2012 May 22 |
 |
http://www.theatlanticright.com/2009/09/30/polanski-apologists-ii/
0
0
  |   3 comments

The list of a hundred film people who are defending director Roman Polanski is what you might expect. A cross section of morally bankrupt people in the entertainment industry. One might suspect many of them, like Woody Allen, or Terry Gilliam, are thinking about the behavior of people at some of the parties they have attended, and hoping no one will tell about some of the less lovely exploits that go on at hard partying entertainers’ bashes. The notion that the only thing that matters is the quality of the art produced, and great art equates to a pass for boorish behavior is common among the elites. That applies equally to intellectual and political elites, as well as entertainment stars. So it is no surprise to see most of the names on the list. Very few are known for anything except being effective entertainers.

There is, however, one exception. Claude Lanzmann. Seeing his name on the list brought me genuine sorrow and pain. Lanzmann is a film maker who is probably better known in Europe than in North America. (That’s true of most of the names on the list of 100). But what hurts so much in Lanzmann’s case is that many of us who know him primarily for his film “Showa” would probably not have expected to see him among the supporters of rape and child abuse. “Showa,” Lanzmann’s nine hour motion picture oral history of the Holocaust, is one of the most harrowing, searing films I have sat through. No Ken Burns like production full of archival stills and grainy movie footage of corpses appears in “Showa.” The voices and facial expressions of the interviewees was more than enough to convey the horror of the Holocaust. So there’s the ultimate sickening tragedy: A careful documentary film maker, who unsparingly brought the brutality of Man’s Inhumanity to Man into our lives, proves to be no different than the ordinary people who looked the other way while the trains rolled to Treblinka. Like the Polish and German citizens who ignored the one way traffic of victims, Lanzmann ignores the ordinary movie maker Roman Polanski who rapes and sodomizes little girls. Lanzmann’s signature on the petition to free Polanski says that he doesn’t think what Roman Polanski did was anything bad enough to send him to prison. Which makes Mr. Lanzmann a lot like the ordinary folks who watched the trains go by.

  1. Posted by Muad'dib
    | Quote | Trackback | Link #102783
    Muad'dib I think that something that should be done here is that everyone needs to take a look at the situation and remove the high profile aspect of it. Instead of looking at this from the perspective of "Roman Polanski - Hollywood Oscar winning director," put it in the perspective of Joe Citizen down the block. I think that if we look at it from that perspective and remove the emotional aspect from it, it's hard to see a scenario where Roman Polanski could simply walk away without facing due process of the law. Fact: for right or wrong, Roman Polanski skipped out on his sentencing - he already admitted guilt, and he's lucky it was plea-bargained down to sex with an underage person rather than full out rape. If it was me in this situation no one would be coming to my aid saying that I should go free. If it was me, I'd be hauled back to the US and I would have to let the process of law take its course, and I believe that is exactly what should happen here. In the process of the law, it doesn't really matter what Samantha Geimer thinks about it or that she has forgiven him - that's irrelevant to the situation at hand, although she could attend the hearings and ask the judge for leniency - sentencing is up to the judge who will eventually handle the case. I truly believe that Polanski will be extradited back to the US and the due process of law will finally be fulfilled - it's not really a matter of if - it's a matter of when.
  2. Posted by Roy Mandina
    | Quote | Trackback | Link #102825
    Roy Mandina There is no statute of limitations on rape. Only liberal demented idiots, like Whoppi Goldberg, and Debra Winger, would want to see this pedophile go free. Liberal jackasses would sit at the the table of this human filth after he raped a child but would walk away in disgust if they were to find he was a Bush supporter. Please spend a few minutes and find out the names of the the other liberal trash that want to see this guy walk, and boycott them. Watching "The View" keeps human waste like Whoppi employed and able to spew her demeneted philosophy to our soceity.
  3. Posted by Ted
    | Quote | Trackback | Link #102940
    Ted This has nothing to do about personal political bent. I am pretty liberal, and I was abhorred by Polanski's behavior since he left Southern California in 1978. The ugly truth about Hollywood actors is that many aren't well educated, and lack alot of skills for critical thinking. Much like those jumping to Polanski's defense have only seen, "Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired" as their only source of information, without reading the Grand Jury transcripts, the motion filed by Polanski's lawyers in Dec. 2008, or the Prosecution's response in January 2009. All are accessible on the web. There is a statue of limitation on rape, no limitation on murder. Polanski was indicted weeks after the rape took place, so that is not the issue. Polanski's guilty plea is the issue, and has always been the issue. A defendant can't make a plea bargain and think they can dictate the sentence after the pleading guilty to a felony, especially that the plea bargain looks like a charge bargain plea instead of a sentence plea bargain. A defendant isn't the judge of the sentence after they plead guilty to a felony. If they have a problem with a judge, take the gripe through the appeals process, not fleeing.