Roman Polanski

[Liza]

I know we've talked about a bunch of directors, but I don't think anyone's mentioned Roman Polanski yet (or if they did I don't remember). But he's one of the most gifted and controversial directors out there. I love his work, and I really feel sorry for him for all the hard things he's gone through.

I know a lot of people consider him a criminal for his statuatory rape of a teenage girl, but I really don't think we should judge him on that alone. He's gone through so much, it wouldn't surprise me if his mind wasn't all there anymore.

I think his best film is Rosemary's Baby, but Chinatown is a very close second.

[Brian Damage]

He's a rapist and should be punished for his crimes. This criminal shouldn't be allowed to make movies anymore. At least until he pays for his crimes. He's nothing but a coward....I guess that's typical for a rapist.

[Janice]

I admit the man has talent, but when a 39 year old man has sex with a 13 year old child, he's nothing but a sack of ****. Nothing else to say as far as I'm concerned.

[sara]

[webuster]

I haven't seen any of his films, but Rosemary's Baby is on BBC4 tonight and I'm definitely watching it!

[Liza]

I'm not defending him for what he did, it was inexcusable. But I do have sympathy for him because of all the things he's gone through. He survived the Holocaust and moved to the States only to have his pregnant wife slaughtered by lunatics - I can't imagine what that must have done to his mind. Still, he's made some fantastic films and deserves to have them recognized.

[Liza]

Roman & Sharon Tate

[Brian Damage]

Rape is rape and when Hollywood gave him a standing ovation for winning best director for The Pianist, it made me sick to my stomach. He should be tried for his crimes. The End.

[Liza]

Originally posted by Brian Damage
Rape is rape and when Hollywood gave him a standing ovation for winning best director for The Pianist, it made me sick to my stomach. He should be tried for his crimes. The End.

Well, I do agree with you. But don't forget, earlier that year the girl that he was accused of raping had come forward in his defense, and said that his films should be judged on their own merit, not on his past. Not quite sure how I feel about that, but I guess it's good that she could forgive him.

[Mr. Television]

Originally posted by Liza
Well, I do agree with you. But don't forget, earlier that year the girl that he was accused of raping had come forward in his defense, and said that his films should be judged on their own merit, not on his past. Not quite sure how I feel about that, but I guess it's good that she could forgive him.

I don't have any sympathy for him no matter what the girl says now but I agree that Rosemary's Baby is a great film. I liked Frantic with Harrison Ford but I haven't seen any of the others.

[webuster]

Just saw 'Rosemary's Baby' and it was a fantastic film.
also, even though what Polanski did to the 13 year old girl was wrong, his films shouldn't suffer because of it. Sharon Tate was beautiful- what happened to her was tragic.

[Pentimento]

If we are incapable of separating the artist from the art, condemning or at best dismissing every work created by those deemed by the majority to be possessed of questionable morals or having committed infractions of the law, the world would be a place of such puerile art that I doubt I'd want to live in it. I'm suddenly seized by the image of a Utopia overrun by Anne Geddes babies, Disney cartoons and libraries filled with Mother Goose and the Bobbsey twins. (And some would even remove Disney for being gay-tolerant.)

Polanski committed an unconscionable act, as did the Manson family when they murdered his wife. I don't feel either have a place among the criteria for judging his films.

[Liza]

Originally posted by Pentimento
If we are incapable of separating the artist from the art, condemning or at best dismissing every work created by those deemed by the majority to be possessed of questionable morals or having committed infractions of the law, the world would be a place of such puerile art that I doubt I'd want to live in it. I'm suddenly seized by the image of a Utopia overrun by Anne Geddes babies, Disney cartoons and libraries filled with Mother Goose and the Bobbsey twins. (And some would even remove Disney for being gay-tolerant.)

Polanski committed an unconscionable act, as did the Manson family when they murdered his wife. I don't feel either have a place among the criteria for judging his films.

Agreed.

[OU812]

Originally posted by Pentimento
If we are incapable of separating the artist from the art, condemning or at best dismissing every work created by those deemed by the majority to be possessed of questionable morals or having committed infractions of the law, the world would be a place of such puerile art that I doubt I'd want to live in it. I'm suddenly seized by the image of a Utopia overrun by Anne Geddes babies, Disney cartoons and libraries filled with Mother Goose and the Bobbsey twins. (And some would even remove Disney for being gay-tolerant.)

Polanski committed an unconscionable act, as did the Manson family when they murdered his wife. I don't feel either have a place among the criteria for judging his films.

The problem here is that some people live by different morals. Rape is one of the worst crimes a person can commit. Some people just cannot forgive or forget. If someone raped your 13 year old daughter and became a famous director could you go and see one of his movies??? Could you stand up and cheer for him after winning an award??? Could you separate the director from the criminal??? I couldn't.

[Pentimento]

Originally posted by OU812
The problem here is that some people live by different morals. Rape is one of the worst crimes a person can commit. Some people just cannot forgive or forget. If someone raped your 13 year old daughter and became a famous director could you go and see one of his movies??? Could you stand up and cheer for him after winning an award??? Could you separate the director from the criminal??? I couldn't.

My message was about art. I merely asserted that a person who does a reprehensible thing should not be summarily banned from doing his work, and that art should be judged solely on its own merit. But am I to understand that, in your judgment, I am somehow morally deficient because I don't feel that an artist should be forbidden to create if he does something immoral, by a majority's standards of course, in his private life? Does that also mean that anyone who enjoys and respects the work of an immoral artist also falls short of meeting the minimum standards of a virtuous society?

As for your argument, which was off my point but, at the risk of this degenerating into a "political" thread, I'll address it anyway. You're absolutely right. Some people can never forgive, even if they were not the ones directly wronged. They wear their outrage and wounded sensibilities like a badge of honor. Still, Polanski's victim forgave him. Who am I (or anyone), then, to be less forgiving than the one who was actually violated?

You ask, what if it were my daughter? I can only speculate as I have no children, but I was a child once and this is an area of human depravity with which I am acutely familiar. I agree that it's possibly the worst horror one person can inflict upon another, particularly upon a defenseless and trusting child, and the effects are unimaginably pervasive and can persist throughout a lifetime. But, if it were my daughter? (First, I doubt that I would have allowed a 13-year old girl to spend any time alone with a man who has promised to take her picture for Vogue, but that's beside the point.) Would I later be able to applaud his professional success? No. Would I even watch any of his films? I seriously doubt it. I'd ignore them. And that is, and hopefully always will be, the public's prerogative.