You claimed that a character in some movie, that you have no idea what it was titled, some how "proved" that Woody did something to Dylan.
So I used Orson Welles ( someone else who is famous for writing, directing, and acting in his movies ) and specifically, "CITIZEN KANE", disproving that just because an autuer does all of the previous stated things, does NOT translate into it being, in some way, auto-biographical.
I truly hope that the above explanation helps you to now understand it all. As I stated, it is the Aristotelian logic/debate method.
Mia coached Dylan and also Ronan, back then, and now they are both convinced that what they say is true., Nobody who was there, at the time, says it is true!
Like you, I am NOT going to do a search, but you did post that you would never see one of his movies now. And frankly, whatever movies of Woody's you may have seen and enjoyed, in the past, don'/t count for much, since you can't remember the titles of them.
Oh good grief...you don't even know the title of a movie you watched on T.V. and loved ( it's MIDNIGHT IN PARIS and a great movie ), that you did NOT pay for, and now hate.
Maybe YOU don't know about the people whose movies you watch, before seeing them, but many others do. It's easy, especially on T.V., all you have to do is push a button and it'll tell you, on your screen the year it was made, who is in it, and who directed it. See...easy! :-)
And please don't flatter yourself, re Woody.
For starters, Dylan was 7 at the time of the supposed incident, he NEVER had done anything like he was accused of, before, nor afterwards. And judging from his past marriages and dating history/relationship history, you aren't his "type"; not many people are.
You claimed that a character in some movie, that you have no idea what it was titled, some how “proved” that Woody did something to Dylan.
I have repeated until I am sick of it: I believe Dylan’s story. Ronan’s brave actions solidified MY BELIEF.
What is wrong with you? If you are so connected to FACTS, why would you lie about what I wrote, when it’s clearly still available on the internet here?
So I used Orson Welles ( someone else who is famous for writing, directing, and acting in his movies ) and specifically, “CITIZEN KANE”, disproving that just because an autuer does all of the previous stated things, does NOT translate into it being, in some way, auto-biographical.
I truly hope that the above explanation helps you to now understand it all. As I stated, it is the Aristotelian logic/debate method.
You almost have to be pranking me at this point.
Someone can make a movie and insert a hint into something he likes, or not. The movie can be based on or homage to other movies. The movie can have cameos, clowns, or cowboys. AND STILL IT IS POSSIBLE TO INSERT A LITTLE MOMENT with some little nod to the audience, ABOUT ANYTHING. What is it that you don’t understand? If Allen did such a thing, it is still not proof of anything and I’d be a fool to call it so. You’d be a fool to say it would not be possible for Woody Allen to put in a scene where he winks about his passion for younger women.
You are far from using Aristotle’s debating method. I believe your argument is If A, and B, then C doesn’t exist. Which makes no sense.
So now you say no one who was there (when, when she was being groomed and molested?) says it was true. Ohhhhhkayyyyy, then clearly that is proof she wasn’t abused, right? Geez. Bill Cosby and Harvey did nothing wrong either.
Whoa, are you hitting me below the belt here, saying that I dared to not remember the name of a movie? Oh no, I should be shot at dawn.
I did say I loved the movie. I’ve never said I hate the movie. You are sincerely flawed with the putting words in others’ mouths.
I was making a joke re woody and me as a young girl. But I am assured by you that I was not his type. My loss.