Saturday, January 13, 2018

Woody Allen, Mira Sorvino, Maureen Orth, et al



Is Mia Farrow sorry she was in every single movie Woody Allen made over a 15 year period? Has she apologized to Dylan for dating Woody Allen all those years? Mia and Dylan both claim that Woody was openly lusting after her from the time she was a toddler. Has Mia apologized for sacrificing Dylan on the altar of her own stardom? Didn't Mia notice that Dylan was running and hiding from Woody as they now claim? Mia fought in court to allow Woody to adopt her in spite of all this.

By her own account Mia Farrow is a terrible mother. The judge in the custody case said as much. How could she not notice that Soon-yi was dating Woody?

But now a couple of actresses have apologized to Dylan Farrow for being in Woody Allen movies.

The attacks on Allen are contradictory. He's attacked for ignoring Mia's children. Allen himself said he focused only on Moses, Dylan and Satchel (now Ronan) and the custody case revealed that he knew very little even about them. Yet they claim he was a "father-figure" to Soon-yi. One person managed to reconcile these two positions by saying that having no relationship whatsoever with Woody just made Soon-yi want his attention even more--it made him an even MORE of a father-figure. (Like Dinesh D'Souza's claim that Barack Obama's total lack of contact with his father meant his father had an even GREATER ideological influence over him.)

Maureen Orth wrote some nonsense, TEN UNDENIABLE FACTS ABOUT WOODY ALLEN. One or two of the "facts" WERE deniable and the others were irrelevant. She claimed that "three adult witnesses" confirmed Dylan's claims of abuse that day.
...Another babysitter told police and also swore in court that on that same day, she saw Allen with his head on Dylan’s lap facing her body, while Dylan sat on a couch “staring vacantly in the direction of a television set.” 
Staring vacantly is pretty much how one watches TV. But the babysitter who said this also denied that Allen and Dylan disappeared together---she said that they were never out of her sight for more than five minutes.

And why does Orth only count "adult witnesses"? Moses Farrow was thirteen-years-old, he was with them the entire time (the nannies weren't, apparently) and he was perfectly capable of noticing if they went anywhere together (they didn't). The accusation was made the next day so the memory was fresh in his mind. There was also a cook present in the house who said it did not happen---at no time were they running around trying to find Dylan and Woody as only one nanny claimed.

There was only one "adult witness" who says that the alleged incident could have happened and she got a book deal out of it. Her book ended with her professing her love and devotion to Mia Farrow and it was made into a Fox Network movie.

Orth says Allen lost four court battles. He lost the custody case no one expected him to win and he lost an appeal in that case; he filed an ethics complaint against a prosecutor and filed an appeal in that case as well. I wouldn't call them "court battles" exactly. It's undeniable, but what does Orth think it proves?

The ethics complaint was against a prosecutor who claimed in a press release that he didn't charge Allen with a crime only because the trial would have been too much for Dylan. Orth doesn't mention the undeniable fact that Dylan had until she was 20 to file criminal charges.

It was insane to allow Allen and Farrow to adopt children together when they weren't married. And what was their excuse for not simply getting married? People apparently had the idea they were married anyway. They could have continued to live separately. I've known married couple who lived in separate countries.

No comments:

Post a Comment