Roman Polanski - Chinatown (1974) Discussion

[–] chninlp 9 years ago

It was actually written by Robert Towne but obviously Roman Polanski, along with Towne, heavily revised the screenplay.

I would say that the film is a heavily collaborative masterpiece given that the director corrected the horrendous mistakes of the screenwriter while the producer and film composer corrected the horrendous mistakes of the director. So the criminal director shouldn't get all or even most of the credit for the film's reputation in this particular case.

reply

[–] franzkabuki 9 years ago

You're confusing him with somebody else for Polanski is not a "pedophile" - unless he's been living some secret double life nobody knows of. But, of course, even if Chinatown had been directed by a pedophile, it'd still be an excellent movie, so it's quite irrelevant here.

"facts are stupid things" Ronald Reagan

reply

[–] I_Created_U 9 years ago

Funny how this double standard works as soon as one is rich and famous.

I'm pretty sure if the guy was the cook in your favorite restaurant, you wouldn't say "Ok the guy sleeps with little girls, but hey, he makes one hell of a pie, so it's quite irrelevant here!"

Or "Yes, honey, i know the janitor raped our daughter, but look at the sink, it works perfectly again! This guy is a genius!"

Also, although Polanski isn't technically a pedophile, he did sodomize a 13 yo girl after having drugged her, which may indeed make him an ephebophile and not a pedophile, but still a complete unredeemable *beep* who deserves serious jail time, and maybe also hellfire.

It's insane people even defend this guy. If he was a regular Joe working in a petrol station, the whole thing would have played out like a "Criminal Mind" episode, not like a Christmas special of "Keeping up with the Kardashians".

It's scandalous really.

People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs

reply

[–] franzkabuki 9 years ago

Yes, Polanski isn't "technically" (or tactically or strategically or in any other way) a pedophile... so what the hell are you whining about? And why wouldn't people who are actually aware of the relevant facts of the case "defend this guy" in the face of hysterical hyperbole? It's your call for suppression of debate and free expression of opinion that is "scandalous" here. And it is still unclear as to what bearing does Polanski being a sex offender have on the quality of his films.

"facts are stupid things" Ronald Reagan

reply

[–] I_Created_U 9 years ago

what the hell are you whining about?

Maybe i don't like the fact that he drugged and sodomized a 13 yo girl? Maybe. I happen to be against rape, i'm a free-thinker like that.

And it is still unclear as to what bearing does Polanski being a sex offender have on the quality of his films.

You might not see it, but this has been answered here:

"Ok the guy sleeps with little girls, but hey, he makes one hell of a pie, so it's quite irrelevant here!"

"Yes, honey, i know the janitor raped our daughter, but look at the sink, it works perfectly again! This guy is a genius!"

You are defending somebody's undefendable actions based solely on the fact that he is good at something. A rapist and/or murderer can rape and/or murder without consequence as long as he has a specific talent, such as the rapist janitor who is very good with sinks or the rapist cook who makes the best pie in town. My point is that you would obviously not employ said janitor anymore and wouldn't consume the cook's pies either, you wouldn't log in to a website and praise and recommend their work like you are shamelessly doing now, hence my double standard accusation earlier.

Bottom line is you defend a rapist of little girls because the guy makes movies. Do i really have to explain why i think there's something wrong with this picture? Do you maybe wanna have this conversation with your daughter/sister/mom and explain to them why we should acclaim a known girl rapist because he happens to have talent? I'd like to see that.

People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs

reply

[–] franzkabuki 9 years ago

"I happen to be against rape".

Imagine that. What a valiant - although hopelessly ignorant - little white knight you are. Unfortunately for you, Polanski was never even charged with rape, let alone convicted of one. He also didn't "drug" anyone as the chick drank her two glasses of champaigne and swallowed her half a quaalude out of her own initiative and neither was she reduced to a helplessly zonked-out state the way, for instance, Bill Cosby's victims cllaim to have been, as evidenced by the testimony by Anjelica Huston who saw them immediately after the incident.

"facts are stupid things" Ronald Reagan

reply

[–] chet19 9 years ago

"...let alone convicted of one"

LMAO! He wasn't convicted because he ran away before the trial.

reply

[–] cello76-782-250410 8 years ago

Are you 'SICK IN THE HEAD' ??

A socalled Rich movie star, gives a child champagne (probably told her it's just fizzy pop) , promises to put her in his next movie and gives her pills, (probably telling her they were just smarties/M&M's) and then being RAPED SODOMISED is her fault ???!!!

- if i was you, i would be seeking psychiatrist help, because that sort of thinking is messed up.

do you even have kids ? any young family members ? any of them female ? do you even like them ?? i cant see how.

and as for forgiveness.

I have a fifteen year old daughter and its not up to 'her' to forgive him, she is in my care till she reaches adulthood and there is no way 'I' would forgive him, he can go to hell for all i care.

reply

[–] I_Created_U 8 years ago

Amen. It's crazy we even need to convince people of stuff like that.

People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs

reply

[–] roreyking 8 years ago

I have a fifteen year old daughter and its not up to 'her' to forgive him

ROTFL!! Talk about a domineering parent! If your daughter could forgive and move on in a case like that, she'd be a much better, healthier and mature person than you.

reply

[–] Flickout 9 years ago

The scandal is a 45+ year sentence for one deviant act. If the "victim" can forgive, why can't you?

reply

[–] chninlp 9 years ago

The people of the state of California have a right to get justice for crimes and the case was brought on behalf of the people of California and not the young teenage sex crime crime victim in the case.

reply

[–] Captain_Wesker 8 years ago

I'm pretty sure if the guy was the cook in your favorite restaurant, you wouldn't say "Ok the guy sleeps with little girls, but hey, he makes one hell of a pie, so it's quite irrelevant here!"

.

---
It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing .

reply

[–] slimone (7996) 5 years ago

Yes he was a pedophile! He was convicted of raping a 13 year old girl! The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences expelled him from it's membership!

reply

[–] tyrexden 9 years ago

yeah... sorry... but thats like saying you didn't know Jack Nicholson was in it... I don't believe you.

reply

[–] Flickout 9 years ago

Well now, there's a stupid attitude. Polanski served time for his one (proven) error - it's not his fault that the prison officials screwed up and released him too early, leaving a pissed-off judge with a vendetta. The girl involved forgave him decades ago. It's too bad you can't be as generous.

reply

[–] roger1 (3703) 6 months ago

Polanski served time for his one (proven) error

---

I think that's a key point here, but one that doesn't have much legal punishment connected to him.

From some books I've read on the 60s/70s (hardly legal proof, but "food for thought") Polanski may well have had OTHER encounters with underage girls, given(evidently) behavior of his, things he said, girls he ASKED for.

I have gone over the speed limit many times over the years. But I only got caught for it and ticketed for it by the cops, a few times in my life.

I'm of a mind that Polanski got caught for speeding this one time...but it wasn't the first time.

Not provable..the courts won't go after other cases, but I think logic sort of dictates the reality: he ONLY sought out and seduced (forcibly?) that ONE girl, that ONE time...and no others?

Doubtful.

reply

[–] Jerry-137 8 years ago

For those doubters here is Wikipedia's artical on his sexual abuse case.

In March 1977, film director Roman Polanski was arrested and charged in Los Angeles with five offenses against Samantha Gailey a 13-year-old girl[1] – rape by use of drugs, perversion, sodomy, lewd and lascivious act upon a child under 14, and furnishing a controlled substance to a minor.[2] At his arraignment Polanski pleaded not guilty to all charges,[3] but later accepted a plea bargain whose terms included dismissal of the five initial charges[4] in exchange for a guilty plea to the lesser charge of engaging in unlawful sexual intercourse.[4][5]
Polanski underwent a court-ordered psychiatric evaluation,[6] and a report was submitted to the court recommending probation.[7] However, upon learning that he was likely to face imprisonment and deportation,[5][8] Polanski fled to France in February 1978, hours before he was to be formally sentenced.[9] Since then Polanski has mostly lived in France and has avoided visiting countries likely to extradite him to the United States.

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

End of Conversation.

*************************************
My favorite: Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb

reply

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Degree7 8 years ago

Who gives a *beep*, it was forty years ago

~ I'm a 21st century man and I don't wanna be here.

reply

[–] BrunoAntony (1198) 6 years ago

If you feel bad, don't buy the film on Blu-ray, just pirate it.

Watching it isn't giving Polanski some kind of a telepathic support.

Bad people can create good art.

reply

[–] ecarle (14979) 6 years ago

I think the key "creative issue" here is that, thanks to what happened, Polanski never made an American studio movie in America again.

He really ended up with only two of those: Rosemary's Baby and Chinatown. Not bad at all -- though certainly perverse, the both of them. And hits. Perhaps Roman was more of his times than we knew...

reply