Hollywood’s statute of limitations
posted at 2:56 pm on September 30, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
In order to completely understand the perverse nature of Hollywood’s almost-total support for director Roman Polanski in his effort to fight extradition and avoid the consequences of his conviction for statutory rape 32 years ago, recall their attitude towards another seminal director ten years ago. When the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences (AMPAS) announced that they would give a lifetime achievement Oscar to Elia Kazan, many in Hollywood erupted in anger and protest. After all, Kazan had committed the unpardonable sin of naming names of Communists in Hollywood to the House Un-American Activities Committee.
The Los Angeles Times reported at the time from the awards ceremony about the protests:
Hollywood still isn’t sure whether it’s ready to forgive Elia Kazan. In an appearance that was considerably less dramatic than the controversy leading up to Sunday’s Academy Awards, the 89-year film titan received a mixed reaction as he took the stage to receive his honorary Oscar at the 71st annual Academy Awards ceremony.
Demonstrators had noisily protested the acclaimed director’s lifetime achievement award outside the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion earlier in the day, urging Oscar-goers to sit on their hands during Kazan’s appearance. According to eyewitnesses at the ceremony, many in the audience stood and applauded, but an almost equal number stayed seated and did not applaud. …
Television cameras caught Warren Beatty, Helen Hunt and Meryl Streep standing and applauding. Steven Spielberg remained seated, although he applauded; actors Nick Nolte, Ed Harris and Amy Madigan made a point of staying in their seats and not applauding. …
About 500 protesters gathered outside the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion Sunday afternoon, armed with placards adorned with such slogans as “Elia Kazan: Nominated for the Benedict Arnold Award,” “Don’t Whitewash the Blacklist” and “Kazan–the Linda Tripp of the ’50s.”
The clip of the award can be seen here, complete with the notorious glares coming from actors Ed Harris and Amy Madigan, both of whom were toddlers when Kazan testified to HUAC. Forty-seven years after Kazan’s decision, hundreds of his colleagues still shunned him for his actions at HUAC. And for what? Having made an arguably misguided decision* to blow the whistle on Communist activities that Kazan believed to be a threat to the adopted nation that he loved.
I have no idea on whether Harris or Madigan have specifically expressed support or criticism for Polanski, but their colleagues have almost in unison erupted in demands for forgiveness for the fugitive, arguing that 32 years is too long to hold a grudge and that an old man should be allowed to live his remaining years in peace, honored as an artist. And what are we to forgive? The rape and sodomy of a 13-year-old girl, whom Polanski drugged first.
Acting to protect the country from a perceived threat: lifetime shunning.
Drugging, raping, and sodomizing a 13-year-old girl: Forgiveness and hero worship.
That’s one seriously perverted sense of values.
Addendum: I know that some will object to “arguably misguided” from both directions, but I think Kazan chose poorly and that the HUAC effort was a Constitutional affront. The First Amendment guarantees the right of political speech and thought, and membership in the Communist Party then and now should not have been an issue on which anyone needed to testify under oath to Congress. I understand that the Cold War was in its most fraught stage and that times were different, but the Constitution applies at all times, or it doesn’t apply at all.
I’d also like to point out that most of the Left and Right agree on Polanski, which I find very encouraging. You won’t find too many issues on which Kathy Kattenburg, my friend Michael Stickings, and me see eye to eye. With the exception of the celebrity wing at the HuffPo, we have a broad consensus that Polanski needs to face justice.
Update: The Village Voice has a satire that is not to be missed:
Use your sense memory, people. It was a different time — the heady days of 1970s Hollywood — and, as the great Stanislavski said in his seminal work, “Building a Character,” there is truth-truth and then there is artistic-truth. Rape is life!
Maybe you don’t know that Roman Polanski is a Holocaust survivor. And that his wife, Sharon Tate, was murdered by the Manson family. If you knew that, you would probably feel bad for him, and forgive him for raping a child. Why DO bad things happen to good people? It’s weird.
Maybe you don’t know that Roman Polanski is not just a filmmaker, but a really really good filmmaker. And certainly you don’t know that he was on his way to a film festival when apprehended. And you must not know that film festivals are historically sacred ground, havens of pure cinema where people buy and sell everything but their souls remain intact.
Maybe you aren’t aware — and really, thanks to author Robert Harris for pointing this out in today’s New York Times –that “Mr. Polanski’s own young children, to whom he is a doting father, want him home. ” If you had known that, surely you would have forgiven him by now. If he’s not around to raise his kids, who would prevent them from getting raped by good people?
Ouch. What would Anne Applebaum think? (h/t HA reader Tommy)










Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 Next »
I have a sinking feeling that there’s going to be a lot of defending of HUAC and Joe McCarthy (yes, I know, two different things) below. Ugggh.
But at least no one will be defending Polanski, so that’ll be nice.
YYZ on September 30, 2009 at 3:00 PM
Dear Senator McCarthy,
I would like to turn in YYZ as an enemy to the state.
Your Truly,
portlandon on September 30, 2009 at 3:02 PM
Sorry, Ed, but Elia Kazan was an American hero for testifying in front of HUAC no matter what you say in your addendum. We know now from declassified archives that the CPUSA was actively involved in trying to overthrow the U. S. government and that included using their Hollywood stooges to help with that end. So you can either side with Kazan and freedom or you can side with the Nick Noltes and Roman Polanskis of this world.
Percy_Peabody on September 30, 2009 at 3:03 PM
Communism still seems to be in vogue in Hollywood. So does perversion.
kingsjester on September 30, 2009 at 3:05 PM
I think he’s made his choice. He’ll die while fighting facing his past.
Too bad. It actually reveals his true character.
I have a lot more respect for the woman involved in the riots/chaos who bailed out, went onto become a soccer mom, got caught, faced up.
He’s probably very afraid that his entire case will be retried, for publicity reasons.
AnninCA on September 30, 2009 at 3:06 PM
Forget about Kazan, and really who cares at this point.
Polanski drugged, raped and sodomized a 13 year old.
PERIOD END OF SENTENCE!
omnipotent on September 30, 2009 at 3:06 PM
Ed believes waterboarding is torture, too. And that Sarah Palin’s career is over. It is what it is.
BigD on September 30, 2009 at 3:07 PM
Even the KKK does not stick together as much as the Hollywood Klan.
MB4 on September 30, 2009 at 3:07 PM
This case says more about the prosecution than it says about the parties involved, in my opinion.
AnninCA on September 30, 2009 at 3:07 PM
Interesting comparison, Ed. I say cast Spicoli as the lead in the fawning Hollywood paean to Polanski.
Christien on September 30, 2009 at 3:08 PM
They are STILL trying to overthrow the U.S. government with the help of Hollywood stooges, only this time they have agents in the White House too.
maryo on September 30, 2009 at 3:08 PM
Is this a country of laws or not? I don’t care how emotional one gets about any issue, if a law is broken, it’s broken. The law is blind and I assume it should also ignore emotions.
Let’s just make a vow to boycott Hollywood movies, please!
Oink on September 30, 2009 at 3:08 PM
That’s one seriously perverted sense of values.
Ummm, no THAT’S HOLLYWEIRD!!!!
SDarchitect on September 30, 2009 at 3:08 PM
Conservatives actually care about the constitution.
Trent1289 on September 30, 2009 at 3:08 PM
Polansky’s wife Sharon Tate and his unborn child was murdered by Susan Atkins. Atkins died in jail last week, 40 years after the murder took place. The state of CA refused to grant her clemency in the final days of her life, even as she wasted away from the effects of advanced brain cancer.
I don’t recall any calls of mercy for Ms. Atkins from Polansky, though I might have missed it.
But big picture, Atkins deserved to die in prison for her crime and Polansy is no less obligated to atone for his crime today than Atkins was just because some time has elapsed since the events took place.
DrW on September 30, 2009 at 3:09 PM
I have happy memories of the Oscars that year, in that I was so disgusted by the anti-Kazan behavior that it became the final straw. I’ve not watch the awards show since. It had been such a waste of time and it took Ed Harris and Amy Madigan to finally show me the light.
myrenovations on September 30, 2009 at 3:10 PM
A united media/entertainment complex helped give us an empty suit like Obama. Should we have given the Soviets free reign to have done the same in the 50s or 60s?
But this is an enlightening comparison. There are certain things that one should be forgiven for, according to Hollywood, upon being a child star. Child rape is on that list, but apparently not rolling over on your fellow stars engaged in treason.
18-1 on September 30, 2009 at 3:10 PM
Kazan was a hero. If you want to know why Hollywood was silent about the Holocaust for so long during WWII, look to the people on the Black List.
Stalin had his friends, and we are lucky we got rid of them.
unclesmrgol on September 30, 2009 at 3:11 PM
Why do “good people” C-O-N-T-I-N-U-E to support Hollyweird with their entertainment dollars???
AT LEAST EVERY OTHER PERSON who reads this post will have rented a movie or gone to a theater in the last week.
KILL YOUR TELEVISION.
BUY BOOKS.
HAVE GREAT SEX…..
But you are a HYPOCRITE if you whine about Hollywood then head to Blockbuster every Friday.
WALK THE WALK of hating Hollywood.
***geeez***
seejanemom on September 30, 2009 at 3:11 PM
When the people who direct or act out the fantasy of those who write and script it, change the person(s) who act or film it?
Yes….
As they take on the persona of the “fictional character”.
So if you are a rapist in a film… eventually I expect you see your name down the road in a paper…. for what you did in a film.
Oh maybe it is just my observation.
upinak on September 30, 2009 at 3:11 PM
All Hollywood-types who would like to have your 13-year-old raped and sodomized by a famous director raise your hand!
maryo on September 30, 2009 at 3:11 PM
OK, everyone here wants to jump on the morality bandwagon, go ahead.
But then don’t complain when they prosecute Cheney for torture.
AnninCA on September 30, 2009 at 3:12 PM
Excellent point.
Stop making so much damn SENSE. ;)
seejanemom on September 30, 2009 at 3:12 PM
Hmm, everyone stood for Charlie Chaplin. Maybe it’s less about the first amendment, and more about which side of the political spectrum one is on.
Vashta.Nerada on September 30, 2009 at 3:13 PM
It’s interesting that what you’re seeing more of, as far as the speeches and the petition signings go, is the ‘has-been’ wing of Hollywood — or at the very least, people whose best work is well behind them — being the the loudest voices in support of Polanski. The younger Hollywood crowd, some of whom were either toddlers or not even born when Roman skipped the country, seem to be a little more circumspect about jumping on board the clemency train for the director.
You’d hope that it’s because they have a little more moral clarity than their elders, or at the very least don’t hold Polanski in the same sort of awe his contemporaries seem to and realize that art does not trump criminality. However, odds are better than 50-50 they’re holding their tongues because their agents have said supporting a child rapist is probably a bad career move if you’re trying to build a favorable Q rating with the public.
jon1979 on September 30, 2009 at 3:13 PM
Hey idiot, you have officially ‘jumped the shark’.
HornetSting on September 30, 2009 at 3:13 PM
I don’t know about you but I’M getting me a nice cold bottle of Asti Spumante and a handful of qualudes and headin’ over to Whoopi Goldberg’s house for a “date” with her daughter.
miles on September 30, 2009 at 3:14 PM
OK, everyone here wants to jump on the morality bandwagon, go ahead.
But then don’t complain when they prosecute Cheney for torture.
AnninCA on September 30, 2009 at 3:12 PM
This has nothing to do with Booosh or Darth Cheney. But thank you for your concern.
kingsjester on September 30, 2009 at 3:14 PM
I believe AnninCA just writes this type of crap to antagonize. No one, absolutely no one, can be that stupid.
maryo on September 30, 2009 at 3:14 PM
Don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater mom. I understand where you are coming from, but TV and Movies CAN offer inspiring and transformative experiences.
And how would I watch the Steelers without a TV?
DrW on September 30, 2009 at 3:14 PM
Do members of the Hollywood Klan take some kind of secret oath to defend fellow members of the Hollywood Klan no matter what their crimes?
MB4 on September 30, 2009 at 3:14 PM
Concur!!!
seejanemom on September 30, 2009 at 3:15 PM
I’m a little surprised that Woody Allen’s name hasn’t come up. Yes, he didn’t do the drug/rape thing but he’s still pretty creepy and there seems to be no judgement about his lifestyle.
I don’t care that Polanski made Chinatown and had a crappy childhood. Those are things to bring up at the sentencing hearing. He needs to face justice for what he did.
highhopes on September 30, 2009 at 3:15 PM
No one here cares about your opinion.
ladyingray on September 30, 2009 at 3:15 PM
Yeah, those are our only two choices.
Im with Ed on this one
Squid Shark on September 30, 2009 at 3:15 PM
I love those 2 times a year that we agree :)
Squid Shark on September 30, 2009 at 3:17 PM
Nobody cares about your opinion! Get it?
AsianGirlInTights on September 30, 2009 at 3:17 PM
There’s just too many witnesses, from Whitaker Chambers to Alexis Mitrokhin, that the KGB set up Communist parties in democracies as two-tier criminal conspiracies. The outer shell would be sincere adherents who respected their national soveriegnity and organized as any other legal political party. The leadership would trawl this sea of reds for the worthwhile acolytes to the inner Party, an illegal espionage, sabotage and blackmail network for Moscow, for the understood goal of violent revolution and dictatorship of the proletariat. This core had no more right to operate than the Confederate States of America had a right to consulates in the North.
Chris_Balsz on September 30, 2009 at 3:18 PM
YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT….
Watching my DAWGS is INSANELY frustratong with no cable….but I have friends in high places and I get a stream on the computer…so , I wish I could help you, but that was TRULY the nly reason my cable lasted as long as it did.
Honestly… no sarcasm….SEC College football is the SINGLE REASON I miss my television….so I feel your pain brotha….
seejanemom on September 30, 2009 at 3:18 PM
Then, you’ve missed the point, again.
massrighty on September 30, 2009 at 3:18 PM
A DELAYED stream, let me make cler, but the delay is such that I don’t notice….
seejanemom on September 30, 2009 at 3:18 PM
These (Hollywood etc.) people are so out of it that it is beyond belief. The Polanski defense is immoral…and they think communism is cool because they haven’t lived it… AND MOST IMPORTANTLY they believe they will be part of the ruling class of communism. Under what they admire they will be mere clowns to amuse the people they thought they were going to be a part of. Capitalism is the only system these morons get a voice.
DCJeff on September 30, 2009 at 3:19 PM
Jailing rapists = moral
Prosecuting Cheney = immoral.
See how easy?
massrighty on September 30, 2009 at 3:20 PM
Should have been here yesterday then.
upinak on September 30, 2009 at 3:20 PM
Sen. Joe Mc Carthy was a hero. He attacked over 50 years ago the same bunch trying to bring this country down today.
If one is to get weepy eyed in saying, it’s OK to be a Communist, then one is also ok to belong to Hizballah or al-Qaida. They’re all terrorist groups, and it can easily be argued that Communism has killed more people world wide and have killed more Americans.
Jeff from WI on September 30, 2009 at 3:21 PM
Wow! AnninCA supports drugging and raping children. Who would have guessed? Who are we to call such actions immoral and judge Polanski?
Oh wait a minute! Polanski admitted drugging and raping the girl. Surely one can condemn that without being accused of jumping on the morality bandwagon.
highhopes on September 30, 2009 at 3:21 PM
+++
lovingmyUSA on September 30, 2009 at 3:22 PM
Anyway, back to the real discussion, do we agree with legal agreements or not?
I can’t imagine the chaos that would erupt if plea bargains turn into political fodder.
And that’s what this is happening. So do we respect plea bargains or not?
If not, I’d be the lawyer who says, don’t sign.
How does this benefit us?
What are the unintended consequences?
I say, we lose tremendous leverage with criminals.
But, if that’s the direction people wish to go towards, by all means.
But then, be ready to give up ALL benefits of being trusted to follow through with agreements with the State.
AnninCA on September 30, 2009 at 3:23 PM
Oh, please DO bring Cheney up on imaginary charges.
Just curious-how are you going to prove he personally tortured anybody? Expert testimony from someone at Kaiser Permanente in Santa Rosa?
Del Dolemonte on September 30, 2009 at 3:23 PM
Luc Besson isn’t supporting Polanski.
Score 1 for the good guys.
Hey Ed, time to start a running list of those coming out on either side of this matter.
I can hereby promise not to patronize anyone on the supports the bastard side. Anyone else with me?
redshirt on September 30, 2009 at 3:23 PM
Dammit it, Jeff, you’re on.
BigD on September 30, 2009 at 3:24 PM
McCarthy did more to set back conservatism than any other man in 50′s. He is an embarassment, no matter what Coulter says.
Squid Shark on September 30, 2009 at 3:24 PM
.
Impossible, everyone knows that waterboarding isn’t torture! What is the next crazy AnninCA statement looking for a shootdown gonna be?
Simonsez on September 30, 2009 at 3:25 PM
Sentenced.
Fled.
Caught.
Jailed.
Still easy – you muck it up with too much blather.
massrighty on September 30, 2009 at 3:25 PM
Kazan, right or wrong, had the courage to face his conviction.
Can’t say the same for Polanski.
Christien on September 30, 2009 at 3:25 PM
What agreement Ann?
ladyingray on September 30, 2009 at 3:25 PM
Face justice? He needs to be introduced to his new cellmate, Bruiser, and to the other fine fellows on Cell Block C.
BuckeyeSam on September 30, 2009 at 3:25 PM
Ann seems to support child rape.
HornetSting on September 30, 2009 at 3:26 PM
See, that’s the problem–you have no morals–how can you relate?
lovingmyUSA on September 30, 2009 at 3:26 PM
All Enemies Foreign and Domestic. The Communist Party in the US was nothing more than a front for the USSR.
SittingDeadRed on September 30, 2009 at 3:26 PM
Robert F. Kennedy disagreed with you.
Do you dislike:
A. His goals?
B. His methods?
C. His persona?
massrighty on September 30, 2009 at 3:26 PM
Hollywood, “Values, we don’t need no stinking values”.
jack herman on September 30, 2009 at 3:26 PM
AnninCA on September 30, 2009 at 3:27 PM
Never base a decision on feelings rather than morals. Because feelings do change. Morals do not.
FontanaConservative on September 30, 2009 at 3:28 PM
I find the fact that there is a black liberal actress who can argue “rape” and “rape rape” and get away with it as interesting as the Polanski story.
Anything other would have been terminated by every network within hours.
Marcus on September 30, 2009 at 3:28 PM
Oh, and this episode really does prove John Edwards right. There are two Americas.
In leftist elite America, there are no laws, only guidelines and you can do what you want without paying a price.
In normal America if you rape a child or cheat on your taxes you go to jail.
18-1 on September 30, 2009 at 3:29 PM
OK, I’ll just go along here.
Plea bargains are out. From now on.
But that means, no more leverage for law enforcement, either.
That’s OVER.
Right?
AnninCA on September 30, 2009 at 3:29 PM
The more salient point about Ed’s post relates to what Dr. Zero wrote yesterday. Like many liberals, Hollywood has the nasty habit of ferociously punishing their own if they don’t completely tow the communist party line. From what I’ve read from other works, Kazan felt compelled to testify because his conscience wouldn’t allow him to do otherwise. That was Kazan’s crime against Hollywood- to betray the party.
Fortunately for liberals, Polanski didn’t betray his party. Instead, he drugged and brutally raped a child. In the liberal mindset, there is no crime greater than to defect from or reject the party. Rape is forgivable, betraying the communist/democratic party isn’t.
anXdem on September 30, 2009 at 3:30 PM
Can you imagine the cheering that will erupt when you announce your departure from HotAir? It’s going to be deafening!
AsianGirlInTights on September 30, 2009 at 3:30 PM
“In a phase of this struggle not widely known, some of us came toe to toe with this enemy this evil force in our own community in Hollywood, and make no mistake about it, this is an evil force. Don’t be deceived because you are not hearing the sound of gunfire, because even so you are fighting for your lives. And you’re fighting against the best organized and the most capable enemy of freedom and of right and decency that has ever been abroad in the world. Some years ago, back in the thirties, a man who was apparently just a technician came to Hollywood to take a job in our industry, an industry whose commerce is in tinsel and colored lights and make-believe. He went to work in the studios, and there were few to know he came to our town on direct orders from the Kremlin. When he quietly left our town a few years later the cells had been formed and planted in virtually all of our organizations, our guilds and unions. The framework for the Communist front organizations had been established.
It was some time later, under the guise of a jurisdictional strike involving a dispute between two unions, that we saw war come to Hollywood. Suddenly there were 5,000 tin-hatted, club-carrying pickets outside the studio gates. We saw some of our people caught by these hired henchmen; we saw them open car doors and put their arms across them and break them until they hung straight down the side of the car, and then these tin-hatted men would send our people on into the studio. We saw our so-called glamour girls, who certainly had to be conscious of what a scar on the face or a broken nose could mean careerwise going through those picket lines day after day without complaint. Nor did they falter when they found the bus which they used for transportation to and from work in flames from a bomb that had been thrown into it just before their arrival. Two blocks from the studio everyone would get down on hands and knees on the floor to avoid the bricks and stones coming through the windows. And the 5,000 pickets out there in their tin hats weren’t even motion picture workers. They were maritime workers from the waterfront–members of Mr. Harry Bridges’ union.
We won our fight in Hollywood, cleared them out after seven long months in which even homes were broken, months in which many of us carried arms that were granted us by the police, and in which policemen lived in our homes, guarding our children at night. And what of the quiet film technician who had left our town before the fighting started? Well, in 1951 he turned up on the Monterey Peninsula where he was involved in a union price-fixing conspiracy. Two years ago he appeared on the New York waterfront where he was Harry Bridges’ right hand man in an attempt to establish a liaison between the New York and West Coast waterfront workers. And a few months ago he was mentioned in the speech of a U.S. Congresswoman who was thanking him for his help in framing labor legislation. He is a registered lobbyist in Washington for Harry Bridges.”–Ronald Reagan, 1957
Elia Kazan was an American hero, on the waterfront and on the homefront.
Noel on September 30, 2009 at 3:30 PM
A (I like the priniciple, but the endstate he sought was incorrect IMO)
B and C most definitely.
Squid Shark on September 30, 2009 at 3:31 PM
Oaths of allegiance are “just speech”, but if you pledge allegiance to enemies of America then you are a traitor. The Communist party was representing America’s enemy. Period. It still does, even though we now have a commie in the White House and infesting Congress.
If you pedge allegiance to another nation you can lose your American citizenship. Try and argue the first amendment about that.
progressoverpeace on September 30, 2009 at 3:31 PM
Didn’t some liberal feminist say that “all sex is rape?”
BigD on September 30, 2009 at 3:31 PM
Nope, this blog has decided. All plea bargains are out.
Live by that decision, folks.
I suspect that will be one tight fit.
But that’s your choice.
AnninCA on September 30, 2009 at 3:31 PM
You are so stupid. Until a judge approves a plea agreement, there isn’t one. Get over it.
ladyingray on September 30, 2009 at 3:32 PM
The judge in the case rejected the plea deal.
Polanski should have gone to jail, and used the appeals process to secure a reversal on appeal. That’s how it works, in the nation of laws.
Everything else is just noise. He fled, to avoid jail. He now needs to be returned, to begin his sentence.
This is easy, if you argue from logic, and based on the rule of law.
massrighty on September 30, 2009 at 3:32 PM
I remember that ceremony. I think that was the last one I watched. Hollywood of any sort being moral arbitrators is more irony that I can tolerate.
Cindy Munford on September 30, 2009 at 3:33 PM
Look, Anninacan is trying to worm her way out of saying she agrees with raping and drugging children.
HornetSting on September 30, 2009 at 3:33 PM
OK, everyone here wants to jump on the morality bandwagon, go ahead.
But then don’t complain when they prosecute Cheney for torture.
AnninCA343 on September 30, 2009 at 3:12 PM
Personally I can’t wait until we charge Obama with theft (obvious), and just to be fair, torture (he allows rendition) also. Heck, why not murder (abortion funding/changing ROE), prostitution (he has given money to ACORN), etc?
The left keeps thinking of crossing the line on prosecuting their political opponents when they have control of the executive branch. That would be, to put it mildly, a mistake.
18-1 on September 30, 2009 at 3:34 PM
+
ladyingray on September 30, 2009 at 3:34 PM
“In order to completely understand the perverse nature of Hollywood’s almost-total support for director Roman Polanski in his effort to fight extradition and avoid the consequences of his conviction for statutory rape 32 years ago, recall their attitude towards another seminal director ten years ago.”
I didn’t need to recall their treatment of Kazan to completely understand the perverse nature of Hollywood’s celebrities, I just had to know what the facts were of Polanksi’s case. If you need more to understand that nature, I suggest you look at the movies they make, for example, “Youth in Revolt” (Weinstein-Prod) coming to a theatre near you in January, or The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus (Gilliam-Dir) due on Dec 25.
I’m not saying all in Hollywood are like these two, but it does seem
Dusty on September 30, 2009 at 3:35 PM
I haven’t had a reason to visit a movie theater in years, rent a video, or even watch prime time TV.
How relevant is Hollywood anymore?
Kini on September 30, 2009 at 3:36 PM
(whoops, phone call)
… seem that an awful lot of the birds in that flock are the same species.
Dusty on September 30, 2009 at 3:36 PM
That woman Manson follower desrved to die in prison for her forty year old crime of, ironically, killing Polanski’s wife and unborn child, that scumbag PamAm bomber definitely deserved to die in prison and so, now, does this perverted child rapist/sodomizer deserve to die in prison. There is (or should be) no statute of limitations on such heinous crimes.
Big John on September 30, 2009 at 3:37 PM
Hot Air, you’re laying on the words “drugging,” “raping,” “sodomizing” and “13 year-old girl” a little thick in your posts. Its getting to the point where the content of your posts is becoming a distraction from the important issue being addressed.
Scopper on September 30, 2009 at 3:37 PM
No problem. We’ll all just enjoy revisiting cases. INCLUDING, torture, waterboarding, etc.
That’s the principle you are supporting. Legal rulings don’t matter.
Only the Morality.
Ok, but don’t complain when the worm turns.
That’s your choice.
He was offered a plea deal. The judge turned the tables.
Just about like Obama is turning the tables on the CIA, and others.
So don’t even try to argue that’s not fair, since you agree with the left.
Morality wins. We decide even 30 years later. Doesn’t matter about law or precedent.
We can still prosecute to the full extent.
Well, let me tell you, with that measuring stick, nobody with half a brain will EVER serve government.
You have set up a no-win situation that will have consequences for decades.
Stupid? Oh yeah.
AnninCA on September 30, 2009 at 3:38 PM
Well, I think we should all listen to these accomplished “stars”, after all look at what a fine job they have done with their own kids. Hollywood is littered with the battered, abused and discarded remains of Hollywood’s own children. A disproportionate amount of child celebrities lie in graveyards or gutters, unable to overcome their abusive childhoods. So, really, why wouldn’t we listen to them?
bloggless on September 30, 2009 at 3:38 PM
Most stupid people are desperate…
ladyingray on September 30, 2009 at 3:38 PM
So does this mean you will never praise Lincoln ever again? After all, he did a heck of a lot worse the the HUAC.
Tim Burton on September 30, 2009 at 3:38 PM
Yeah, probably the same one who says that all men are rapists. There is no more conflicted group than liberal feminists.
CarolynM on September 30, 2009 at 3:39 PM
These are the people who applauded when OJ walked! Okay. Even if the crime is worth only some community service, the lawyers and judges are going to slam dunk Polanski for rabbiting out of the country and “fleeing justice.” That’s something that kicks sand in their faces and they won’t forget it. It would be ironic if Polanski got 10 to 15 for bolting the country and only a fine a trash pick up community service for the rape.
kens on September 30, 2009 at 3:39 PM
Makes me wish for some of that good old “frontier justice” we used to see in the old cowboy movies (which is ANOTHER thing ballywood has corrupted…)
lovingmyUSA on September 30, 2009 at 3:39 PM
AnninCA on September 30, 2009 at 3:31 PM
It is possible to hate the guts of someone you have never met. I have learned this from reading your drivel. I know that no one cares what my opinon is but I find you worthy of only scorn.
John D on September 30, 2009 at 3:40 PM
I would like it pointed out to some of these Hollyweird celebrity blowhards who want Roman Polanski forgiven and welcomed back into their fold with open arms that for almost 30 years, this guy practically thumbed his nose at justice, literally defying authorities to arrest him for his heinous and despicably deplorable rape of a 13 year old. So now that they have called his bluff and he is sitting in a Swiss jail fighting extradition, he is all huffy and puffy about it all, declaring to the media how the authorities dare arrest him, the legendary Roman Polanski.
This is contemptible unrepentant arrogance and audacious indignant defiance unlike anything I have ever seen come from another human being. Roman Polanski is no legend. He is a fugitive criminal who thought, by the passage of time, that he could escape justice, and who instead is now finding out that the wheels of justice sometimes turn very slow, but they still turn, and they are now turning to insure that Polanski pays the penalty for what he did.
pilamaye on September 30, 2009 at 3:40 PM
Off the top of my head, this story (or at least the Dr. Parnassus character) is rather old, no? I’m thinking Debussy and The Children’s Corner. Someone help me.
BigD on September 30, 2009 at 3:40 PM
Sorry for the horribly constructed sentence, I hope you could figure it out. Just terrible.
Cindy Munford on September 30, 2009 at 3:40 PM
And, lest we forget, COMMUNISTS are OUR enemies and the enemy of our form of government. I don’t have a problem with the person that “ratted” out Benedict Arnold and I don’t have a problem with someone that ratted out communists. When someone seeks to destroy your government, they are, by definition, a traitor.
CC
CapedConservative on September 30, 2009 at 3:40 PM
Let’s agree on what we can, and disagree, without rancor. He (McCarthy) worked to expose infiltration of the US government by hostile agents of an aggresive power.
If you want to claim that, in doing so, he caused harm to some people, I’d accept that that’s true.
Remember Goldwaters famous axiom “I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.”
As to the persona (demeanor) issue – that, in my mind, would be the least of issues. I’m reminded of some posters here, who often make good points, but do it in a way that gets folks riled up. That doesn’t invalidate their points, just makes them hard to take at times.
massrighty on September 30, 2009 at 3:41 PM
Next up- “An Education” A delightful tale about the story of a 16 year old girl being seduced by a man twice her age. Bring the whole family! You’ll love it. These people are sick.
bloggless on September 30, 2009 at 3:41 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 Next »