The Roman Polanski case — or the Roman Polanski cultural wars as some are putting it — has obviously hit a collective cultural nerve and created polarized factions: the pitchfork-touting crowds and defenders both coming out in equal force.
“American lynch mobs never die; they only become more self-righteous about their savagery,” is a good Jonathan Rosenbaum quote making the rounds in the pro-corner, or at least in the corner of anti-ugliness.
Famous-named defenders that the burning torches crowd can now detest have grown in numbers and Cannes Film Festival director Thierry Fremaux has started a petition to free Polanski and enlisted Harvey Weinstein who said, “We’re calling on every film-maker we can to help fix this terrible situation.” Various world-renowned filmmakers such as Marty Scorsese, Pedro Almodovar, Steven Soderbergh, John Landis, Jonathan Demme, David Lynch, Deborah Winger, Fatih Akin, Darren Aronofsky, and more than 100 filmmakers, actors and industry types have signed (some are are also cracking wise that Woody Allen has also signed it; here’s a gigantic list of names). Apparently this girl at Jezebel will be boycotting all the works from all these filmmakers backing him which basically means she’s never going to see a movie again. Or at least not an even half-decent one.
Though Hollywood backing their own is hardly surprising or unexpected.
And as this news cycle moves — incredibly fast — it already appears that those championing his release are being drowned out by the noise created for those against him. At least today, who knows where the media will land tomorrow, but today they’re focusing on the negative. Not all of Hollywood is apparently for Polanski. Stop the presses as Kirstie Alley says we should not celebrate or defend the director which actually isn’t bad advice.
French officials seem to be backing down from their outraged tone at his surprise arrest on the weekend. Earlier this week, two French cabinet ministers were criticized for leaping too quickly to his defense and now a French government spokesman has turned in a more even-handed and serious tone. “Roman Polanski is neither above or below the law. We have a judicial proceeding underway that is a serious affair, the rape of a minor, for which the American and Swiss justice systems are carrying on their work. This case is particularly complex because it involved four countries, France, Poland, Switzerland and the United States.”
The U.K. Telegraph has penned a poisonous editorial called, What if Roman Polanski’s daughter had been raped. And the temperature media-wise definitely seems to be shifting. In a very somewhat strange-sounding move from the outset, the film “Coco Chanel and Igor Stravinsky” was pulled from the Zurich Film Festival by its French (ahh, that’s it) director Jan Kounen in direct protest of Polanski’s incarceration (which the lynch mob will be only too displeased to hear is rather cushy and fitted with a TV, bed and table).
Not helping one bit at all is Debra Tate, the sister of Polanski’s murdered wife Sharon Tate who was on the Today Show this morning and essentially declared him innocent.
Meanwhile Polanski is expected to spend at least a few weeks in Swiss detention before any decision is made about his extradition to the U.S. or his release, but Polanski’s lawyers will likely fight this every step of the way, but perhaps with France now adopting a graver tone, maybe he won’t be released as easily as some pundits have suspected.
Ok. I'm not condoning pedophilia, but this guy needs a break. His family was murdered in the holocaust. His wife and unborn child were murdered by Manson's people. He did something wrong and the girl later publicly forgave him, AND the judge in his initial trial was apparently super dubious.
HE'S PAID HIS DUES! I MEAN DAMN! HE'S 76, LET HIM REST!
Polanski wasn’t home when the beautiful Sharon Tate was brutally murdered by Manson Gang because he admitted in court he was across town F’ing another actress while he had left his pregnant girlfriend to be butchered deep in the secluded rural canyon home! Upstanding guy living with another 14yo child in France when a trip to Switzerland got him jailed on old warrant! Swiss got scared that hidden $billions$ in their secret NAZI famed accounts might dry up and released him to slither back to Child Rapist Lovin’ FRANCE!
BTW: AGAIN, IT IS RICH MONEY HIDING MALES IN SWITZERLAND JUST WANTING HIM TO GO AWAY!
Polanski just needs to man up and come deal with this. He's drug it out for way too long. He's been given plenty of chances to deal with this and has not taken any of them. He did something wrong, come deal with it so we can move on with our lives.
If you rape a 13-year-old, you "pay your dues" by going to fucking prison. The fact that there are lots of people who survived the Holocaust or had their wives murdered WITHOUT sodomizing any children kind of makes nonsense of your theory. Polanski is responsible for some of the best movies of all time, but he committed a serious crime, and the victim forgiving him (because what else is she gonna do? Let hatred for him ruin her life even more than the man himself already did?)means fuck-all legally. Wait, no, I've got a better way to make the apologists STFU: imagine he'd raped a boy. There, I bet all your phony forgiveness and compassion just flew right the hell out the window.
I have to say, wanting a man to face the consequences for having sex with a thirteen year old girl is not akin to being part of a lynch mob.
I don't want to condone paedophilia either and I think the legal process should apply to this case as any other. But a bit of contextualisation is needed. This was a 13 year old girl who was not known by Polanski to be 13 at the time. She was in Jack Nicholson's house when the act occured, where she had been hanging out, partying. This wasn't a girl who had been accosted on her way from school or anything. Jack left Polanski alone in the house with the girl whilst he hit the town. Both parties have since said that it was consensual. I doubt either Polanski or Nicholson thought it would be a good idea to have sex with a 13 year old. It was obviously a wrong thing to do and it should be punished accordingly, but all this 'child rape' sensationalism is making it seem like Polanski forced himself on someone he knew was 13. As opposed to having consensual sex with someone he didn't know was 13. It doesn't make it any more right but please, let's ease off with the sensationalism. He did what he did and he'll be punished accordingly. But let's not dress it up as something more.
CHILD RAPE APPOLOGIST!
…AND LIAR!
POLANSKI ADMITTED THAT HE KNEW SHE WAS 13 IN HIS OWN F’IN BOOK HE PUBLISHED; YOU PAID ARONOFSKY LOVIN’ RAPIST HACK!
I still say he will be released. The officials just don't want to be seen as giving him special treatment.
It may take longer than I originally suspected (or not), but I don't think he'll ever be sent back to America.
Anon, if you read the court transcript of the girl's testimony, it does not sound like the sex was consensual: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-lopez30-2009sep30,0,1671827,full.column
I'm shocked the ICC has not yet charged him for the egregious cinematic atrocities of Bitter Moon and The Ninth Gate.
Also, I think quote seems to be more pro-ugliness.
According to a NYT article (online today) discussing Polanski hiring a high-profile Washington lawyer, it said Polanski told the girl they would have a photo shoot and that's how he got her in a bathtub, wouldn't let her leave and forced her.
They mention the plea bargain was to plead guilty for sex with a 13-year old but drop charges of rape and sodomy. I don't know how long his sentence would have been then. And they didn't mention if this was what the then girl and her family wanted.
It is sad that film festivals and national culture ministers are upset that a man who escaped sentencing for a crime can not pick up an award. (The crime being sex with a minor if the plea bargain deal is accurate, whether it was unknown to Polanski or not, and that is pretty doubtful, or rape).
And I'm interested why so many Hollywood directors, executives, etc, even if they're friends of Polanski's, would vehemently stand by him and ignore that he's due in court.
Even if the girl, now a woman, forgave him (to move on) he needs to be tried doesn't he? Couldn't an incident like this happen again? If he wasn't wealthy and famous he wouldn't have been let free to film a movie during the trial (and party at Oktoberfest) justice could presumably have been served (even with a dubious judge or poor handling by questionably LA lawyers).
There is unfinished business, whether he's tried in the US or pleads guilty from Oktoberfest 2009in Zurich he should be in a court.
People dying in the streets and Hollywood filmmakers start a petition to free Roman Polanski. Whatever your feelings on the subject, I think we can agree that there are more important things to worry about — e.g. the Ken Loach festival boycotts are serious business. This doesn't need anymore media attention.
How about you sign a petition for a public option?
I wonder just how well known Polanski's morality/crime and evasion of US authorities is? I don't think this part of Polanski is common knowledge. It certainly wasn't mentioned often before.
I don't remember "The Pianist" oscar. Was the coverage afterwards "Director doesn't pick up Oscar because he's on the run for raping a 13-year old girl"?
It was mentioned before, and I do remember it being brought up quite a bit around the Oscars, but I think most people had only a really vague concept that something had happened, and that he couldn't travel to the US.
And, The Playlist, while the original details of what happened between Polanski and the girl are enough to bring out some strong opinions out of most people, you guys do understand that the angry crowds are only growing louder and and angrier because of idiotic comments like the one made by Tate's sister and the anon on this page that pulled the victim blaming card (with made up facts on top of it)? Most of Polanskis defendors are really doing him no favors – the Hollywood petition included, because c'mon "We demand the immediate release of Polanski"??? Really Hollywood? Even you guys have to know that it comes off a little presumptuous.
This is an ugly case where people on both sides are seemingly losing all common sense.
I say to all take the position you guys took originally: don't try to whitewash what he did and focus instead on the legal aspects of this.
No anons, you are not condoning pedophiles…only the rich and really talented ones! Thereby cashiering not one but TWO cherished tenants of justice as we know it.
As uneducated about the law as you seem to be, you can still read transcripts of the case, not to mention excellent articles in the NY Times, Washington Post, New Yorker etc. explaining the legal situation here. Your assertions are inaccurate and irrelevant to the extradition.
Alright, I was the original Anon and I'm changing my opinion on this.
Aronofsky!
Supporting your FrIEND POLANSKY all these years without once thinking that this child who Polanski raped might actually benefit from a wealthy Hollywood producer finding some work for her! NO, that might imply that her testimony was honest and very damning of Polanski even if her age did not make it automatically child rape!
Samantha has always, and even today where she supports Polanski because this has already ruined any privacy she might have ever hoped for!