Ain't too proud to blog: and it's all your fault I screen my phone calls

Reminds me of when Disney showed the movie "Powder," and if I remember correctly, the producer or director was a child sex molester... something like that.

I just remember protesting and refused to see the movie for that reason. (even though I can't even remember the details now)

I don't know about this one... tough call. Although I don't think I did anything quite like Polanski, I know that I'm glad that I'm not judged entirely on things from my past.

¤ ¤ credit: Kitty | 03.13.03 at 03:15 AM | link-

-this ¤ ¤

There are 2 sets of laws and morality in this country -- one for the rich, and one for the not so rich. Movie/TV stars and famous sports figures make obscene amounts of money for what they do, and get kid glove treatment when they do wrong. I can't remember ever hearing of a "regular" person being allowed to leave jail to build a house or work on a car; but movie stars get to leave to make movies. It's disgusting. There wouldn't even be a question if Roman Polanski wasn't famous -- they'd fry him the minute he re-entered the country! So what if he makes good movies -- he raped a child, and has yet to pay for his crime. I'm sure he's lived the good life all these years in his self-imposed exile, which should truthfully be referred to as running from justice. He's a fugitive, pure and simple!

¤ ¤ credit: Leigh | 03.13.03 at 03:24 AM | link-

-this ¤ ¤

Something that I find offensive is a line from the third link in this posting... Brody, the star of "The Pianist" calls it all 'nonsense'.
"...What's important is people differentiate all this nonsense and focus on the achievement of making a film like this and what Roman has given us with a film like this.
I'm sorry... nonsense?... a film is nonsense. Knowingly commiting the wrong of unconsentual sex with a minor is reprehensible.

¤ ¤ credit: Susan | 03.13.03 at 03:37 AM | link-

-this ¤ ¤

I think that the members of the Academy should be professional and vote for work on it's merits regardless of who created it, but as a viewer and a human being they should do what they morally feel is correct.

I can't hear a Michael Jackson song now without seeing him cuddling up to that child on the couch in his home and saying "sleeping with a child is a beautiful thing". He's a freak and his freakiness has tarnished the way I feel about his music, but if I were asked to judge a song of his, I would give my honest musical opinion about it.

I really don't understand how Polanski got away with what he did. That makes me sick. I'm in two minds about whether to see the movie now. I try to make it habit to see all of the oscar nominated movies if I can. I'll have to think about that now.

¤ ¤ credit: Jessica Parker | 03.13.03 at 04:59 AM | link-

-this ¤ ¤

Of course he shouldn't be considered for and Oscar or any other reward. I think that if you commit such a horrible crime you should never be allowed success, much less be allowed to collect the tokens of that success. An Oscar on his mantle says "I am one to admire, one to look up to, one to envy." A 13 year old rape victim says "No you aren't." Don't forget, what he did would be rape to a 39 year old as well.

¤ ¤ credit: a different Bill | 03.13.03 at 07:35 AM | link-

-this ¤ ¤

This is gonna make me really unpopular, but if you were to extrapolate the situation further away from entertainment and out into the real world then wouldn't the Nazi scientists being rescued from the Russians and used on the space program mean everyone should condemn NASA for everything they've done? When you consider how much more advanced we are thanks to the space program and that there was an initial human sacrifice factor involved...

...you're gonna use Godwin's Law again aren't you?

¤ ¤ credit: D | 03.13.03 at 07:49 AM | link-

-this ¤ ¤

Disgusting as it is, I don't think his crime should be a factor in the Oscar voting. If the movie he made is truly the best picture, then it is the best picture, regardless of who made it or what that person may have done outside the making of the film. The Academy isn't giving awards for character or good citizenship; they're giving awards for filmmaking, and nothing more. Keep in mind that there are (sadly) a lot of people in this country who still think homosexuality is just as immoral (and in some states illegal) as what Roman Polanski is accused of. Should we not give awards to gay actors and directors?

If Mr. Polanski's film deserves the award, it should get the award. And if he sets foot in this country to claim his award, he should be immediately arrested and sent to prison, where we can all hope his cellmate is a very large, mean and sexually frustrated hillbilly.

¤ ¤ credit: dave | 03.13.03 at 08:37 AM | link-

-this ¤ ¤

whew...i got in there before she invoked Godwin.

¤ ¤ credit: dave | 03.13.03 at 08:39 AM | link-

-this ¤ ¤

This is a different situation, but this reminds me of paintings by John Wayne Gacey, and tell all books by murderers and all of that. Any revenue generated, in most cases anyway, go to the victims or the families of the victims. In Polanski's case, he's not in prison although he deserves to be -- it's a shame that at least some portion of the revenue from his films can't be earmarked for the victim. Of course, that may not be of much consolation to her....

¤ ¤ credit: Nicole | 03.13.03 at 08:49 AM | link-

-this ¤ ¤

She doesn't appear to be seeking any consolation. It doesn't make him any less disgusting, but she seems to have gotten over it. She's gone to court recently to speak on his behalf and appeared on Larry King to do the same thing.

From United Press International:

Geimer said she would like it if Polanski were able to come back to the United States without fear of being imprisoned.

"And, honestly," said Geimer, "the publicity surrounding it was so traumatic that what he did to me seemed to pale in comparison."

¤ ¤ credit: dave | 03.13.03 at 09:08 AM | link-

-this ¤ ¤

I agree with Dave: Polanski's art should be judged seperately from his life--but he should pay the penalty for his crime.

We cannot judge art based on the life of the artist. Just because Chaucer was a narrow-minded anti-Semite doesn't mean that his works aren't among the most important ever written in the English language.

And I really think the final say should land with his victim--if she feels (as she explicitly stated) that it would not be a perversion of justice for Polanski to win the award, then I really don't see how the rest of us have a right to judge.

¤ ¤ credit: wealhtheow | 03.13.03 at 09:48 AM | link-

-this ¤ ¤

This didnt occur to me while I was writing my original comment, but here's an analogy, although not nearly on the same level as Polanski's crimes.

I had some classes with Shaq at LSU many years ago. We were all very disappointed (but not surprised) when he left school early for the NBA. A few years later, Shaq, the most famous and arguably most talented athlete our school ever produced, was denied induction into the LSU Athletic Hall of Fame, because he never graduated. That's absurd. It's not an academic hall of fame. He ended up having to come back every summer and take classes just to get in.

Like I said...not quite the same thing, but the idea that you have to separate things and evaluate them objectively applies.

¤ ¤ credit: dave | 03.13.03 at 12:18 PM | link-

-this ¤ ¤

Certainly what he did was an awful, terrible thing. My mind can't even comprehend how someone can do that to a child. But the Oscars don't judge people by their moral fiber, they judge their film work alone. If they started doing otherwise, we'd have a lot fewer Oscar nominations. Does he deserve the Oscar for his work? Probably. Does he deserve to be punished for what he's done? Yes.

¤ ¤ credit: Colleen | 03.13.03 at 12:35 PM | link-

-this ¤ ¤

Forgive me, I didn't read all the comments, so I don't know if this has been said.

What he did is disgusting... BUT, if we say, you can't attend these awards because of what you've done, it takes away from the point of the awards, to me.

Are we going to do a thorough background check of every person up for an award? I feel that he should be punished for what he did, but that's not the responsibility of the Oscars. I just don't like the idea of making a morality judgement with a frivolous awards show. They're wholly separate things.

That said, I totally understand why people don't think he should be included.

¤ ¤ credit: Anne | 03.13.03 at 12:50 PM | link-

-this ¤ ¤

if his film deserves the Oscar give it to him. if he , himself, comes back into the states to GET the award (which I am sure that he won't)- put him in jail. it's that simple. He was convicted but fled jurisdiction before he could be put in jail. He shouldn't be given special privileges to come and get his Oscar. Oscars are SO not that important.

¤ ¤ credit: Ruthie | 03.13.03 at 12:54 PM | link-

-this ¤ ¤

Susan, thank you! It's exactly what I felt but couldn't find the words to say.

¤ ¤ credit: robyn | 03.13.03 at 01:03 PM | link-

-this ¤ ¤

What I want to know is why Woody Allen's crap hasn't been banned? Sure Soon Ye was legal but that was still his daughter (even not biological) and it's gross. It just shows you how self centered and sick he is with having power over someone.

¤ ¤ credit: dj mo fo | 03.13.03 at 01:06 PM | link-

-this ¤ ¤

I see things in black and white and I know that if this crime had happened to me, or to my children, knowing that a man fled the country to escape punishment, then becomes an award winning Director and is up for an award, I would be screaming at the roof tops. Plan and simple - "he pled guilty to a single count of having sex with a minor, punishable by up to 20 years in prison. He fled to France shortly before sentencing." He's a coward and should be accepting his punishment, not an award.

¤ ¤ credit: susan | 03.13.03 at 01:09 PM | link-

-this ¤ ¤

dj mo fo- why should Woody Allen's stuff be banned, especially since, as you noted, he didn't even break any laws? Talk of banning any kind of movie, book, or music is pretty damned frightening to me, especially on purely moral grounds.

Just as Roman Polanski is regarded the world over as one of the best film directors ever, so is Woody Allen. Nothing either of them has done in their personal lives changes anything about their art.

Many of the people we regard as heroes have nasty things in their closets. For instance, some of the US' "founding fathers" were slave owners, drunkards, wife beaters and philanderers. Many of the greatest musicians and painters were druggies. It's important to separate a person from their accomplishments in order to remain objective.

¤ ¤ credit: dave | 03.13.03 at 01:58 PM | link-

-this ¤ ¤

ok i'll give you the 'banned'. it was too strong of a word. i guess what i'm saying is i think roman and woody are sick people. they think their money, power, and talent gives them the right to do whatever they want to people.

as for their films, well, i just don't get it. personally, i don't think they're all that and a bag of chips.

i'll stick with citizen kane.

¤ ¤ credit: dj mo fo | 03.13.03 at 02:06 PM | link-

-this ¤ ¤

Someone mentioned earlier that there are different standards for the rich and famous in this country. By way of example, Robert Blake was just granted bail. Unbelievable. Any non-celeb would've already been tried and convicted by now.

¤ ¤ credit: dave | 03.13.03 at 03:07 PM | link-

-this ¤ ¤

Pete Rose paid a price for crimes directly linked to baseball. While he met his victim when doing a cover shoot for French Vogue, it's not tied to the film and whether or not it receives an Oscar.

Not saying I agree with his behavior at ALL - what he did was wrong. I should also note that I personally think they were too hard on Pete Rose. But most importantly, I get annoyed when I'm judged for the sins of my past 10 or 15 years ago - his were 25 years ago - and I wouldn't want anyone to tell me that I don't deserve success because of sins in my past. Would you? What if we were all judged on past mistakes, crimes, sins, etc.? None of us want that. Just because he's famous should he be held to a higher standard?

(They should still arrest him if he shows up in the US.)

¤ ¤ credit: Christine | 03.13.03 at 04:05 PM | link-

-this ¤ ¤

On a side note, I wrote my comment after reading just your post and about 3 other comments here. Now that I've read more of them I sound like I'm repeating what a lot of other people have said.

¤ ¤ credit: Christine | 03.13.03 at 04:08 PM | link-

-this ¤ ¤

i guess it depends on the nature of the past sins as to whether or not they should keep you from succeeding in other fields. it's subject to a lot of philosophical questions, but most importantly, i think, is whether or not you still represent a danger to others. for isntance, suppose Mr. Polanski had in fact served his time in jail, but after being released, decided not to pursue a career in film but rather working with teenagers in some capacity. You can argue that a convicted child sex offender should never be allowed to work with kids. On the other hand, you can also argue that he's paid his debt to society by serving his sentence, and that the sins of his past should no longer be held against him.

Skuze me getting a philosophical...i think it's the cold medicine.

¤ ¤ credit: dave | 03.13.03 at 04:11 PM | link-

-this ¤ ¤

I think people are looking through rose coloured glasses if they don't think that people who receive awards are judged on things other than their work- of course they are!
And if someone has not paid the price for a crime- even after 25 yrs they should pay it. He was a grown man and should have his arse extradited.

¤ ¤ credit: LisaC | 03.13.03 at 07:04 PM | link-

-this ¤ ¤

Personally, I think it is about the FILM. If the film itself has merit and is deserving of the award in and of itself, the award should be given. Whether or not Polanski steps foot into this country to receive the award or to be cuffed and booked is his own call.

And I think if he is foolish enough to show up, he should get a nice taste of our legal system (notice I refrained from calling it a "justice" system).

Just my two. Robyn, you rock!

¤ ¤ credit: Joni Mueller | 03.13.03 at 08:49 PM | link-

-this ¤ ¤

You use Pete Rose; what about Joe Jackson? Banned from baseball just as he was entering his prime and nothing he was accused of was ever proven. His real crime? He heard the other players plotting to throw the World Series and did nothing. I use Shoeless Joe to prove that our society has changed in its views of criminals and those associated with crimes.

How about (I know you'll like this one, Robyn) Eddie Sutton, mens basketball coach of Oklahoma State. He paid players and recruits while coaching at Kentucky; the school went on probation, players transferred and Sutton was fired. Fast Eddie then went to OSU and coached the NEXT SEASON! He still hasn't been punished for these violations.

Heck, I could go on with athletes but it is best said at The Pro Athlete Crime Database.

What about Ted Kennedy? I still remember Chappaquiddick (yeah, I'm that old). Driving drunk (proven) and his passenger, Mary Jo Kopechne, died due to his negligence and intoxication. What was his punishment? A Senate seat.

Or Joe Biden? Remember that he went up on plagiarism charges in 1988 while on the presidential campaign. That's right, folks, he copied and entire speech and called it his. (He settled out of court) He is STILL a Senator. In school if you copy and get caught don't you flunk?

Seems that the way Roman is being treated is consistent with these folks. Seems that a lot of money and time heal all crimes!

¤ ¤ credit: BillH | 03.14.03 at 01:20 AM | link-

-this ¤ ¤

BillH- I can relate to the Eddie Sutton story. We got the same thing at LSU. Our old coach, Dale Brown, ran up an impressive tab of NCAA recruiting violations. So the year before the sanctions hit (5 years of drastically reduced scholarships, limits on tv and post-season play), Dale conveniently retired (drawing his full retirement from the university-- I'll never understand that one). So who got punished for his crimes? His successor coach, and all the kids that played at LSU for the next 5 years. Dale just gets to hang out and play golf. Nice.

¤ ¤ credit: dave | 03.14.03 at 08:09 AM | link-

-this ¤ ¤

I forgot the icing on the cake! Remember what happened to Ingrid Bergman? Oscar winner, annually in the nominations until (scandal of scandals!) she has a child without being married! How dare she! She was never nominated for another Oscar. Seems Hollywood has turned an about face!

¤ ¤ credit: BillH | 03.18.03 at 11:28 PM | link-

-this ¤ ¤