Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Yaelle
The movie was HUSBANDS AND WIVES, that Mia was working on, at the time.

You are seeing what you want to and making vast leaps, which my words do not impart.

No, I used the Aristotelean argument theory, re Wells and Allen. It is pure logic and goes like this: if X is so and Y is so, then XY is so.

I'm sorry that you were molested; however, I do think that your misfortune is coloring your opinion. Neither you nor I nor anyone else was there at the time, and because Mia and Woody were fighting over the custody of his child with her and the two that they had adopted together, she, as many people do under trying times, said the vilest of things about him, to thwart him.

If you choose to not see his films, because of your assumptions about what happened, are you also applying this to a whole host of other films and books, by terrible people ( with proven despicable acts )throughout history?

69 posted on 12/11/2017 12:36:19 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies ]


To: nopardons

Most of the stuff about Woody and Mia comes from Carter Graydon’s Vanity Fair piece which was approved by Mia and Mia’s mother, Maureen O’Sullivan. That Graydon murders people with prose is nothing new. Long before Sidney Zion became a dear friend of mine (may he rest in peace), he did a murderous article on Sidney and his dead daughter, Libbie. I bought it hook, line and sinker until I learned the real story: that Sidney and his wife, Elsa, were loving parents (not neglectful party animals) and that the overworked doctors made huge mistakes with their patient. That taught me all I needed to know about Vanity Fair. It was and is a despicable publication.

And one other thing: you are right in that too many mothers claim sexual abuse in order to gain custody.


70 posted on 12/11/2017 2:31:43 PM PST by miss marmelstein
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies ]

To: nopardons

You are remarkably consistent in the absence of logic in your arguments.

I’m not going back to Search, but I believe You said that if I had the opinion that woody sneaked a bit of a wink to his lust for young girls into his oeuvre, it necessitated other filmmakers (orson welles?) being exactly like their characters. Please show me any X and Y logic there.

If we couldn’t comment on activities where none of us were present, we couldn’t have message boards. I believe what Dylan has written about her abuse at the hands of her father. Her brother’s passionate stance and action solidify my belief. I did not have to be there in order to believe.

We never spoke on whether I would watch a Woody Allen film. As a young girl I was a fan. Good thing he didn’t know me then, isn’t it? Now, I choose not to voluntarily see his films. One night I was surfing and came upon a movie and loved it, it was as if it was written for me personally. Watched the rest of it before learning it was his fantasy time travel movie about Paris, and I was disgusted I’d watched it. But yes, I realize lots of art and literature were produced by people who were not good. We all have to live with that. Half the time we have no idea something we enjoyed was created by a relative monster. I would prefer not to give living pedophiles any $ so I do what I can.


72 posted on 12/11/2017 2:45:14 PM PST by Yaelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson