Видео

Because woody is innocent

Totally agree. In fact he Rick would be doing the cause a favor of he allowed others to post it to their own RUclips channels.

Seeing as she wasn’t his daughter in any way, and he had absolutely no role in raising her (read Mia’s own book if you don’t believe me) then you apparently don’t know much.

​@@theghoul9326apparently you're a pedo sympathizer

​@@belachaney Unlike you, I know what I'm talking about.

Woody had no role in raising her (and this is according to Mia as well), was never a father figure, and he and Soon-Yi are still married. Happily. THAT should be all you need to know. The facts.

Dude, no he didn’t.

Yes, the movie was loosely based on his relationship with Stacey Nelkin. What’s your point?

Ah...It's a MOVIE. ONE movie. Allen has shot FIFTY of them, most of which he wrote, and all different. It's a thing called "fiction," Dr. Freud..

That's creepy but do we have to pretend that dating a 17 year old is is the same thing or that it's indicative of the same pathology as molesting an 8 year old? Like I really don't want to be the guy who's incredibly pedantic about the word ephebophile but that is pretty clearly different

No, and innocent man who’s been exonerated by every investigation against him, including passing a lie detector test administered by one of the top experts in the country.

Why in the world would you give any credence to it at all? It's INCREDIBLY vicious, and Mia is psychotic.

Well I guess I'm not convinced you're not a pedo either😂😂

And?

You know NOTHING about Israel.

3 did NOT commit suicide, 1 did.

@@geordiebest7160 People refuse to learn the facts, and when they are called out or corrected they accuse you of being Woody or defending him. Facts matter.

@@geordiebest7160 Well, because most normal men would not go to their girlfriend's home, see her daughter and then went "Oh, you look hot, let's have sex", which Allen did. That brings his morality into questions, no matter how you want to spin it.

How could you be familiar with all this, and yet NOT know that Soon-Yi was NOT---repeat---NOT, as in NOT, his adoptive daughter? In fact neither Allen or Farrow ever spent the night at the other's place, although they were right across the street. Soon-Yi was away at boarding school most of the time Allen and Farrow were dating. When she returned home it was Mia who encouraged Allen to take her to movies and museums and whatnot. The fact they 'fell in love' seems irrefutable at this point. The fact that the courts have allowed them to adopt two children of their own ought to be proof enough that Woody is completely INNOCENT. The fact that Mia Farrow is one of the most psychotic, vindictive, and dangerously vicious people alive today is also irrefutable..

@@TheRealDrJoey Stil doesn't change the fact that dating your girlfriend/ex/wife's daughter, adopted or not, is extremely creepy. The signs are there buddy.

A travesty of a mockery of a sham of a travesty of a mockery.

@@infelixscriptor3585 I think you’ll find it’s a travesty of a mockery of a sham of a mockery of a travesty of two mockeries of a sham

He’s married to his daughter mate.

@@JohanCruyff-wj4pf it’s not his daughter though, is it, mate

@@rhodaborrocks-dy3fb yeah mate only his adopted daughter.

I think it’s fair to be turned off by his relationship with Soon-Yi. It was highly unethical. But they have been together for over 30 years, married for 26, have two daughters who adore them, and were clearly meant for each other, so it’s well past time people got over it.

@@geordiebest7160 Mariel herself feels her role in the movie was a breach of her innocence. Nothing you said addresses the ethical implications of the film. That obviously isn't of interest to you, so we are having two different conversations. I will watch the film eventually, and I may appreciate some elements of the filmmaking - I love Annie Hall, for example. Nothing to do with the ethical implications. I was a teenager who was in relationships with middle-aged people who took advantage of me, so yes, it feels somewhat personal to me. I can't argue the merits of the filmmaking as I haven't seen it. I am not fond of Allen as a person. I can separate art from artist in some circumstances. I suppose when I see the film I can decide whether or not I find that possible in this case.

What is it that you find 'highly morally problematic' about a relationship between two consenting adults, that has turned out to be serious, happy, durable, faithful, productive, and has led to marriage and a happy parenthood? I can't find a 'highly morally problematic' aspect to it. Woody was not Soon-Yi's father figure and never had anything to do with her (or the other 'Previn children') until *Mia asked him* to *start* spending time with her 20 year old daughter. NOT his initiative. NO 'grooming' of any child. NO 'authority' in her life. Mia had already dumped Woody as her lover in 1987, that is FOUR YEARS before the relationship with a 21 yo Soon-Yi sprung up. Mia withdrew from the lovers' relationship with Woody when pregnant of Ronan, a child she would later admit is 'possibly not Woody's' but Sinatra's. So Woody did not cheat on a lover, but Mia did. And Soon-Yi did not steal her mother's boyfriend. Tell me, what remains as 'highly morally problematic' if you take all known facts into account?

Yes i listen to her podcast and she said he never advanced on her.@@geordiebest7160

@@michelcouzijn5862 Thank you very much. Most informed and cogent comment here. I can stop obsessing on this thread now!

@@Fiveash-Art Go watch some cartoons, buddy 😘

If your father had been *falsely* alleged of child sexual abuse for whatever reason; and FOUR investigations cleared him, and even the false alleger's attorney and hired experts did *not* believe the abuse story, and your father was 100% exonerated; then would you appreciate it if people said "I wasn't there, so I can't make decisions about the issue" and continue to spread doubts about your father's innocence? It is a good question to ask yourself.

@@michelcouzijn5862 Thank you.

Why do you think he did it?

"He fucking definitely did". You don't need facts? You don't need evidence? You don't even need a charge to find someone guilty of a heinous crime? You just "know" he did it? And that's good enough for you? Then you are no better than all those people in favor of 'mob justice'. Salem witch trials, that's your cup of tea. Mormon persecution. Lynch parties. Ku Klux Klan. McCarthy trials. McMartin preschool craze. The San Antonio four. You don't care for justice. You only care to accuse, and to fucking accuse. THAT is the 'monster' in you.

You've made a fool of yourself with this vicious, ignorant comment.

Whip-smart Irish Catholics?? Bill is half Jewish and a diehard atheist.

@@geordiebest7160Not to mention that before the allegation Dylan was already in therapy for being unable to distinguish fantasy from reality.

Hi Anna, you claim that 'there was no investigation'. You also claim that 'he married his other daughter'. These are TWO FALSE claims. How is it possible that you - I assume an honest, good-willing person - made TWO FALSE CLAIMS? Maybe you should ask yourself that. Because apparently, your 'opinion' relies on TWO FALSE CLAIMS. And I don't think that is a good thing. Do you?