Woody Allen

Discussion and info on people in film, ranging from directors to actors to cinematographers to writers.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Woody Allen

#726 Post by domino harvey » Wed Apr 22, 2020 9:36 am

NABOB OF NOWHERE wrote:
Wed Apr 22, 2020 6:46 am
domino harvey wrote:
Wed Apr 22, 2020 2:52 am
Allen recorded an audiobook version available via Audible as well, which honestly sounds like the ideal way to experience this!
It certainly is. I have done the first 2 hours (of 12) and if you like Radio Days or the Stand Up Years this - so far I haven't got to the Mia years - is for you.
At least I won’t get my fingerprints all over it like the physical book! Whatever matte finish was used on the dust jacket only looks really cool until any part of your hand makes contact with it

User avatar
AWA
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:32 pm
Location: Windsor, Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: Woody Allen

#727 Post by AWA » Sun May 10, 2020 1:56 am

I haven't seen it posted here - which isn't unusual since it hasn't officially been posted or announced in any official social media account - that the new WoodyAllen.com website has a LOT of updates on content that is well worth checking out.

Most importantly several films have actual screenplays posted. Not transcripts - working drafts of scripts, usually from Woody's typewriter and often with his handwritten annotations. Many of these are previously uncirculated in bootleg circles and/or different versions than ones circulating. Many of them contain filmed but deleted scenes, different dialogue, multiple drafts of the same scene and, in some cases, continuity scripts with various added notes.

I have several bootleg Woody scripts and several of these are different than what I have (sometimes with significant differences, others very minor. Some notes:

- Husbands & Wives script, one of the most sought after Woody scripts, is here. Surprisingly, the dialogue was followed as written, for the most part, and, unlike Deconstructing Harry (which also utilized jump cut editing), the jump cuts only rarely were used to cut out a scene of filmed dialogue - they were planned. H&W has an interesting little scene between Gabe and Jack in a bar wondering where everything went wrong, has some longer "interview" dialogue with Gabe's character. On Page 24, when Gabe is recounting past crazy girlfriends (part of which made the cut of the film as Harriet, which is obviously now based on Louise Lasser as can be clearly seen in Apropos Of Nothing), Gabe mentions taking "erotic, pornographic Polaroid pictures" with one such ex-girlfriend. And, on the very next page, in reference to another girlfriend is the "eating out of my hand" line that was just re-used as the dedication to Soon-Yi in the autobiography. Plenty of other little differences and jokes throughout, a great read.

- Crimes & Misdemeanours script contains several different scenes, most notably a much longer and extended ending with a small verbal confrontation scene between Cliff and Lester. Halley is a (married) senior's therapist and Cliff is making a film on Golden Age Thinking - which leads to discussions of how current generations always view previous eras as being better than the ones we're in now - which would be cut and later salvaged to become Midnight In Paris. Including some lines that actually made it into MIP, such as not really wanting to live in any era that didn't yet have Novocain. Lots of adjustments throughout as C&M was shaped through many re-filmed scenes during filming and in editing. It shows with many cut and stapled passages, pages, notes, etc.

- Anything Else contains both the script and the editing shot list script (which itself wouldn't appeal to anyone outside of how an editor's workflow might work using prints). Several different drafts of various scenes are included, running the page count on this to well over 300 (!). Some different scenes, different dialogue, etc but not the apparent "time-travel" initial draft and partially filmed scenes that was the original crux of the film (which, as Apropos makes clear, is highly autobiographical and is present day Woody talking to his younger self).

- Annie Hall continuity script is funny in so much as the notes throughout the script (which is not the original script, for those hoping to get a glimpse of the extended cut with the many deleted scenes and murder mystery sub-plot) contain detailed explanations to jokes and references, explaining what each one is. Which is sometimes informative but mostly funny just because each joke is broken down for you. Not sure why that even exists, actually, unless Woody had to explain everything to editor Ralph Rosenbaum (which, maybe, explains why their partnership ended shortly after?).

- Another Woman script, another sought after gem that previously has not circulated, contains different scenes and dialogue (including some passages that would show up in later films, like the Isaiah Berlin fox / hedgehog pondering who is a fox or hedgehog that ended up in H&W.

- Bullets Over Broadway is a *slightly* different version than the one that circulates. One note is that it was originally to be titled "The Artist", which Woody notes is apparently unavailable so they will have to think of a different title. Apparently it was available enough to be used on a totally different film many years later!

- Radio Days has many elaborate different scenes, including the Fellini-esque opening scene with the escape artist at the beach. If you've recently read Apropos, this will be a fun companion read.

- scripts from Blue Jasmine and Midnight In Paris are the most recent examples, with minimal differences from the released films. MIP is circulating already. These are both typed in a word processor, so likely completed drafts typed out by an assistant.

- Deconstructing Harry continuity script hasn't previously circulated

- Hannah & Her Sisters continuity script hasn't previously circulated but is not the original edit with the attempted rape / stabbing scene and sex at the docks.


A few others are there, but not all films have screenplays added. Some have original promotional materials, including the bios of cast for each film from the time of the release with occasional quotes about working on the film. The tech savvy will also be able to get the high resolution versions of the production stills posted for each film.

I don't know if they are adding more all the time or not, as this has never really been announced in any official capacity (such as Facebook, which is always very active for the official WA account). And this all might get taken down once they notice what is being offered here (or then again maybe not?).

Anyone interested in Woody's process, writing and the background for these films would find this to be a gold mine. Happy reading.

User avatar
kindaikun
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:04 pm

Re: Woody Allen

#728 Post by kindaikun » Sun May 10, 2020 5:17 pm

Wow, I hadn’t heard about this (beyond some small script extracts appearing in videos on his official YouTube channel recently). Thanks for the tip, I’ll defiantly be checking these out.

User avatar
AWA
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:32 pm
Location: Windsor, Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: Woody Allen

#729 Post by AWA » Fri May 15, 2020 4:32 pm

This was posted to YouTube yesterday and is worth sharing here - not only because it's the most complete and airtight defence of Woody I've ever seen (I've been researching and following this story for 20 years and there are a few clips and things in this I hadn't seen before), but also this is just a great documentary made from film and video clips and really well edited and really well written. It's also funny at times and will make you laugh.

By The Way, Woody Allen Is Innocent

It is 2.5 hours long so it's a commitment but it's never boring. It reminds me a lot of Los Angeles Plays Itself, another great no budget documentary made almost entirely from film clips.

Anyways - watch this. This is what I've been trying to point out over the years about how the idea that there is "grey area" about the allegation against Woody is ridiculous - there is no grey area at all. There's something wrong with you if you absorb all of these facts and information and still think there is any doubt whatsoever about Woody's innocence in regards to the allegation.

It also goes in depth on Mia's toxic nature .... and explains her background as to what mad her that way from her extended family history and past relationships.

An underlying theme is how media, especially modern social media, becomes an echo chamber of misinformation while re-inforcing people's desire to feel morally righteous and justified in what they're doing, even if doing so out of total ignorance and parroting common ignorant tropes of a total distortion and misunderstanding of the allegation and context is harmful and dangerous - not just about Woody, but our society and democracy in general.

Anyways... take the time to watch it, regardless of what side of the fence you're on about Woody and if you like Woody's films or not. As seen in the comments section, some people with no interest in Woody films (regardless of the accusations which they also don't care about) found this really interesting, informative and engaging.

User avatar
Ribs
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 1:14 pm

Re: Woody Allen

#730 Post by Ribs » Fri May 15, 2020 4:41 pm

Anyone who thinks 155 minute long video essays will ever convince anyone of anything is running a fool’s errand.

Glowingwabbit
Joined: Wed May 01, 2013 1:27 pm

Re: Woody Allen

#731 Post by Glowingwabbit » Fri May 15, 2020 4:57 pm

AWA wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 4:32 pm
Anyways... take the time to watch it, regardless of what side of the fence you're on about Woody and if you like Woody's films or not. As seen in the comments section, some people with no interest in Woody films (regardless of the accusations which they also don't care about) found this really interesting, informative and engaging.
Not gonna lie I got a chuckle from this. I don't care about his personal life or any of the cancel culture stuff, but I can't imagine ever sitting down to watch a 2.5 hour film about a director whose filmography has maybe a few titles I like.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: Woody Allen

#732 Post by therewillbeblus » Fri May 15, 2020 5:19 pm

I don't know, I think sometimes people are more interested in a debate over facts or ideas than the person involved- they can be mutually exclusive. For example, like many, I have problems with Norman Mailer, but I still sought out seeing today's Criterion release Town Bloody Hall because the debate inherent in documentary (in this case about a debate) was an intriguing concept, even if I had no interest in hearing him speak in it. In fact, now that I'm thinking of it, very few of my favorite people-oriented docs are about people I like or even find interesting, but the nature of the doc's approach make it interesting.

User avatar
AWA
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:32 pm
Location: Windsor, Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: Woody Allen

#733 Post by AWA » Fri May 15, 2020 5:30 pm

therewillbeblus wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 5:19 pm
In fact, now that I'm thinking of it, very few of my favorite people-oriented docs are about people I like or even find interesting, but the nature of the doc's approach make it interesting.

Exactly. Most docs I've ever watched are about people I either didn't like or didn't know much about and was just interested to learn more for the sake of it but also to understand that part of culture / history / art / etc better.

This doc in paticular is about WAY more than just Woody's case. Its the underlying message throughout and the last part that really takes over and the Woody allegation is just *one* of the examples of how mob justice is a dangerous echo chamber. That and it's a good critique of the NeuLeft, which you don't get very often but should since so much of what happens on the Left these days is a mirror image of what is happening on the right that they are often trying to criticize. (full disclosure - I'm a lifelong left wing / socialist voter).

User avatar
AWA
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:32 pm
Location: Windsor, Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: Woody Allen

#734 Post by AWA » Fri May 15, 2020 5:34 pm

Glowingwabbit wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 4:57 pm
AWA wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 4:32 pm
Anyways... take the time to watch it, regardless of what side of the fence you're on about Woody and if you like Woody's films or not. As seen in the comments section, some people with no interest in Woody films (regardless of the accusations which they also don't care about) found this really interesting, informative and engaging.
Not gonna lie I got a chuckle from this. I don't care about his personal life or any of the cancel culture stuff, but I can't imagine ever sitting down to watch a 2.5 hour film about a director whose filmography has maybe a few titles I like.

I watched his hour long defence of the Star Wars prequels after watching this. I really don't like Star Wars very much at all (outside of Empire and the New Hope). And really hated the prequels. But did defend them on the basis that Lucas made them and he's incredibly knowledgable about film history and no dummy, even if I don't particularly care about his films that much. I watched it anyways on the basis of how good this was. It is an hour long. I have no vested interest in caring one way or another about Star Wars films, but it was a *really* well made doc as well and I found it very interesting and insightful. Imagine that. Learning about something you don't necessarily care about.

Glowingwabbit
Joined: Wed May 01, 2013 1:27 pm

Re: Woody Allen

#735 Post by Glowingwabbit » Fri May 15, 2020 5:54 pm

AWA wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 5:34 pm
Glowingwabbit wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 4:57 pm
AWA wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 4:32 pm
Anyways... take the time to watch it, regardless of what side of the fence you're on about Woody and if you like Woody's films or not. As seen in the comments section, some people with no interest in Woody films (regardless of the accusations which they also don't care about) found this really interesting, informative and engaging.
Not gonna lie I got a chuckle from this. I don't care about his personal life or any of the cancel culture stuff, but I can't imagine ever sitting down to watch a 2.5 hour film about a director whose filmography has maybe a few titles I like.

I watched his hour long defence of the Star Wars prequels after watching this. I really don't like Star Wars very much at all (outside of Empire and the New Hope). And really hated the prequels. But did defend them on the basis that Lucas made them and he's incredibly knowledgable about film history and no dummy, even if I don't particularly care about his films that much. I watched it anyways on the basis of how good this was. It is an hour long. I have no vested interest in caring one way or another about Star Wars films, but it was a *really* well made doc as well and I found it very interesting and insightful. Imagine that. Learning about something you don't necessarily care about.
That's fair. Although I also wouldn't be interested in watching a well made doc on Star Wars even if it was only an hour long. I don't care how well made it is I'm simply not interested in learning more about Star Wars. But back to the 2.5 hour doc. Yes I have to have some vested interest in the subject matter to sit through it. Otherwise I have thousands of other films on my watchlist to check out.

User avatar
AWA
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:32 pm
Location: Windsor, Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: Woody Allen

#736 Post by AWA » Fri May 15, 2020 6:14 pm

Glowingwabbit wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 5:54 pm
AWA wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 5:34 pm
Glowingwabbit wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 4:57 pm


Not gonna lie I got a chuckle from this. I don't care about his personal life or any of the cancel culture stuff, but I can't imagine ever sitting down to watch a 2.5 hour film about a director whose filmography has maybe a few titles I like.

I watched his hour long defence of the Star Wars prequels after watching this. I really don't like Star Wars very much at all (outside of Empire and the New Hope). And really hated the prequels. But did defend them on the basis that Lucas made them and he's incredibly knowledgable about film history and no dummy, even if I don't particularly care about his films that much. I watched it anyways on the basis of how good this was. It is an hour long. I have no vested interest in caring one way or another about Star Wars films, but it was a *really* well made doc as well and I found it very interesting and insightful. Imagine that. Learning about something you don't necessarily care about.
That's fair. Although I also wouldn't be interested in watching a well made doc on Star Wars even if it was only an hour long. I don't care how well made it is I'm simply not interested in learning more about Star Wars. But back to the 2.5 hour doc. Yes I have to have some vested interest in the subject matter to sit through it. Otherwise I have thousands of other films on my watchlist to check out.
For what its worth... his Star Wars doc is about Star Wars but it is about film history. I mean... there are how many clips of Alphaville in it. Man With A Movie Camera. John Ford films. A history of the name "Phantom Menace" as it applies to both serials and B-movies. The tropes Lucas used are all references to a vast array of cinema. That's what interested me. It doesn't weigh that deeply into fanboy surface shit, it's about filmmaking and an artist. That's why it was interesting to me, even though I don't particularly care about the art or the artist, I know enough about Lucas to know he's very well versed in cinema history, so to see how an artist used his knowledge of films from all over the world in all eras in many genres to make a homage to them is still a fascinating look. Plus it's a damning take down of horrible film criticism from online critics who are culturally illiterate. Again - it's about one thing but it's about something much much bigger - combine that with sharp editing and great writing, that's the ingredients of a good film, period.

User avatar
AWA
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:32 pm
Location: Windsor, Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: Woody Allen

#737 Post by AWA » Fri May 15, 2020 6:16 pm

Ribs wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 4:41 pm
Anyone who thinks 155 minute long video essays will ever convince anyone of anything is running a fool’s errand.
Watch the first 15 minutes then. Decide for yourself that way. It's pretty convincing. His homework is meticulous.

Glowingwabbit
Joined: Wed May 01, 2013 1:27 pm

Re: Woody Allen

#738 Post by Glowingwabbit » Fri May 15, 2020 6:19 pm

AWA wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 5:34 pm

For what its worth... his Star Wars doc is about Star Wars but it is about film history. I mean... there are how many clips of Alphaville in it. Man With A Movie Camera. John Ford films. A history of the name "Phantom Menace" as it applies to both serials and B-movies. The tropes Lucas used are all references to a vast array of cinema. That's what interested me. It doesn't weigh that deeply into fanboy surface shit, it's about filmmaking and an artist. That's why it was interesting to me, even though I don't particularly care about the art or the artist, I know enough about Lucas to know he's very well versed in cinema history, so to see how an artist used his knowledge of films from all over the world in all eras in many genres to make a homage to them is still a fascinating look. Plus it's a damning take down of horrible film criticism from online critics who are culturally illiterate. Again - it's about one thing but it's about something much much bigger - combine that with sharp editing and great writing, that's the ingredients of a good film, period.
Ok that actually does sound interesting.

User avatar
AWA
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:32 pm
Location: Windsor, Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: Woody Allen

#739 Post by AWA » Fri May 15, 2020 6:34 pm

Glowingwabbit wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 6:19 pm
AWA wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 5:34 pm

For what its worth... his Star Wars doc is about Star Wars but it is about film history. I mean... there are how many clips of Alphaville in it. Man With A Movie Camera. John Ford films. A history of the name "Phantom Menace" as it applies to both serials and B-movies. The tropes Lucas used are all references to a vast array of cinema. That's what interested me. It doesn't weigh that deeply into fanboy surface shit, it's about filmmaking and an artist. That's why it was interesting to me, even though I don't particularly care about the art or the artist, I know enough about Lucas to know he's very well versed in cinema history, so to see how an artist used his knowledge of films from all over the world in all eras in many genres to make a homage to them is still a fascinating look. Plus it's a damning take down of horrible film criticism from online critics who are culturally illiterate. Again - it's about one thing but it's about something much much bigger - combine that with sharp editing and great writing, that's the ingredients of a good film, period.
Ok that actually does sound interesting.
Yes, very. I thought I'd just watch some of it to see what else he had done. I watched the whole thing in one sitting because I didn't want to turn it off. Again - Star Wars criticisms are usually like nails on a chalkboard navel gazing smug self satisfied jerks. This was really interesting about art and the artist's process. And also a damning take down of those vapid fanboy critics on YouTube that don't know anything about film history (amazing part is where he looks at their criticism videos of other films, including the one guy who tries to prove to people how he understands Citizen Kane is the best film ever made and, in the end, gives it an A+... it's both hilarious and also very insightful commentary on the modern idea of online film criticism from any two bit jackass on YouTube who clearly doesn't know what they're talking about).

He starts the film with clips from No Direction Home looking at how Bob Dylan going electric was trashed and booed by fans on his 1966 England tour. And works his way into Star Wars critics from there. Had me at Bob Dylan, man. Then the amazing clips and references to Lucas' interest in avant garde cinema history and how it informs him visually as a narrative filmmaker... some fantastic stuff there. This guy is a real filmmaker, not a video blogger or whatever the hell they call that shit.

User avatar
Rayon Vert
Green is the Rayest Color
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 10:52 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Woody Allen

#740 Post by Rayon Vert » Sat May 16, 2020 11:08 pm

AWA, thanks for the heads-up about this doc. I'm a little more halfway through and indeed it's very well-made and pretty much closes the case. (I'd be surprised to hear what, going on memory, some people on this board who have declared Allen anathema think of the case if they give it a look - which of course is also very possible they won't because they'd first have to be motivated to open this thread in the first place; possibly calling attention it in the Weinstein & abuse thread would give it more exposure.)

One thing that I have trouble wrapping my head around is how come Allen spent 12 of his years life with such a person as Farrow is depicted here, and if he witnessed or how he reacted to her abusive treatment of the children if true.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Woody Allen

#741 Post by domino harvey » Sat May 16, 2020 11:42 pm

A debate on Woody Allen's innocence is like a debate on abortion. People have already made up their mind and are not one good argument away from changing it

User avatar
AWA
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:32 pm
Location: Windsor, Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: Woody Allen

#742 Post by AWA » Sun May 17, 2020 2:53 am

domino harvey wrote:
Sat May 16, 2020 11:42 pm
A debate on Woody Allen's innocence is like a debate on abortion. People have already made up their mind and are not one good argument away from changing it
Normally I would agree. However, how well this is constructed and paced in its tour of the facts and information is extremely effective. This video alone has changed the minds of a few of my friends who were on the fence and/or heavily leaning to guilt because "Woody is creepy". Actual real life friends of mine. Who all know how much I know about this case and am a huge student / fan of Woody's. I asked them to watch this as a token to humour me as a friend. *All* who watched it came down off the fence *before it was even over* and messaged me to say there is no doubt at all in their minds now at all that Woody is innocent, they don't find him creepy (the one friend who used the word creepy all the time now, seeing this, found Woody to be compassionate to try and get custody of those kids that he didn't even live with in the first place to get them out of there... though they maintain the criticism of Woody for not ejecting out of that relationship way sooner, which I agree with totally as a valid criticism). Two of them apologized to me for contesting my points on this for so long and one of them said it made them cry and they found it sad and moving.

This is different. If this were on Netflix, this would be in the news changing the public narrative completely like other major docs have done.

User avatar
AWA
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:32 pm
Location: Windsor, Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: Woody Allen

#743 Post by AWA » Sun May 17, 2020 3:00 am

Rayon Vert wrote:
Sat May 16, 2020 11:08 pm
AWA, thanks for the heads-up about this doc. I'm a little more halfway through and indeed it's very well-made and pretty much closes the case. (I'd be surprised to hear what, going on memory, some people on this board who have declared Allen anathema think of the case if they give it a look - which of course is also very possible they won't because they'd first have to be motivated to open this thread in the first place; possibly calling attention it in the Weinstein & abuse thread would give it more exposure.)
If you'd like to post it to the Weinstein thread, feel free. Your idea and a good one.
Rayon Vert wrote:
Sat May 16, 2020 11:08 pm
One thing that I have trouble wrapping my head around is how come Allen spent 12 of his years life with such a person as Farrow is depicted here, and if he witnessed or how he reacted to her abusive treatment of the children if true.
I agree totally. Woody's anxiety about change and breaking routine keeps him in bad situations longer than he should until it has become a disaster. Case in point - marriage to Louise Lasser (as detailed in his autobiography), Mia and Jean Doumanian in his professional life, who bilked him out of millions of dollars and systematically dismantled his core crew throughout the later 90s as "cost cutting measures" that weren't so much linked to reduced budgets as they were to increasing profit margin on the budgets provided (and damaging professional and personal relationships in the process as he stood idly by and let her do that to his crew until it was too late). I have a bit of a similar anxiety about change myself and have to force myself to break routine to make positive changes in my life when I realize something is wrong in my routine or habits and is harmful to me. Initially I am frozen against making a change out of some kind of fear, but then can force myself to do it and reap the benefits of it. Woody clearly has whatever named issue that is in spades and doesn't do anything about it until its much too late.

User avatar
How rude!
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2012 1:36 am

Re: Woody Allen

#744 Post by How rude! » Sun May 17, 2020 5:43 am

'By the Way, Woody Allen Is Innocent', is an excellent, if somewhat bloated example of in depth analysis of the known facts. Mia Farrow really does come across as a very troubled, insanely vindictive person. I never really studied the case, but there seems no doubt that it is extremely unlikely he is guilty of child abuse of Dylan Farrow.

The deciding point for many, I suspect, is his subsequent relationship with his step-daughter. At what age was she when he first experienced a sexual feeling towards her. He knew her from a very young age. Pre-pubescent age. If he was your neighbour, would you let your kids visit 'Uncle Woody' unsupervised?

I suspect that, and not the Dylan Farrow claims, are the ultimate basis for many people's fixed opinion of Woody Allen.

User avatar
Randall Maysin
Joined: Tue Apr 02, 2013 12:26 pm

Re: Woody Allen

#745 Post by Randall Maysin » Sun May 17, 2020 6:32 am

"Very troubled"...that seems oddly deferent. I think she's probably quite happy to be just what she is, and to do just what she is doing, as are many of those who are ruthless, nasty and false.

User avatar
MichaelB
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Contact:

Re: Woody Allen

#746 Post by MichaelB » Sun May 17, 2020 7:49 am

How rude! wrote:
Sun May 17, 2020 5:43 am
The deciding point for many, I suspect, is his subsequent relationship with his step-daughter. At what age was she when he first experienced a sexual feeling towards her. He knew her from a very young age. Pre-pubescent age. If he was your neighbour, would you let your kids visit 'Uncle Woody' unsupervised?
Can you clarify who you're talking about, as it can't possibly be Soon-Yi Previn?

User avatar
dustybooks
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 10:52 am
Location: Wilmington, NC

Re: Woody Allen

#747 Post by dustybooks » Sun May 17, 2020 10:51 am

I suspect it’s the same reason that people who recoil violently at his movies don’t necessarily have the same response to, say, Roman Polanski’s even though they would likely concur that Polanski is a more sinister person. Allen cultivates a personal relationship through his films that feels intimate to a lot of people, and the popular impression is that he (his fixations, his interests, etc) is inextricable from his work. I think it’s partly calculation — from what I can tell Allen the person doesn’t all that closely resemble Allen the “character” — but it’s definitely very different from what most directors generate. Then again I think you’ll find a number of Hitchcock followers who refer to him as “Hitch,” which is what people who knew him personally called him, and I couldn’t really speculate on why that is.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: Woody Allen

#748 Post by therewillbeblus » Sun May 17, 2020 10:54 am

AWA wrote:
Sun May 17, 2020 3:00 am
Rayon Vert wrote:
Sat May 16, 2020 11:08 pm
One thing that I have trouble wrapping my head around is how come Allen spent 12 of his years life with such a person as Farrow is depicted here, and if he witnessed or how he reacted to her abusive treatment of the children if true.
I agree totally. Woody's anxiety about change and breaking routine keeps him in bad situations longer than he should until it has become a disaster. Case in point - marriage to Louise Lasser (as detailed in his autobiography), Mia and Jean Doumanian in his professional life, who bilked him out of millions of dollars and systematically dismantled his core crew throughout the later 90s as "cost cutting measures" that weren't so much linked to reduced budgets as they were to increasing profit margin on the budgets provided (and damaging professional and personal relationships in the process as he stood idly by and let her do that to his crew until it was too late). I have a bit of a similar anxiety about change myself and have to force myself to break routine to make positive changes in my life when I realize something is wrong in my routine or habits and is harmful to me. Initially I am frozen against making a change out of some kind of fear, but then can force myself to do it and reap the benefits of it. Woody clearly has whatever named issue that is in spades and doesn't do anything about it until its much too late.

Great exchange. I’ve been banging this drum (sometimes exhaustively) here on this forum for a while, but modern therapies (specifically subjective, client-centered ones) like Motivational Interviewing live by the mantra that change is hard for all people; in many instances the most challenging thing we can do. Sometimes we can will ourselves to change, but as mostly emotional beings, who operate in cognitive spaces (and that includes folks who test logic-heavy on Meyers Briggs, etc) we continue to make choices and take actions (including non-actions, often) that feed into fear, doubt, insecurity, anxieties.

Woody is an anxious person so that can contribute, but just generally many (most, all?) people have to suppress some realities in order to cope with their situations. I’ve stayed in way too many jobs and relationships that were just plain not healthy or safe due to the complex psychological processes that need to occur to move someone into sustained awareness of the need to change. Change disrupts one’s predictability, the rooted dynamics of roles, relationships, and other systems. Since people have finite will power, when in certain intense situations they wind up using up all of their energy just keeping their heads above water.

It’s a really fascinating phenomenon, and while I reject reading this truth as a cop-out into complacency, or an excuse into not taking responsibility, on the other hand it’s scientifically proven that people cannot independently pull themselves up by their emotional bootstraps to issue change left and right effortlessly like a superhero. Even making the step from the unaware pre-contemplation stage into the aware contemplation stage in Prochaska‘s stages of change model, let alone maintaining or progressing, is a feat. And of course, like all psychological theories that give attention to the emotional sides of us, it’s not a linear process (for example, how many times have I maintained independence from a toxic relationship only to revert back and suppress my awareness of this as a problem; or how many times have I quit smoking only to revert back to the behavior and forget the reasons why I stopped- if we had to cope on a constant basis with pulsing awareness of our unhealthy choices, we’d go insane- so in a sense the parts of our brain that defend against this constant self-flagellation are helping us too, while also stunting that capacity for change. It’s a grey system.)

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Woody Allen

#749 Post by domino harvey » Sun May 17, 2020 2:27 pm

Discussion of the names celebs go by in real life moved here

User avatar
AWA
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:32 pm
Location: Windsor, Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: Woody Allen

#750 Post by AWA » Sun May 17, 2020 6:03 pm

therewillbeblus wrote:
Sun May 17, 2020 10:54 am
Great exchange. I’ve been banging this drum (sometimes exhaustively) here on this forum for a while, but modern therapies (specifically subjective, client-centered ones) like Motivational Interviewing live by the mantra that change is hard for all people; in many instances the most challenging thing we can do. Sometimes we can will ourselves to change, but as mostly emotional beings, who operate in cognitive spaces (and that includes folks who test logic-heavy on Meyers Briggs, etc) we continue to make choices and take actions (including non-actions, often) that feed into fear, doubt, insecurity, anxieties.

Woody is an anxious person so that can contribute, but just generally many (most, all?) people have to suppress some realities in order to cope with their situations. I’ve stayed in way too many jobs and relationships that were just plain not healthy or safe due to the complex psychological processes that need to occur to move someone into sustained awareness of the need to change. Change disrupts one’s predictability, the rooted dynamics of roles, relationships, and other systems. Since people have finite will power, when in certain intense situations they wind up using up all of their energy just keeping their heads above water.

It’s a really fascinating phenomenon, and while I reject reading this truth as a cop-out into complacency, or an excuse into not taking responsibility, on the other hand it’s scientifically proven that people cannot independently pull themselves up by their emotional bootstraps to issue change left and right effortlessly like a superhero. Even making the step from the unaware pre-contemplation stage into the aware contemplation stage in Prochaska‘s stages of change model, let alone maintaining or progressing, is a feat. And of course, like all psychological theories that give attention to the emotional sides of us, it’s not a linear process (for example, how many times have I maintained independence from a toxic relationship only to revert back and suppress my awareness of this as a problem; or how many times have I quit smoking only to revert back to the behavior and forget the reasons why I stopped- if we had to cope on a constant basis with pulsing awareness of our unhealthy choices, we’d go insane- so in a sense the parts of our brain that defend against this constant self-flagellation are helping us too, while also stunting that capacity for change. It’s a grey system.)
Very interesting comments, thank you taking the time to share that. I would love to know more about that as it has been a burden I've have to wrestle with my whole life. When relationships are ending, I know they are - I can read all the signs, I know this is no longer healthy, this is getting worse, I need to get away from this person, etc - but I can't bring myself to make the break. As a result I linger too long in something that ended before and it has become toxic to both of us and I try to find ways to correct what can't be corrected before I finally leave (or am left, which hurts more).

Woody's book details this in so many ways, some of which I'm not sure he's even aware of. Reading the stories about Jean, Mia, Lasser, etc I kept having to stop reading and think about how strongly I related to his thoughts on why he continued to stay despite knowing something was wrong. He even wrote how he continued to work with Gordon Willis despite knowing the crews were growing to HATE Willis because he had a serious drinking problem and was very miserable with his crew as a result. Woody notes Willis was never that way with him and while Woody knew by the end of the working day Willis had had too much to drink, he was still very professional with Woody and Woody enjoyed the collaboration. But he still worked with him longer than he should have (note: the results of that, such as Broadway Danny Rose and Purple Rose, I'm quite glad we have!).

Regarding Mia's abuse of her children, Woody does note that he never saw anything first hand himself and was kept unaware of what all was going on and how situations were being handled. That is... partly true. He admits he began to realize what Mia was doing was unhealthy and, after Ronan was born started to become aware of how the other children were being treated. Soon Yi wrote the first time she began to change her mind about Woody was when she injured her leg playing sports at school and Mia didn't bother to pick her up or take her to be checked at the doctor. Woody heard about it from Moses and went himself to see her and brought her to the doctor. She was 17 at that time and her opinion of him began to change that day. Years later, when Mia told Woody he should take Soon Yi to a basketball game to get to know her better, that's the reason why Soon Yi agreed to go when asked. Woody going out of his way to help her when she was injured, simply because he was appalled that Mia wouldn't, and disregarding the animosity that existed between himself and the Previn children who ignored him, strongly disliked him and avoided being around him... to do that shows he was at least beginning to see the extremes in which Mia treated her children very differently from her biological children. But still he did nothing due to his crippling anxiety about change and breaking routine. I can relate to that, but not to that extreme.

Post Reply