Why is most of Hollywood quiet about this?
?
shareWho's Hollywood exactly? I follow a bunch of actresses and some posted about this.
share
MovieChat Forums > Allen v. Farrow (2021) Discussion > Why is most of Hollywood quiet about thi...
Would you expect otherwise? He's in good with the Hollyweird elite which is why for decades he's been shielded from any significant scrutiny.
share
All dismissive cynicism aside, just consider:
Most other high-profile cases like Cosby and Weinstein (and Trump) involve NUMEROUS incidents/allegations with MULTIPLE victims/accusers
This case involves one incident, period. No other witnesses can corroborate or definitively refute Dylan's claims.
Honestly, I think it's foolish to take EITHER side in this case. You don't know enough and never will know enough to pass judgment.
I'd note that the vast majority of molesters do NOT act just once. But this could've been a single instance exception to that general rule. It's certainly not proof of innocence.
I'd also dismiss Woody's claim that he's too claustrophobic to have molested Dylan in so small a space. He could've prioritized differently on that one occasion.
But aside from those two considerations, neither of which are enough to push me one way or the other with any certainty, I maintain that the only reasonable third-party position is: "I don't know."
Maybe that's we're getting silence from "Hollywood" and the majority of everyone else except for us.
> Honestly, I think it's foolish to take EITHER side in this case. You don't know enough and never will know enough to pass judgment.
I see your point, but look at it from different viewpoints.
The Farrows are pushing this in front of the public ... why?
They basically are saying every single official inquiry or investigation
was corrupt or wrong or had something about it that came to the wrong
conclusion. Then it happened again with Woody Allen's and SoonYi's
adoption. Listen to the vitriol, and Mia Farrows obsession with this,
and poor Dylan's life has been destroyed by it.
Was the damage to Dylan done by 20 minutes with Woody Allen, or
a lifetime with Mia Farrow?
Let's assume you are right about not being able to know or intuit
whether or not Woody Allen did what he was accused of. It doesn't
make sense to me, but for the sake of argument, let's think about
it either way.
1. Woody did not do what he was charges with, and multiple investigations
cleared him of, and he never did before or after. If that is the case, then
look at the magnitude of the hate and injustice that has been done to him
and his works and career and life.
2. Woody did do what he was charged with, which is 1 count of ... I guess
child molestation, in a less than 20 minutes session. Whatever, say it did
occur, and it was an aberration as you mention it is possible. What should
be the resolution to that? Is the psychological damage done or claimed to
have been done to Dylan, and from what I saw in the "fake"-u-mentary she
did seem very psychologically messed up. Could that have possibly been due
to her damaged relationship to her father, or solely to the incident itself.
I know this seems cold blooded to talk about, but criminal crimes are about
laws and proof, and civil crimes are about damages. So, analyzing both
situations and assuming the worst ... why is it that certain people and certain
media networks are giving air to this is a creepy, non-serious, malicious way.
Did this documentary help anything? What was its aim.
What are they saying should happen to Woody for this crime - if it was true?
Can Dylan's psychological problems all be laid on this one incident with Woody,
if we assume it actually happened? What about the dysfunction and suicide
of the other children in Mia Farrow's "family".
To me, any way you look at this, even if Woody was guilty, the damage to
Dylan is far from being Woody's fault. I think that can be said reasonably.
From the point of view of a DA or Judge, how would you sort out the
punishment. What was the charge or what would it have been and if
actually convicted what would the penalty have been?
> I maintain that the only reasonable third-party position is: "I don't know."
Agree or disagree, that is a reasonable conclusion. So, why it is allowed or was a good idea for a documentary that got greenly and produced to make what to Woody was clearly a hatchet job? It seems to me to be like the ultimate harassing slander job, trying to make use of #MeToo and whatever political capital Ronan Farrow might have to further Mia Farrow's vendetta of disgrace.
As someone who thinks #MeToo is a good thing in general and who was considering buying Ronan Farrow's book and had an in general favorable impression of him, I would never consider Ronan Farrow as credible or buying a book by him or listening to interviews by him. It seems bad enough when men lose their "balls" to their wives, but when it happens with their mothers that is a true twisted tragedy.