From the Amazon listing:
“Kindle Price: $13.99
Sold by: Simon & Schuster Digital Sales Inc.”
I am surprised at the involvement of Simon & Schuster here.
It’s sickening that people continue defend an admitted child-rapist in Polanski, Winslet or anyone else. I don’t know, nor do I care, why she changed her mind.
Michael Vick went to prison for dog fighting and resumed his NFL career. Mike Tyson served time for rape and went back to boxing. Marion Barry smoked crack and went back on the DC city council. Some people get second chances but some don’t like OJ. Hard to say why one person gets second chance and another person doesn’t.
Generally, the people being discussed here did not go to prison for their crimes. There’s a big difference between serving one’s sentence and not serving one’s sentence for terrible deeds.
If you haven’t seen the show Dexter the basic plot is he’s a serial killer but only kills people who did not get convicted for their crimes. Or he kills someone who only got probation or a short sentence. Maybe that’s why the show was popular.
So she changed her mind in the span of four months, when no new information came out, because…why, exactly?
That’s the other thing about this. At one point she was defending Polanski,* then four months later she’s throwing Allen under the bus. There’s a huge disparity between the two cases, so it doesn’t make a lot of sense.
Depends on what you mean by “second chance”. In the early '00s, I worked in a group home, and one of the residents watched BET constantly. One day on their “TODAY” style morning show, they brought in OJ as a guest. They just chatted with him in a very friendly manner, asking him what he had been up to (his answer: a lot of golfing–no mention of his tireless quest to “find the real killers”). One of the female hosts even flirted with him, asking if he was seeing anyone lately. I was gobsmacked: it was like a whole separate parallel reality.
*Who, to my mind, is a much thornier case. Obviously he’s a fugitive from U.S. justice, and it’s certainly bizarre that so many in Europe have rallied behind him. OTOH do I want to live in a world in which the intensely affecting masterpiece film The Pianist does not exist? And has there ever in human history been a single person with such a varied and bizarre biography? Endured and survived the Holocaust in the 1930s/1940s. Became a celebrated filmmaker in the 1960s. Wife brutally killed in late pregnancy by the world’s most infamous cult in 1969. Becomes a criminal fugitive in the 1970s and flees to Europe. Wins all kinds of Oscars in the 21st century. So hard to wrap my mind around.
Who cares? Why does this matter in this discussion? It’s unknowable.
It shouldn’t be. He forcibly penetrated a child who said no, and has since defended himself, over and over again. Punishing child-rapists, and spreading the message that child-rape is totally unacceptable in society, is far, far more important than a handful of movies, whatever quality they may be.
And none of his biography comes close to making up for raping a child, much less raping a child unapologetically. The only that that could possibly come close to making up for raping a child would be saving a child from being raped.
Judging Polanski isn’t remotely difficult.
I think you misunderstood my comment. It wasn’t about “judging” him, or what “makes up” for anything. What’s hard to wrap my mind around is that any single person has been involved in so much weird shit. It’s just really strange.
[Moderating]
This, however, is over the line. If you have a problem with a poster personally, take it to the Pit. This is a Warning for personal insults.
This is nonsense. She expresses one opinion and then changes her mind at some point and expressed the opposite opinion. It has nothing do to do with “four months.” When a person changes es mind about something, that change is a singular event. Comparing the timing of two statements that you happen to know about is meaningless.
I’ve changed my mind many times in my life and you could probably not identify “new information coming out” as a fulcrum. It is usually a gradual process of thinking about something, hearing arguments and facts, and at some point the weight of everything, it tips. There’s usually no identifiable last straw.
Mmmkay.
Kate Winslet…
Also Timothée Chalamet, Elle Fanning, and Selena Gomez.
They all happily worked with Allen on A Rainy Day in New York. Then the media and their fans jumped on them, so they quickly recanted, donated their salaries to women’s causes, and said how much they repented of their heresy. If they hadn’t, their careers would have been damaged and they would never have heard the end of it.
Of course, they may have genuinely changed their minds about Allen.
:rolleyes:
Yup, genuine change of heart. That’s the ticket!
Social shame persuading relatively powerful people to “change their minds” (authentically or not) and oppose assisting child rapists like Polanski is a very good thing, and should be encouraged.
This thread is about Woody Allen. That’s what we are talking about. Nice try moving those goalposts!
An intelligent, well researched appraisal of Woody Allen & this appalling fiasco via this link;
The snippets I’ve seen, although coming from anti-Allen sources, don’t do him any favors.
This might be the case that there’s an argument for wanting it to be published if he is going to shoot himself in the foot.
Thanks! Drifts towards and appraisal of the Woody Allen book deal around the 17:30 mark.
Oh that mine adversary had written a book! 
I’m about forty pages in, and it’s extremely entertaining–and shockingly self-deprecating. And not in the usual way that comes across as charming or makes someone look better overall. I guess in a very broad way it might come across better than trying to do blatant self-hagiography, but if I were his agent I definitely would have advised him to maybe round off some of the rough edges or leave off a few anecdotes and word choices. I respect the frankness though, even if it makes me feel a little tense on his behalf.