D
Deleted member 1074
Guest
Support Woody in these trying times.
Down with Mia. Up with Woody.
Down with Mia. Up with Woody.
Sadly, I think this crap just killed Cate Blanchett's best actress win. Another undeserved win for Sandra Bollocks.
Boooo, hopefully you are wrong to assume that Cate Blanchett would not win the oscar.
Que???
I don't believe he did it, no, no, more likely he married an evil vindictive woman
I don't believe he did it, no, no, more likely he married an evil vindictive woman
and she poisoned the children against him some people cannot just let things go, granted, he did ask for it when he ended up with
hell hath no fury and all that
Sadly, I think this crap just killed Cate Blanchett's best actress win. Another undeserved win for Sandra Bollocks...
can't see the image you posted damn you "Great Firewall of China"
From 1992...the FIRST time Baroness Von Wackiecunt tried to smear him.
[video]http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/02/02/watch-woody-allen-address-the-dylan-farrow-child-abuse-allegations-on-60-minutes.html[/video]
Is anyone else getting sick of comparisons being drawn to the Polanski case? Roman Polanski was charged with multiple offenses and admitted to what he did; there was physical evidence that abuse had occurred. Allen was never charged with anything because after three examinations by three different doctors, the results came back that Dylan Farrow showed no signs of sexual or physical abuse (a finding Mia Farrow has openly acknowledged).
What's really galling is that Mia Farrow has publicly stated her support for Polanski on a number of occasions, including an appearance in Polanki: Wanted and Desired in which she defends him. How she can engage in apologetics for someone who was convicted of raping a 13 year-old and then turn around and assume the moral high ground in this situation is beyond me. At best, this is a double-standard and at the worst, hideous hypocrisy and acrimony. If she truly believes her daughter is the victim of sexual abuse, how can she in good conscience support a man whose own sexual predation is significantly more substantiated and evidenced than Allen's? Something is seriously wrong here.
Is anyone else getting sick of comparisons being drawn to the Polanski case? Roman Polanski was charged with multiple offenses and admitted to what he did; there was physical evidence that abuse had occurred. Allen was never charged with anything because after three examinations by three different doctors, the results came back that Dylan Farrow showed no signs of sexual or physical abuse (a finding Mia Farrow has openly acknowledged).
What's really galling is that Mia Farrow has publicly stated her support for Polanski on a number of occasions, including an appearance in Polanki: Wanted and Desired in which she defends him. How she can engage in apologetics for someone who was convicted of raping a 13 year-old and then turn around and assume the moral high ground in this situation is beyond me. At best, this is a double-standard and at the worst, hideous hypocrisy and acrimony. If she truly believes her daughter is the victim of sexual abuse, how can she in good conscience support a man whose own sexual predation is significantly more substantiated and evidenced than Allen's? Something is seriously wrong here.
see it, its greatLet's not forget, of course, she was with Sinatra when she was 20 and he was in his 50s. Now it also seems possible that their son was fathered by him. Farrow's stance is oddly inconsistent and potentially BPD. In fact, her behaviour strongly reminds me of what they call a distortion campaign...
http://angiemedia.com/2008/12/29/bpd-distortion-campaigns/
I've not seen Blue Jasmine yet, but someone suggested that it could be a coded character attack on Mia.