Do you have any idea how many old, boring people were voting for the Academy back then? Most of them were old and were like "whats a Star Wars?"

I have never understood the appeal of Woody Allen NOR 90% of best picture winners, most of which are boring pretentious shit. See: Birdman

Woody Allen made a few really good comedies.

He also reorganized two full floor to ceiling shelves worth of books (presumably to make them look better) when he was shooting at my work last summer and never told anyone he'd done it. Among other things. I was finding stuff Woody Allen had messed up for almost a month.

Which is kind of OK with me, it was kind of like when I worked at a video store in college that had a whole section for David Mamet's filmography, and a couple times a year when he was in town David Mamet would come in with a big sandwich, eat it while he browsed through his own movies, and then leave bits of sandwich all over the carpet. Except that's way more charming.

That is not the real question. It isn't even A real question.

Awpoop. I liked Birdman.

But I liked Guardians of the Galaxy more; that should've been nominated and won all the oscars ever. I wonder what's going to happen this year when Oscar season rolls around. Mad Max Fury Road takes home the best picture prize?

Birdman was good. I didnt find it boring or pretentious. It was a fun slightly weird film with some decent dialogue and acting.
Also @Rodents, what do you think it was having pretensions of?
Also, boring? Are you one of those people whose attention can only be maintained by an explosion every 5 minutes?

I just realized that I've never seen a single Woody Allen film.

and

Birdman was amazing.

Birdman just wasn't those things, Rodents. It had character conflicts (even fistfights and room-trashings!), romance, wit, and some great comedy. I think some of the internet's reaction to it has been a bit hyperbolic (same with Mad Max, but that's the internet for you), but calling it pretentious or boring is just inaccurate. The movie even set up a pretentious 'theatre critic' straw man as the story's villain, just to distance itself from pretentiousness. So, come on. You don't actually think that; you're just tired of internet cinephiles talking it up, which I can sympathize with.

As for Guardians, I still can't believe how well-received it's been.

He had some good ones, and as far as I know this was the first mainstream American movie to really incorporate a total V-effect, which must've been pretty groundbreaking to a lot of people, especially those who didn't go to arthouse cinema, but that was nearly 40 years ago and you can just watch an episode of the Simpsons or Family Guy and catch up pretty quickly.

Okay, maybe Birdman wasn't pretentious and it was only just boring.

Also incredibly boring: The King's Speech. The entire movie put me to sleep. Inception, True Grit and Winter's Bone were all way better.

Crash, Million Dollar Baby, Argo, The Artist, zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

Evidently you think I'm similar to Marshall McLuhan? I don't really see how I'm like Mr McLuhan at all, and I'm a bit confused as to whether I should be insulted or flattered by the comparison.

With that said, if I've misinterpreted your motives, and you're actually trying to flatter me with this comparison, then.... thank you! I am sorry I misjudged your intentions.

Could you explain to me why I am like Marshall McLuhan? I have not read any of his books and am unfamiliar with his work.

I was looking back at some of your older posts, because I remembered enjoying them once or twice in the distant past. You didn't used to be like this. What happened? Did you have a stroke or some kind of head trauma or something? Or is it really the most banal trolling of all time, like some kind of nihilistic meta-commentary on the site or the internet or youtube or something?

And I'll take the bait: you are the guy standing behind Allen in this clip, not McLuhan. You vomit words onto the page, and you vomit them prodigiously. And it isn't especially well-written; 90% of what you write is so mind-numbingly simplistic that it's hard to even get through.

The real shit part is that I know I'm not alone in that I come here for the comments almost as much as the videos. There are a lot of fine writers on this site with interesting stories, insightful ideas, and useful expertise. So having to wade through your loquacious garbage is a real bummer for some of us. That's it. That's the criticism that people have been saying to you for at least weeks now.

I caught on to, and started ignoring, evilhomers trolling months ago...before it was cool to do so!

>> You didn't used to be like this. What happened? Did you have a stroke or some kind of head trauma or something?


I'm not sure. I don't believe it was a traumatic injury. I think it's because, as you said:

>> I know I'm not alone in that I come here for the comments almost as much as the videos. There are a lot of fine writers on this site with interesting stories, insightful ideas, and useful expertise.

I am a fairly intelligent person, and combined with my social anxiety and my habit of over-analyzing even the most seemingly trivial of things, it is difficult for me to find people whom I can really open up to. The poe network is one of the few places online where I *know* that a lot of intelligent, witty, educated people congregate, many of whom are even smarter than I am! As a result, I feel... comfortable, around you guys. I feel like you are my friends, even jerks like SolRo, and I don't feel the need to bottle things up like I usually do IRL. I know that you guys are smart enough to handle me, and I am operating under the assumption that I can learn new things and get new perspectives by dialoguing with my friends here. People like Bort, Boomer, Oscar Wildcat, JHM, baleen, ashtar, Cena, IZ, OZ, we may disagree on things, but they always seem willing to have discussions with me; they "get" me, which is a rare thing to find!

So, in short, I think it's just that I'm more comfortable now than in the past.

Also maybe some emotional anxiety? I notice that I paint and write more whenever I am stressed.



>> you are the guy standing behind Allen in this clip, not McLuhan

I've said this many times before: if I ever make an inaccurate statement, call me on it. Call me on it *specifically*, and I'll be happy to either show you why I'm right, or concede my error and grow as a person because of your superior insight and expertise.



>> You vomit words onto the page, and you vomit them prodigiously. And it isn't especially well-written; 90% of what you write is so mind-numbingly simplistic that it's hard to even get through.

Oh... well, that's not good. Here again, could you cite some specific examples - like for instance, of me being mind-numbingly simplistic? I know people have accused me of this in the past, but whenever I ask them to elaborate, they do not (or cannot?). This leaves me wondering whether what they say is true, whether it's simply "trolling", or whether it's neither true nor trolling, but rather just a dismissive social response resulting from their frustration with me. I can be a very frustrating person, even though that is never (or rarely ever) my intention.

Thank you for "taking the bait", BTW. I cannot grow and understand different perspectives unless people "bite".

I like EH.

Me too. Big long-winded weirdo!

Thank you, Master Ashtar, that means a lot to me. I like you, too.

Likewise Bort. Sorry, you ninja'd my post.

Speaking of long-winded, I was going to include this in my response to Captain S:

----------
For example, I know that I over-analyze things, it's just the way my brain works. But there's a difference between "being loquacious"and "being thorough"! Usually, if I'm posting something, it's because I feel that what I'm posting is necessary for the logical flow of my current argument, or else to clarify the ideas I am presenting in hopes of eliminating potential confusion. I sometimes go back to proof-read and chop out DOZENS of lines worth of text, because I feel they go nowhere, or because I think that my point has already been made.
----------

but I deleted that entire section before I posted it! I know people hate it when I use the word "meta", so I shan't use it now... but, well, you know.

I think it's time everyone appreciates how cool SolRo is.

I like your comments Evilhomer!
You are a good writer too imo!
I reckon you write a lot of your comments in a wryly po-faced way, but I appreciate the subtle humor in that.

Isn't spouting off a bunch of half-assed opinions about economics and synthesizers (for example) that would probably make people leave the room in real life a big part of why ANYONE comes here anymore?

When am I gonna get MY day in the sun?!

Thank you, Mr Purple Cat. You are another person whose input I enjoy, and is always up for a friendly debate! (sorry for not including you in my short list above; it was not intended to be exhaustive) And yes OZ, that is a very good point. Everyone here has quirks, and I imagine the sorts of things we enjoy doing and saying here would get us thrown out of parties. In fact, I suspect most of us don't even GET invited to parties, else why would we be hanging out online? I don't usually feel bad about being eccentric here, because I think we're all in the same boat.

yogarfield - I believe infamy is just something that has to find you. You could, for example, try to troll people incessantly; this is what worked for Cena, Waugh, and Gmork. But this is not a guaranteed method of getting attention! Perhaps you will get your day in the sun, perhaps not? As is often the case, my favorite Youtuber, Lindybeige, has a video that could apply here - simply exchange the phrase "viral video" for "negative attention from playa haters", and the advice he gives is the same:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgT2rV-xp9E

I like Homer, too, but he drives me nuts. A typical exchange goes like this.

ME: It's bad for men that having sex is tied to their sense of self.

HOMER: Why are you anti-sex?

ME: I'm not, and that's not what I said.

HOMER: Explain what you said.

ME: I already said what I said., and it took me 40 minutes. If I type it again in all-caps, will that be clearer?

I love Homer's comments. Even though we disagree often, we're kindred spirits. I know you only insult AJ and SU just to get to me, and you secretly love them. Its okay.

I'm still out to sea, I'll be back in soon.

Is that some sort of Coast Guard code for "I'm too fucked up on that submarine cocaine right now" ??? WHY ARE YOU HOLDING OUT ON US, MAN!

Shit.

What I meant to say was:

"A man in his fifties who would start a sexual relationship with a girl who may have been as young as sixteen when it started would not hesitate to do something to another young girl if he thought he could get away with it."

I'm no Cospologist, but it does seem kind of fucked up that society was pretty quick to forgive folks like Allen, Polanski, or even Spector (or at least in Spector's case appreciate what he did for music) when Cosby is vilified now for what we have confirmed is true, and his past work and achievements are being stripped from him as if he never did anything good for anybody..

Well, I guess if I inadvertently angered a curmudgeony old rapist, then that's not so bad.

Thanks, Binro. I'd still like to know what Mr Tubman's problem with me is, but your comment cheered me up a bit.

IZ - the sheer number of victims in the Cosby case (nearly fifty accusers now) makes it exceedingly difficult to even entertain the possibility that he has any regrets. There's no room in there for "it was 30 years ago, perhaps he's a different person now".

Right now I'm trying to find a list of the most prolific serial rapists of all time, and while I haven't found anything definitive yet, fifty rapes looks like it's enough to put you on the list.

I used to think like that about Allen, Binro.

Fact is he and Soon hardly knew each other as she was growing up. He didn't raise her, she wasn't really his daughter. And he didn't molest his real daughter when Mia Farrow was downstairs, either. The idea that he took the time to go to her bedroom during Thanksgiving dinner to rape her is absurd. I do think he's a sick fuck though, but his sin is empty narcissism. I believe he is a narcissist enough to know that dating the adopted daughter of a truly evil and equally narcissistic woman (Mia Farrow), a woman that manipulated her own daughter into believing she was sexually molested by her father, who is well known for being completely borderline, that that would be the ultimate revenge.

These are empty people. You can see it in all his films in the past couple decades. Just complete pretension at this point, and that pretension echoes into his earlier works, which really do not age well at all.

Thank god it's okay to openly say Woody Allen hasn't aged well at all. I remember watching his stuff at around 10 with my parents saying how great it (Sleeper) was and never laughing. I chalked it up to being a dumb kid.

Then in high school during a film studies class we watched Annie Hall, again another "classic". Nobody in the class ever laughed. I chalked it up to being dumb kids.

I watch stuff like this now and AT BEST I think, "I guess this was groundbreaking at the time?" Maybe I'm just dumb, but I can't chalk it up to being a kid anymore.


Even the time period excuse doesn't hold water. Monty Python was cranking out funnier and more insightful satire a decade before this.

In conclusion, this is fucking Boomer shit.

Yeah like I said I'm not a Cosby apologist, nor do I think the actions being taken to strike him from history are unjustified, but I dunno, in Spector's case, he was facing murder charges (and later convicted) during the same time the Washington Post named him the "second most influential producer in music history." And Allen was the same thing. He married his fucking daughter AND allegedly sexually abused his other daughter, etc. and nobody seems to care as long as he keeps making good movies.

IZ - I believe there are at least four factors which might make Mr Cosby an easier target than Mr Allen:

1) Mr Cosby has a broad base of appeal and is well-known to all Americans, regardless of race, class, or cultural background. Mr Allen, by contrast, has a far narrower audience: unless you live in a coastal city, are college educated, and are over fifty years old, you probably don't care about Mr Allen's work, if you're even aware of it at all.

2) Mr Cosby is past his prime but still culturally relevant; Mr Allen largely ceased to be a thing by the early 1980s. The flak we're seeing over Cosby is still fresh; the relative lack of Woody-bashing may be because it's old news.

3) Mr Cosby is known for his wholesome, family-oriented entertainment. This makes him a much juicier target for public shame and ridicule than Mr Allen, whose work is cynical, negative, and pretentious.

4) Mr Cosby is black, Mr Allen is white.

Baleen

It doesn't fucking matter that Soon-Yi wasn't Allen's "real" daughter. She may have been as young as SIXTEEN when he started maneuvering her into a sexual relationship. He was a much older male authority figure dealing with a girl from a culture where women are traditionally subjugated.

When Allen's "seduction" of Soon-Yi was discovered by Mia Farrow. Allen had been willing to give Farrow full custody of the children, even his biological son Ronan. To say that Farrow "coached" Dylan to win custody is erroneous because he didn't sue for custody until AFTER Dylan made allegations of sexual abuse against Allen. And Dylan didn't go to Farrow first. She told her pediatrician who was legally bound to report it.

The experts involved found Dylan Farrow's account of the abuse to be consistent and believable. The judge and district attorney found there was strong cause but not enough evidence to prosecute. Allen's legal attempt to prove Farrow had coached Dylan to lie about the abuse was dismissed and he had to pay Farrow's legal fees resulting from that case.

A guy who takes nude pics of a sixteen-year-old child is certainly capable of imposing his will on a younger child. Also, when Dylan was in college, Allen tried to "repair" their relationship by mailing her picture of the two of them together.

He's a sick old sack of shit.

Nobody's "forgiven" Woody Allen, they just don't know if he did anything. Like baleen said, the molestation story isn't exactly an airtight case.

If a total of one woman had come out and said, "Cosby raped me 20 years ago," with no other evidence, his career would still be alive. If multiple people started coming out saying Woody Allen molested them, his career would be over.

To paraphrase Orson Welles, don't trust the experts: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day-care_sex-abuse_hysteria

Perhaps you're right Binro.
I've read all sides, the legal views, the views of the children, Farrow's and Allen's. Nothing really makes much sense and a lot of evidence contradicts other evidence.

Where I agree: Woody Allen is a sick fuck. He fucked his children's adopted sister and married her. It's disgusting.

Where I disagree: Allen did not violate the law or take pictures of a 16 year old and probably did not molest his daughter during Thanksgiving when the entire family was downstairs.

Mia Farrow attacked Soon-Yi when she found the nude photos, breaking a chair over her. Obviously there's something complicated going on here. Mia Farrow is INFAMOUSLY awful to people. She is an awful, awful person. It's a clusterfuck of neurosis going on here. It's too easy to blame Woody Allen for everything. It deprives Soon-Yi of any responsibility or identity (she's not just a "subjugated asian" or whatever), it exonerated the practically criminally insane Mia Farrow.

Anyway Woody Allen's films suck.

It's plausible that Soon-Yi could have been complicit in the relationship. Maybe she saw Allen as the ticket to a better life. Still, he was in a serious relationship with the woman who had adopted her. Farrow & Allen never married and lived in separate homes, but a relationship was there. If the people involved weren't rich celebrities, there would be a lot less forgiveness and way more disgust.

And the fact remains she was a minor and he was in his mid-fifties when it started. Would the sort of man who takes pictures of an underage girl with her legs spread open be the type of guy who would do something inappropriate to another girl?

When evidence isn't strong, sometimes you have to use common sense.

What I always hated about Cosby and what makes his fall so satisfiying is how he took on the role of scold for all of black America. Then racist conservatives repost his shit on facebook as a way of hiding their disdain for blacks behind a black man. Well Mr. Cosby, sagging jeans and naming your daughters Laquisha no longer looks so bad compared to raping dozens of women, now does it?
Bill Cosby is like Uncle Ruckus with a rape record.

Why do you say that?

I'm not really a fan of his work. I wouldn't say I *hate* him, but that may be because I am not particularly familiar with his films. I have seen probably no more than three of them; based on these, my own impression of Mr Allen's work is that he is inventive, but also somewhat boring, and even - ironically (or not!!!) given the subject matter of this scene - a little pretentious. Is this impression that I have accurate? Or is there something more about his work which people love/hate?

Yeah, I was being a tad too brief there. What I mean is I find his films boring, his own personality kinda gross and egotistic (if his public persona is anything like what we see in the papers), and fans of his oh-so-often themselves boring and egotistic.

By "I hate him" I mean I wouldn't punch him in the face, but I would never want to attend any social function that featured him or his art.

Hahaha yeah.. for all the Allen trash talking above, it's true that we wouldn't have probably half of the Simpsons jokes that were vicarious Woody Allen jokes without the man himself.

"Maya Angelou is black?!" gets me every damn time.

>>It's plausible that Soon-Yi could have been complicit in the relationship.
just.

Well, she certainly is now.

>>And the fact remains she was a minor

Are you sure that's a fact? I know he certainly denied it at the time.

It's vague, but it's not meaningless. Woody Allen DID largely cease to be a thing by the early 1980s; young fans became old fans, critics grew less interested in what he had say, and a new generation of Woody Allen fans failed to materialize. Mainstream culture moved on. I don't have any statistics on hand, so I can't prove precisely how washed up Woody's career became, but I think we can agree that Woody's career peaked in the 1970s.

*You've* seen more recent Woody Allen films, sure, but that is just anecdotal evidence. You're old (no offense), and you're one person; your experience is not necessarily representative of society as a whole, and being that you are of an age to remember the days when Woody was still a respected director, it's not surprising that you continue to enjoy his films!

Think of it this way: the 1980s were to Woody Allen what the 2000s and 2010s were to Adam Sandler.

"Hannah and Her Sisters" was Woody Allen's "Little Nicky"; "Deconstructing Harry", his "Jack and Jill".

So what you're describing isn't tied to the movies themselves, it's tied to the audience reaction? Okay, that's less vague, and it has some validity.

But I think it would be more accurate to say that over a long period of years, he's gradually morphed from a maker of comedies for a mass audience to a maker of art house movies. For an art house director, especially an American art house director, he's still a big deal.

Well yes, "ceasing to be a thing" is a matter of audience reception. The quality of the movies themselves may play a factor in determining whether Mr Allen's work is embraced by mainstream culture, but strictly speaking, the quality of an artist and his cultural relevance are two completely different concepts.

"For an art house director", yes, perhaps he's still a big deal - or perhaps not, I can't really say for sure, because I don't associate with hipsters in my daily life, and have absolutely no clue what they're into right now. I'd be willing to meet you halfway and agree with this contention of yours, so long as you're willing to concede that Mr Allen's days of mainstream glory are long past.

Convening with a ghost to win an argument about art-house films? Like hypnotizing your wrestling opponent with Egyptian magic, I didn't even know this move was legal!