her home, he asked her to keep the incident a secret. A: He said to me, he goes, ‘Oh, don’t tell your mother about this.’ … Q: What did you say? A: I wasn’t saying anything. He says, ‘Don’t tell your mother about this and don’t tell your boyfriend either.’ … He said something like, ‘This is our secret.’ And I went, ‘Yeah.’ And then later he said, ‘You know, when I first met you I promised myself I wouldn’t do anything like this with you.’ Source: Transcript of the grand jury testimony in The People of the State of California v. Roman Raymond Polanski. March 24, 1977.
March 1, 2010, 5:41 a.m. CST
Because the fucker sure makes good movies!
March 1, 2010, 6:46 a.m. CST
... than Harry has reviewing them. That was a meaningless ramble of words that made barely any coherent sense whatsoever. Face it, Harry would rather fuck about on Farmville (like some teenage girl) or twat about on Twitter than actually do his fucking job properly. <p> <p> Such a shame how this site continues to tumble. If it weren't for the talkbacks, it'd be dead in the water. And yeah, Harry's reviews mean next to nothing anyway when he stools over just about everything he sees. <p> <p> Anyway, a film by a guy who should be in prison, who hasn't made a good film in three decades, starring a guy who can hardly act? Pass.
March 1, 2010, 9:22 a.m. CST
by dr sauch
Organize your thoughts, use transitions and complete sentences.
March 1, 2010, 9:47 a.m. CST
March 1, 2010, 10:44 a.m. CST
Don't care how good it is, this movie will never cross my eyes.
March 1, 2010, 11:41 a.m. CST
That means there is no reason to review, watch or even acknowledge the existence of any of his movies. They're no more worthy of notice than Charles Manson's songs or John Wayne Gacy's clown paintings. Polanski does not deserve to be afforded the credibility of being reviewed like any other filmmaker. If he'd ever paid his debt, I might fel differently, but he's never taken responsibility and the only critical review he deserves is from a parole board in about 20 years.
March 1, 2010, 12:27 p.m. CST
If you're into that one-man-and-a-guitar shiznit. He's got a nice, deep voice. He's certainly far more listenable than the graceless FM country swings or lame Blue Note malaise that passes for Singer-Songwriter music these days.<p> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jw8S7TJPqGs
March 1, 2010, 2:02 p.m. CST
"They're no more worthy of notice than Charles Manson's songs or John Wayne Gacy's clown paintings." How tasteful to compare Polanski to the man whose "family" cut the fetus out of his late wife's belly. And, BTW, a man who prizes Jared Hess over Roman Polanski as a filmmaker has incredibly bad taste.
March 1, 2010, 2:05 p.m. CST
AICN's very own Nancy Grace, speaks of complexity, yet sees the world in black and white. But if your handle comes from a certain Traveling Wilburys song, then I have to give the proverbial props.
March 1, 2010, 2:09 p.m. CST
Do you support torture? Just a question.
March 1, 2010, 2:42 p.m. CST
by Dark Knight Lite
I don't support the torture of a 13 year-old girl, if that's what you're asking. Tool.
The girl has said she thinks the charges against Polanski should be dropped and the film judged on its artistic merit. <p> Curious what talkbackers' views are about the girl's mother, who clearly wanted her daughter hanging out with Hollywood movie stars, and about Jack Nicholson, who's house this happened at. <p> Seems likely this was a statutory offence rather than an assault, that Polanski wasn't the only culpable party, that Polanski didn't get a fair trial, and that the girl was sexually experienced. <p> Should it have happened? No. But the rhetoric on this and other threads is knuckle dragging at best, and bordering on some kind of perverted obsession with the topic of kiddie rape at worst. <p> Why don't you all go and jerk off over Manhattan.
March 1, 2010, 3:54 p.m. CST
To let them know I will no longer purchase their products. Too bad..I have several nice Sideshow statues and will not add any more.
March 1, 2010, 4:07 p.m. CST
You quite honestly are not bright enough to post on these talkbacks. The girl being sexually experienced or Polanski possibly not being the only culprit is moot, your thinking he did not get a fair trial is ridiculous as he fled the country right afterward to avoid serving a sentence or even an opportunity to overturn the verdict. I sincerely hope you are just a young kid because it's scary to think you might be an adult in charge of young children... or anything for that matter.
March 1, 2010, 4:27 p.m. CST
Any "sexual experience" she might have had (which would really only mean she'd been previously molested) is completely irrelevant. It was a forcible rape. It wasn't a "statutory situation," it was a forcible rape. He drugged a child and forcibly raped her in the ass. It would have been a brutal crime no matter how old the girl was, or how experienced. How fucking sick is it to say that if a child has been previously molested,then that makes it ok to rape her in the ass?
March 1, 2010, 4:28 p.m. CST
Do you find the views of the girl "ridiculous" also? <p> New York Times article: Support for Polanski From an Unlikely Corner<p> Samantha Geimer, the victim of the director Roman Polanski’s illegal sexual acts when she was 13, has formally asked the Los Angeles County Superior Court to dismiss his case, citing wrongdoing by the original judge and a member of the district attorney’s office who has since retired. The Los Angeles County district attorney has argued that Mr. Polanski has no right to seek dismissal himself because after pleading guilty, he fled the country in 1978 on the eve of his sentencing and remains a fugitive. But Ms. Geimer, in Monday’s filing, argues that she, as the victim in the case, does have the right to seek dismissal. She contends that the district attorney’s office subjected her to unwanted scrutiny last week by including in new court papers the details of the sexual encounter, which occurred in 1977. “It is clear to me that because the district attorney’s office has been accused of wrongdoing, it has recited lurid details of the case to distract attention from the wrongful conduct of the district attorney,” Ms. Geimer said in her filing.
March 1, 2010, 4:32 p.m. CST
Girls as young as 14 are ready to have babies, a Mann Booker Prize-winning author has claimed. <p> Hilary Mantel, 57, said society ran on a 'male timetable' which dictated that women should have babies at an older age. <p> 'Having sex and having babies is what young women are about, and their instincts are suppressed in the interests of society's timetable,' she said. <p> 'I think it is that men's lives have set the timetable. Men reach a sort of sexual peak when you are 20, a social peak when you are 40. <p> 'There is this breed of women for whom society's timetable is completely wrong,' she told the Sunday Telegraph. <p> Mantel, who won the Man Booker Prize last year for her novel Wolf Hall, said that society was 'incredibly hypocritical' about teenage sex and teenagers having babies. <p> 'I was perfectly capable of setting up and running a home when I was 14, and if, say, it had been ordered differently, I might have thought "Now is the time to have a couple of children and when I am 30 I will go back and I'll get my PhD".' <p> 'But society isn't yet ordered with that kind of flexibility. <p> 'We were being educated well into our twenties, an age when part of us wanted to become mothers, probably little bits of all of us. Some were more driven than others.'
March 1, 2010, 4:36 p.m. CST
...that is, if it's a library rental. No money towards Roman's pockets. I actually went to see The Pianist at the screening, then walked out after 15 minutes to ask for a refund at the box office. I watched the movie on video rental later. Thank goodness for public and college libraries that have Polanski movies on DVD like KNIFE IN THE WATER -- no customer's money towards Roman's bank account, either. THE TENANT is very, very weird, no wonder it sucked. I might as well not see any *new* movie with acquitted-but-still-guilty murderers Robert Blake and O.J. Simpson, both of whose acting career are deservedly dead in the water. Let them rot in their deathly boring retirement lives. I wrote letter to L.A. district attorney and California district court on Polanski case, urging them not to breach public's trust to go ahead to prosecute Roman Polanski despite the plea of his grown-up victim, stating it is THE PEOPLE OF CALIFORNIA versus Polanski. Roman may be a good filmmaker and actor par excellence, but he still needs to pay for his odious crime. I consider him to be a genuine pedophile because he likes young nubile white girls for fornication and eventual marriage once the girl reach legal age. Film and real-life should be separated, but Roman's unforgivable crime (rape of an involuntarily drunk and drugged teenage girl) reflects on his reputation as a talented but morally skewed artist.<p>Roman Polanski's crime may have occurred 33 years ago, but it remains a criminal offense to North American decency. Free-for-all sex attitude in Europe (France and Poland) do not mean it is condoned in the state of California, one of the 'rabidly liberal' states in the Union. Movie stars and entertainment industry people who signed the petition urging to free Polanski should be ashamed, because they think the "great artist" should be faced with criminal charge but the average citizen do. Double standard reflecting their "liberal attitude" condoning perversion only if it involves a "great artist".<p>I hope to see Polanski finally serve justified time in a California prison. When his time is served, he can be a free man to travel anywhere in the U.S. and make movies. He'd better pray that he continues to live in good health and continue making films as he puts the past behind him with appropriate jail time served rather than be pardoned or something.
March 1, 2010, 4:38 p.m. CST
March 1, 2010, 4:39 p.m. CST
if you're concerned about the morality and character of the people behind the cameras and in the board rooms. Heaven forbid that people find out that James Cameron, Eli Roth, Michael Bay and Jerry Bruckheimer are all a$$holes... Oh, wait, you all know that already...
March 1, 2010, 4:44 p.m. CST
Polanski fled the country and is legally a convicted child molester. If he has a new trial where he is found not guilty then he is vindicated and only then. What he chose, however, was to commit ANOTHER crime by fleeing prosecution. Plus, the girl's statements now are irrelevant as they are not in a court of law and does not absolve Polanski in any legal way whatsoever. Plus, it is entirely possible that one of the steps for the victim to get past this emotionally is to forgive Polanski and move on with her life..unfortunately for him, if he commits a heinous crime like rape he doesn't get a pass just because a psychologically disturbed woman wants to put it all behind her. You are arguing emotionally, but under the law Polanski is a convict.
March 1, 2010, 4:48 p.m. CST
Wow...you just compared being an asshole as being on equal ground to raping a child? Congrats..you are the biggest idiot ever. I sincerely hope you are not allowed out of the home.
March 1, 2010, 4:51 p.m. CST
I did however force you to elevate the quality of your rhetoric. <p> Clearly you have a fixed view on this to which your entitled and as I said, should it have happened, no. <p> But admit it, some of you in here are frothing at the mouth and ignoring the very obvious shades of nuance to the case. You're not interested in the victim at all. Just in being self-righteous, and in Napolean Dynamite's case, indulging some fetish for talking dirty.
March 1, 2010, 4:59 p.m. CST
I mean the US courts seem fine with extraordinary rendition and the death penalty. So you can't just say "well the law says this" and not have things go questioned. The law isn't some perfect code honed by the finest minds. It's messy and a work in progress. I mean, by law, the age of consent in the Vatican City is 12, apparently. Which is like totally fucked up. There's an explanation, but still. People are using this case for their own moral crusades. It's the wrong example to pick for that. Does anyone think Polanski wasn't being a scumbag? No.
March 1, 2010, 5:02 p.m. CST
My rhetoric is always elevated, but truthfully, I don't consider you the most urgent problem. You seem to agree his actions were wrong and if you would choose to release him of his crimes without a new trial, then at least I have comfort in knowing it's not up to you. The real problems are those on here who don't even agree raping a child is wrong based on irrelevant facts like she wanted it, or was experienced, etc...or don't appreciate the horrible nature of the crime like Bayareafilm by comparing rape to being an asshole.
March 1, 2010, 5:02 p.m. CST
...talkback always gets filled with "he's a pedophile and should be jailed" rants. Post, rinse and repeat until Roman completes his jail sentence. I don't know why Hollywood actors would like to work with him like they lick to shine his leather shoes, they probably have skeletons in the closet. (Check out Mark Ebner's 2004 sleaze non-fiction "Hollywood Interrupted", better than lame TMZ celebrity porn) I have newfound respect for Luc Besson who took caution to state the obvious against the tide crying for Roman's release -- because he's the father of young daughters by different women, despite his odd choices (proclaimed he retired from live action directing to make gay animated movie bombs; The Messenger was a hilariously bad movie). If Roman wants to redeem himself, he needs to take the hint and man up to serve jail then early release on good behavior after a year or two. Pedophiles hate humiliation of being caught and facing the music and they flee like cowards who refuse to account for deviant behavior, believing they are 'invincible' in the society.
March 1, 2010, 5:10 p.m. CST
Polanski was living in LA, commited the crime in LA, AND pleaded guilty in an LA court, so American law applies. Plus, he has a US and International warrant out for him, so numerous countries are on board. True, he might not be guilty under some countries laws, but if you pickpocketed some one in Saudi Arabia, do you really want to rely on them not amputating your hand just because another country wouldn't? If you are in a specific country, you follow their laws.
March 1, 2010, 5:22 p.m. CST
I did couch that one under "morality and character" if you read my post completely. People are pretty choosy about what they're willing to forgive and forget. How about some stronger parallels then just being Hollywood douchebags? How about Rob Lowe? Statutory rape in 1988... Are you out there picketing the set of Brothers and Sisters? R Kelly? Remember his illegal marriage to an underage Aliyah? Or the tape that supposedly shows him committing statutory rape? Michael Jackson? Bad suspected pedophile! Dead Michael Jackson? Good musical legend! Tim Allen? Arrested as a coke dealer in 1978. Now he's Santa Claus! Hugh Grant - arrested for public indecency with a prostitute in 1995. Still a rom-com superstar. Hollywood is full of these stories. You know people whose character and morals extend beyond being assholes...
March 1, 2010, 5:44 p.m. CST
I do not watch, listen to, or support Rob Lowe, R Kelly or Tim Allen. The fact they are criminals only adds to my contempt for them as I just mainly consider them horrible talents. And Michael Jackson, although I think he was creepy and would not leave my kids with him, was, as you put it, a "suspected" pedophile..never convicted. Hugh Grant, I believe, just embarrassed himself more than anything and his crime was not against a minor. Polanski WAS convicted of a sexual assault against a minor and is being supported by AICN. If another celeb was convicted of rape and AICN promoted their work repeatedly, I would then condemn that, but that is not currently the case. I did read your post completely and stand behind my statement that you are an idiot.
March 1, 2010, 5:50 p.m. CST
And you, my friend, have selective moral indignation - which negates it's righteousness.
March 1, 2010, 5:56 p.m. CST
I'm being selective by condemning child rapists or people actually CONVICTED of felony sex crimes. I can live with that. If it's any consolation, I would also not leave a child alone with you.
March 1, 2010, 6:39 p.m. CST
The studios play us for fools. They know that we apply a different moral standard to the 'stars' because we are blinded by their beauty - whether that be in face or in art. Don Johnson has sex with 14 year old Melanie Griffith - no one cares; Rob Lowe is accused with statutory rape and does 20 hours community service to avoid jail time - again, who cares; Roman Polanski is charged with six - SIX - felony counts, including rape and sodomy (that's ass fucking for you morons) of a minor and then, after fleeing the country, and on exile, has a 'relationship' with the 15-year-old Nastassja Kinski - no one cares - despite an obvious pattern. People are saying we are using this case to push our own moral crusade....um, is fighting against child abuse not your moral crusade? You mean, there are people who don't think that this is wrong...well fuck me (hold on boys, I'm not a minor)... I am an idiot to believe there was some good in this world. You know, the Christians, Jews, and Muslims all believe in judgement day - one day where evil attacks the planet. But the Hindus believe judgement 'day' is not 24 hours, but an entire age - one where humanity turns its back on what is decent, what is right, and follows the path of self destruction, loving evil in all its forms. Judging by Harry and some of you talkbackers, the Hindus may be right. Because where I stand, you see this movie, you support Polanski, you're as good as being Satan's bitch. There is no moral crusade, here. There is no self-righteousness, here. There is only what is good and what is not. Stealing is wrong. Stealing to feed your starving children is a mitigating circumstance. Raping a child has no mitigation. It is wrong - and that's it. You should not see this movie - if you are decent. You want 2 hours of entertainment? Buy a book. See another movie. Buy a video game. But do not see the product of evil. Because where I come from, raping a child is evil. Pure and fucking simple.
March 1, 2010, 6:42 p.m. CST
I wonder if people realize that a child is brutally raped every time a ticket to a Polanski film is sold, or whenever someone watches one of his movies on TV. Thankfully there are all these vigilantes in here, saving those children at the last minute with their heroic typing of harsh invective! <p> Oh, wait, you mean that none of this affects ANY actual crimes against children, pro or con? And it's just another instance of irrelevant talkback dick measuring and shit talking? Carry on, then, you hypothetical rapists and Batmen.
March 1, 2010, 6:51 p.m. CST
by Banky the Hack
...all you want, but at the end of the day, the artist is making money off of the art. But not my money.
March 1, 2010, 6:55 p.m. CST
I am assuming your family members are embarrassed by you and you can't ever get a person to date you a second time. Nobody thinks speaking up will prevent rape, but it might prevent companies supporting rapists from making as much of a profit from their work. Congrats on being one of the reasons our world is going to crap...
March 1, 2010, 7:03 p.m. CST
The fact that you chose that handle 'ebonic_plague' shows us what a virus you are for humanity. What's funny is that the urban dictionary defines you as "The growing acceptability of having absolutely no education at all"...I find that appropriate. Based upon your theories, no-one should ever talk about crime, or criminals, or maybe events like the holocaust because talking about it is "just another instance of irrelevant talkback dick measuring and shit talking?"...your parents must be so proud of you. Personally, I think you're a cunt.
March 1, 2010, 7:20 p.m. CST
The_Recruiter: I wouldn't call what your mom and I had "a date," but it brought you into this world, and just for that, I owe the bitch a falcon punch. Have fun with your selective outrage and wild histrionics, you've come to the right place. <p> And MonkeyManReturns: My dick is still longer than yours, and no amount of calling everyone else uneducated rapists is going to change that. <p> OMG I'm watching Rosemary's Baby!!! TEH RAYPE IS OUT OF OCNTROL! You guys better get ANGRY!!!
March 1, 2010, 7:24 p.m. CST
Start an internet petition! Think of all the children you'll save by just writing your name and frowning at your screen! Except, I'm going to watch Chinatown tonight, too... ohhhh, all those poor kids, gonna get all butt raped all over again... and to think, I could stop it, if only I'd change the channel.
March 1, 2010, 7:34 p.m. CST
I did not say he supports child rape. But he supports a child rapist.<p> If you were an African American and a famous film maker who was a known racist made a film and some called it great, would you want to see it and support it and him with your money, or review it? <p> What if you were a liberal and Rush Limbaugh or Pat Robertson made a film, would you want to see it or review it and support them in making more such movies? <p>What if you are a conservative, do you want to see a Michael Moorer movie and support him and help him make more movies you are against with your ticket money?<p> Harry took a stand. He supports an acknowledged, and unrepentant, and unpunished child rapist. <p> You can put any qualifier you want on it - like that self serving pablum that wyrm wrote, but supporting a Roamn Polanski movie supports a child rapist. If no one paid to see his movies, no one would finance them. If no one reviewed his movies - let alone gave it a glowing review, then he would sink into obscurity. <p> It really is that simple. Give the man your money or give him a platform - with a good review - and you are supporting a child rapist. <p> You made the decision.
March 1, 2010, 7:45 p.m. CST
...if he had any filmmaking talent whatsoever and it got good reviews and looked like a movie I'd want to see. Luckily there's no danger of that happening. <p> You vigilantes better be prepared to live like the Amish if you're going to forgo all art and technology created by people who have done horrible things. But, you won't, you're just going to chastise people on the internet and compare them to rapists for paying to see a movie, so this is all just typical TB hot air. So have fun talking your shit, until one of you tries physically to get in my face at a screening, in which case I thank you in advance for providing me a legitimate use for my new concealed carry permit.
March 1, 2010, 9:31 p.m. CST
How many of you paid to see "The Hangover" with convicted rapist Mike Tyson? I smell hypocrisy on all on you. Rob Lowe committed statutory rape. How many of you kids rented "Austin Powers The Spy Who Shagged Me"? Or listened to a song written by John Philips? Or listened to music by Jerry Lee Lewis? Or watched the films of Charlie Chaplin? Or listened to Elvis, who, you know, met Priscilla when she was just 14? Or watched a movie with Don Johnson in it? Well, I'm guessing many of you paid to see "The Hangover" with convicted rapist Mike Tyson, and that's pretty much enough to qualify you as a hypocrite. And Dark Night Lite, you mock peoples' disgust with the torture committed by the Bush Cheney administration, yet you come down on Polanski, which is why I asked you if you support torture? If you care SOOO MUCH about justice, and all. And The Recruiter, from your colorful choice of words, I doubt anyone would go out with you a FIRST TIME. Unless it was at a Tea Party gathering with a girl named Moe.
March 1, 2010, 10:15 p.m. CST
by frank cotton
and seriously, this has nothing to do with the sins of the previous administration - some people will go to the most convoluted extremes to interject their tired laments into every conversation. child molesters should be TAKEN OUT AND SHOT. and some of the defenders here obviously recognize a kindred soul, hence their vehemence
March 1, 2010, 10:15 p.m. CST
by frank cotton
March 1, 2010, 10:35 p.m. CST
The guy rufied and butt raped a little girl. End of discussion. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. Regardless of what people have said it doesn't change what he did, what he is, and why did it.<p> What he did: He raped and sodomized a little girl.<p> What he is: A child rapist.<p> Why he did it: He's a sick fuck. H to be in order drool at the thought drugging and sodomizing a kid.
March 1, 2010, 10:36 p.m. CST
He would have to be in order to drool at the thought of drugging and sodomizing a kid.
March 2, 2010, 12:57 a.m. CST
Art should stand on its own - separated from its creator. I just saw this movie at the ArcLight in Hollywood - it's a good film. It captured the alien, isolated world that politicians live in. It also manages to create a realistic conspiracy theory. The weird "moral" high-horse people need to get the hell out of a film appreciation site. The protesters, preaching "I love Chinatown and The Pianist, but I'll never watch them again," are idealist wackos. The only difference between these nutjobs and me: I'm watching good movies.
March 2, 2010, 1:32 a.m. CST
“Jail is not being recommended at the present time. The present offense appears to have been spontaneous and an exercise of poor judgement by the defendant.”<p>"It went on to note that the victim and her parent, as well as an examining psychiatrist, recommended against jail, while a second psychiatrist described the offense as neither “aggressive nor forceful.”<p>http://tinyurl.com/yaphx3o
March 2, 2010, 1:57 a.m. CST
Dr. Alan E. Davis, one of the psychiatrists who examined Polanski, is quoted as saying. “The offense occurred as an isolated instance of transient poor judgement and loss of normal inhibitions in circumstances of intimacy and collaboration in creative work, and with some coincidental alcohol and drug intoxication.”<p>Anyway, what's a trained psychiatrist know about that shit that some random TB'er doesn't? I mean shit...Lucas practically sodomized them back in '99 and that guy didn't even come close to offering up any Quaaludes.
March 2, 2010, 2:03 a.m. CST
<br><br>“Incarceration would serve no necessary or useful purpose.”
March 2, 2010, 2:32 a.m. CST
by Le Phantom
Put the crack pipe down hoss, ain't got nothing to do with politics, or Bush or Hannity or any other fractured thoughts your mind is regurgitating! Let's see how open minded you would be if this piece of shit drugged, raped and sodomized you 13 year old princess!...And then went on to win an Oscar! You mindless fucking twit!
March 2, 2010, 5:15 a.m. CST
How did you get your text all bold like that, Umpire?
March 2, 2010, 7:31 a.m. CST
...and I'll tell you there. Oh, don't tell your mother about this.‍‍‍ <br>This will be our secret.
March 2, 2010, 8:22 a.m. CST
I work in law enforcement. I would love to see your 'new concealed carry permit.' The fact that you resort to violent threats indicate to me the kind of person you are: a thug, a bandit, and another statistic when someone blows your head off.
March 2, 2010, 8:24 a.m. CST
The people you mention all served time for their crimes. They accepted their punishment and went through the legal system. Polanski didn't. If you can't see the difference, you are an idiot.
March 2, 2010, 8:30 a.m. CST
"It isn't retro, it is totally modern." <p> In the first line of the second paragraph he writes, "In many ways, Ghost Writer is one part North by Northwest," thereby wholly contradicting the first paragraph.
March 2, 2010, 8:38 a.m. CST
There were other shrinks who disagreed with your shrink. Polanski and his lawyers all thought he would get community service and it was when - and only when - the judge took advice from other shrinks and stated that jail should be expected, that Polanski ran away. What is more alarming is that you think sodomizing a child is acceptable and are trying to find some way to defend him. You must be a fucking lawyer. Look - we can't stop drug dealers dealing, we can't stop pedos abusing, and we can't stop terrorists terrorizing - all we can do is make a stand. You have chosen Polanski - that is your stand. Many of us have chosen to stand against him. Are there double standards? Maybe there are - that is our cross to bear. Fact for me, is that sticking your cock up a 13 year old behind after getting her woozy, is wrong. Polanski knew this was wrong because he told her to keep it secret. To me, that is a criminal mind. He also ran from the law. The girl herself was the product of a bad home and this was all the more reason to be horrified - she was let down by her parents and society. I will not see this movie. And I happily change the channel when his other movies are on. There are plenty other movies and good TV I can watch and enjoy and my life is not affected one bit by not watching his movies. I think this TB is now over. See you on other TBs for other movies. And ebonic, hopefully I'll see you at the movies with your new permit.
March 2, 2010, 8:49 a.m. CST
Why would want to contribute any money to a studio that would openly and publicly support a child rapist that belongs in prison?
March 2, 2010, 10:08 a.m. CST
I think you mean one of the court-appointed psychiatrists who evaluated Polanski.<p>And who said anything about it being acceptable? Those quotes I posted above are factual quotes that happen to be more than slightly relevant to the topic at hand you monster dickhead. So maybe you should be the fucking lawyer, seeing as how you're so good at putting words into peoples mouths and assigning malicious motives unto those who dare disagree with you.<p>Or are you just some kind of intellectual rapist that thinks you can just shove your filthy mind-vomit into my open orifice cause "that's what I was thinking anyway"?‍‍‍‍<br>Go Fuck Yourself.
March 2, 2010, 10:23 a.m. CST
...so you're some kind of rent-a-cop or desk-jockey so frustrated by your lack of power over the abstract evils of the world that you come here to make yourself feel better by asserting your supposed moral dominance over people who actually have the mental capabilities to understand that the viewing of a movie is not support of a crime. Why didn't you just say that at the beginning? It could have saved us some typing, buddy. Also, I'd watch that blood pressure, too... I'm sure you're aware of the health hazards of sitting on your ass all day, bottling up anger. Don't you become a statistic, either.
March 2, 2010, 11:31 a.m. CST
but he's a fantastic filmmaker, and if i have to morally approve of everyone involved in a flick, that would really cut down on the amount of movies i watch.
March 2, 2010, 2:08 p.m. CST
Harry, but I will not join you in celebrating the raping of children.
March 2, 2010, 7:44 p.m. CST
I cannot even begin to translate Fat-Ass's "review".<p> Also, Harry seems to have really gotten behind Polanski which I find kinda creepy.<p> I hope Harry's little nephew has eyes in the back of his head (look out for the "molester uncle" dude!)
March 2, 2010, 7:56 p.m. CST
by frank cotton
what with diseases and all
March 2, 2010, 10:52 p.m. CST
Back-and-forth debating and invective over art and morality is hilarious. I already took my stand twice in this forum. Harry is a rabid liberal, what do anyone expect when he gushed about le grand artiste-cum-pédophile diffamé Roman Polański's latest movie? This forum is yet another political-and-morals pissing debate started by Harry's convoluted, stream-of-consciousness review (how Proust). Maybe Headgeek is a master troll who starts the flame-filled discussion by writing a short review then web-publish it to provoke some strident moralists into responding with "rationale-injecting" liberals offering rebuttals that spiral into defamation and character assassination. Ah, good times, when controversial AICN articles like JJ Abrams/Superman script and infamous Blade II review explode into geek orgy of hatred and invective. No wonder Kevin Smith mocked AICN forum flamebaits in Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back (what a terrible movie)
March 3, 2010, 2:17 a.m. CST
Wassup with the accent. I wonder if she got lessons or just winged it. she should have done text to speech.
March 3, 2010, 6:02 p.m. CST
As promised, here is the response I received from Sideshow Collectibles, as well as my note back. Dear ***** Thank you for e-mailing us and making us aware of your opinions regarding the content presented by one of our affiliates. We appreciate your correspondences but would like to remind you it is unnecessary to bombard several departments with the same correspondence. Please understand that Sideshow Collectibles does not dictate or endorse the specific content that appears on any of our affiliate web sites, as they are independent businesses from ours. As long as the affiliate content is not unlawful, racist, pornographic, political in nature, etc. then they meet their contractual obligations to maintain their affiliate status with us. The majority of our affiliate advertisers are websites pertaining to film, comics and other pop culture. 'Ain't It Cool News' and other film review websites may have articles or reviews on the works and films of people that may have unfortunate circumstances surrounding them. For the majority, sites are there to discuss the arts and crafts of motion pictures, and not the film creator's personal affairs. We apologize if you feel that our advertising on this site, which features hundreds of movie and DVD reviews, is wrong because one film is tied to a director who has a questionable past. We understand your focus is on the director but please keep in mind that in the movie industry there are many other workers and creative people involved with a movie. People whose lively hoods depend on the success of a film project. Although we personally do not support the alleged acts of this Mr. Polanski, we feel that this matter should be handled in the justice system where it belongs. Perhaps if you feel strongly about AICN's coverage of this project you should contact them directly or perhaps stop visiting their site altogether denying them your patronage. Thank you for your understanding, and if you have any further questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me directly. Best regards, Michael Tolentino Customer Service Manager Sideshow Collectibles 2630 Conejo Spectrum Street Thousand Oaks, CA 91320 USA Direct Ph: (805) 214-2116 U.S. Toll Free: (800) 474-3746 Int’l Ph: (805) 214-2100 ext. 2 U.S / Int’l Fx: (805) 214-2190 And my response back to him: Michael, I genuinely appreciate your time and response. Although you are correct it is unnecessary to “bombard” several departments, I believe that it is appropriate to contact various people when it is unclear as to whom this type of letter should be addressed. In fact, your name and contact info was not related to my initial letters so persistence seems to have been the reason my thoughts arrived at your desk. As for your stance on AICN: I agree the site presents numerous stories on a wide variety of genre subjects, and the reality is, this is a unique situation in that a decision needs to be made as to whether you separate the artist from the work, or not. In the very least, it is a divisive matter. If only one story ran on “The Ghost Writer” it would be something questionably worthy of comment. The reason for my disdain, as well as many others, is that the site offered an uncharacteristically large amount of material on the film to the point that at one time 5+ separate stories existed to promote the film. Normally only 1 story is offered per movie. The reality is, although you do not “personally” support Polanski, your company is indirectly supporting the profitability of the film via its support of a site that has all the markings of having a financial arrangement with the film’s producers. And people are noticing. This might not have an adverse effect on your profits, but if you did review the site at all, you would see the anger that AICN has created in the several talkbacks for the original few stories and you would be able to determine it might have a moral adverse effect on your company. And by the way, you mentioned this is something best left to the justice system…actually, it was…and Polanski was found guilty. So, this is not a company supporting a person accused, or possibly innocent. It is support for a convicted child molester. Sideshow really wants to remain on the side of a site supporting that? The people who peruse AICN would appear to be your target market and many on the site have noticed a lack of response from Sideshow and other advertisers. Remember that for every person who verbalizes a complaint, numerous others just choose to not take the time, but will vote by avoiding your company. One last thought, you had mentioned “As long as the affiliate content is not unlawful, racist, pornographic, political in nature, etc. then they meet their contractual obligations to maintain their affiliate status with us.” I cannot argue that the site definitely contradicts your requirements, but I will say that it can be argued that AICN is making a statement supporting pornography, or making a political statement on the validity of our justice system by voluntarily marketing the work of a convicted child molester who provided a means to revenue for AICN with product created while actively avoiding extradition for his crime. True, not actually a violation of your terms, but…don’t you feel a bit..”icky”? Perhaps you don’t have children. Having said all that, I have purchased several of your statues in the past (Elektra, X-Men vs. Sentinel, etc..), and being a fan of the company, as well as living locally and having had friends employed with your Westlake office, I thought it would be fair and appropriate for me to bring this to your attention. I will, as promised to several people, post your response on the site. Thank you for your time. And please keep in mind, I wrote this from a place of concern and to provide information, not with the intent of attacking Sideshow…I look forward to the Polanski vs.13 year old girl Diorama. Sincerely, *****
March 3, 2010, 10:09 p.m. CST
That The_Recruiter has no life!
March 4, 2010, 10:48 a.m. CST
As a kid I remember watching the kitschy but fun show on PBS about a group of ethnically diverse teenagers solving mysteries with the help of their ghost friend who could only communicate with him and vice versa through letters. I can only read a few sentences of anything Harry writes before my brain gives up. His writing is just terrible, so fucking terrible.
March 4, 2010, 12:54 p.m. CST
I can only imagine how much time it's going to take for The_Recruiter to write to every advertiser of every media outlet that has run a *positive* review of Ghost Writer. Then again, there isn't much to do out in Thousand Oaks...
March 4, 2010, 2:17 p.m. CST
I don't mind a positive review of the movie, but AICN went overboard in pushing the film. I could only find 1 review on other sites, and no mention on many (like Darkhorizons). Also, I've lived equally in the Bay area and in So Cal...there's just as much to do here since LA is 30 minutes away. Plus, my area is one of the highest per capita in the country moron. I assume it just feels like the Bay Area is more exciting to you because you just sit in your little boy cave and play Call of Duty with your imaginary friends all day. If there's really so much you have to do there, then you won't have the time to respond here in this talkback....let's see what happens.
March 4, 2010, 4:28 p.m. CST
Yes, I'm quite familiar with your stripmall suburb, Recruiter. When I was living and working in Hollywood I had a 6 month gig out there in that stucco paradise. The one thing I have to ask, though, is how many second dates YOU get after they see your Sideshow Collectibles statues?
March 4, 2010, 5:52 p.m. CST
Any time you want to direct AICN readers to your pic, do it, and I will respond in kind to show that one does not have to be a silly little troll like yourself to be a certified geek. Or do you prefer just being all talk? Loser. I spent nearly a decade in the Bay Area, and equal time here in LA and like both equally. Maybe while you were here in LA, nobody could stand you to the point that you were never invited to do anything fun. Doesn't seem to be a leap to come to that conclusion. Putting down an area that numerous AICN readers live in is weak and rude...I'm sure most would find you as annoying as I do. Sorry to interrupt your day of shooting aliens, looking up porn, and wishing a real woman would touch your penis who wasn't your pediatrician.
March 6, 2010, 5:13 p.m. CST
The reason she has an American accent because it sounds so much better than a Merseyside Scouse accent.
March 9, 2010, 11:11 p.m. CST
I love Talk Back. reading some of the grand statements of I Support This, or You Support That, and I won't ever watch one of his movies etc....It's the best free entertainment you can find. Best of all, is the high moral tone. Like it's the end of the world if someone likes this movie or not. Watch this movie, and YOU TOO are a rapist! Good lord. Some folks here need to really take a deep breath and remember that this is a forum for and about movies. I for one thought the review was just fine. It (for me) accomplished what it set out to do. Inform me about the movie. I learned a little more about it than i knew before, but not enough to ruin it. I also learned that a lot of folks here are really aggressive in their zeal to see Polanski put in the slammer. Ok. Whatever floats your boat....but frankly i think the movie looks quite good, and I'll probably see it if i get the chance, and moreover, it was this review that made up my mind that it would be worthwhile for me to spend my money on. (cue evil music) MONEY THAT WILL SUPPORT THE EVIL RAPIST POLANSKI...MUWAHAHAHAH!!!
March 16, 2010, 6:34 p.m. CST
"he is not a pedo. 'pedarest', or however you spell it, is pretty different. i hear she was very mature for her age. not saying that's ok! but not unheard of. nevermind celebrities in the 70's, 200 years ago. EVERYONE was doing it" <p> As evidenced here: <p> http://tinyurl.com/yznb9mn
March 18, 2010, 4:40 a.m. CST
Saw it. It was terrible. Nic Cage strikes again.
March 22, 2010, 12:51 p.m. CST
edited in a link to that dodgy music video at the beginning there?
April 12, 2010, 10:20 p.m. CST
of Polanski's past personal affairs, he offers up a well paced, well acted, and well directed thriller.
April 25, 2010, 6:35 p.m. CST
welcome to: |▌|▌|▌== http:www.betterwholesaler.com ==|▌|▌|▌ 50%off ca,ed hardy t-shirt$15 jeans,coach handbag$33,air max90,dunk,polo t-shirt$13,,lacoste t-shirt $13 air jordan for sale,$35,nfl nba jersy for sale and so on.. if you like to order anything you like. More details, please just browse our website Quality is our Dignity; Service is our Lift. enjoy yourself. thank you!! YOU MUST NOT MISS IT!!! |▌|▌|▌== http: www.betterwholesaler.com ==|▌|▌|▌
July 30, 2010, 3:56 p.m. CST
test test test