woody allen

he looks like a mr. potato head

AO Scott examines his historical WA conscience:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/31/movies/woody-allen.html

WTF?

https://scontent-dft4-3.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/27750673_1586414801473497_3847278070291359153_n.jpg?oh=66463c7d5644e9b5ee3ebf9ccc28c61d&oe=5B187BB5

lol

that must've been soon after What's Up, Tiger Lily?

Could be that Allen gave his permission because he wanted to emulate Bob Hope, who had a DC comic book that lasted for over 100 issues.

comic-book woody looks more dapper and handsome, even, than i remember even the 60s-era woody ever being

I don't think Scott's a bad writer but that piece seems incoherent and uncecessary

The comic was from December '67

Some Backstory: http://www.geekpittsburgh.com/comic-book-appearances/woody-allen

There was a Woody color comic strip in Sunday papers in THE '80s. He's not that pure.

(There was a Jerry Lewis comic book in his movie star era.)

Abrams did a best-of collection of the 1976-84 Woody strip in 2009.

shelved?

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/aug/30/woody-allen-new-film-shelved-amazon-rainy-day-new-york

Wow

Life will continue to be worth living without his films.

*potato head blues plays*
*camera zooms out and pans over the streets of manhattan*
*credits roll*

Dr Morbius
Treeship
man alive

https://entertainment.theonion.com/aspiring-actor-dreams-of-one-day-publicly-voicing-regre-1822199182

the controversy that NEVER ENDS AND NEVER WILL

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/09/17/whats-happened-to-woody-is-so-upsetting-so-unjust-soon-yi-previn-speaks-out-in-controversial-interview/?utm_term=.c4e3b78b88e3

That piece is fucking grotesque. In what journalistic universe is "I myself have been friends with Allen for over four decades" the opening of paragraph 7, and not a huge fucking disclaimer right underneath the headline/byline?

Mia Farrow is a bad person, therefore Woody didn't abuse Dylan. Checks out.

Soon Yi does not make things better for Woody there. blech.

It's just so unrelentingly mean-spirited: “I remember the second I laid eyes on her,” Soon-Yi says. “There was a big excitement and hoopla around her. And she came to me and she threw her arms around me to give me a big hug. I’m standing there rigidly, thinking, Who is this woman, and can she get her hands off of me? She didn’t ring true or sincere.” She was six at the time.

In this instance, Farrow’s laserlike interest was beamed at Allen (she’d written him, he tells me, a love letter years earlier), to whom she proposed marriage several weeks into their relationship and then two weeks afterward told him she wanted to have his child. When Allen recounts this chain of events, Soon-Yi grills him: “And that wasn’t a turnoff? You didn’t run the other way, run for the hills? This is why I wrote him off as a major loser,” she jokes. When Allen tries to explain himself, she turns to me as if he weren’t in the room: “He’s a poor, pathetic thing. He’s so naïve and trusting, he was probably putty in her hands. One thinks that he’s so brilliant … and yet on certain things he’s so shockingly naïve it makes your head spin and you think he’s putting it on. Mia was waaay over his head,” she says, and bursts out laughing — not quite at Allen but at the thought of his susceptibility to Farrow’s charms.

Dylan allegation aside, pursuing your girlfriend’s adult daughter it itself psychotically selfish—doing something that would obviously destroy a family.

Daphne Merkin is a friend of Allen's.

how is daphne merkin not a pynchon character

There are so many layers of awful in this story that we almost forget that this is thousands of words of Soon-yi trashing the ex-girlfriend of her husband.

i think the moment that throws the sheer incomprehensible madness of this thing into relief is the line about halfway through the profile when daphne merkin casually informs us that, somewhere in the middle of this whole ordeal (i.e., after mia found the photos and after she'd mailed him a family portrait with a knife skewering it but before the dylan incident), "farrow and allen continued to see each other."

incomprehensible weirdos

like i'm still reading these articles out of morbid curiosity but when i got to that part i just realized there's no way i'm ever gonna figure these ppl out.

after she'd mailed him a family portrait with a knife skewering it... "farrow and allen continued to see each other."

have no problem believing either that this wasn't edge-case behaviour for Farrow or that Allen would choose not to escalate conflict in response

yes, which is why i refuse to play detective in this matter, like many insufferable ppl who are *certain* of what happened on both sides

hi!

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/features/woody-allens-secret-teen-lover-manhattan-muse-speaks-1169782?utm_source=twitter&utm_source=t.co&utm_medium=referral

Open and thoughtful, Engelhardt unspools a life story that took root in a strict German immigrant household and blossomed into a Zelig-esque series of adventures as she attempted to break into modeling: partying with Iman, jet-setting with Adnan Khashoggi, dining with Stephen King, working as a personal assistant to Jeffrey Epstein, the billionaire financier later convicted for soliciting an underage girl. Following her time with Allen, she went on to become a platonic muse to Federico Fellini during the auteur's late-life journeys in Rome and Tulum, Mexico, then spent years tending to egos as a hostess in the executive dining room at Paramount before landing her current gig, working as an assistant for producer Bob Evans.

All that's missing is an admission of involvement in Iran-Contra and a secret pardon by Poppy.

damn

Despite the initial shock of jealousy, Engelhardt says she grew to like Farrow over the course of the "handful" of three-way sex sessions that followed at Allen's penthouse as they smoked joints and bonded over a shared fondness for animals. ("When Mia was there, we'd talk about astrology, and Woody was forced to listen," she laughs.) Engelhardt writes in her manuscript, "There were times the three of us were together, and it was actually great fun. We enjoyed each other when we were in the moment. She was beautiful and sweet, he was charming and alluring, and I was sexy and becoming more and more sophisticated in this game. It wasn't until after it was done when I really had time to think of how twisted it was when we were together … and how I was little more than a plaything." She continues, "While we were together, the whole thing was a game that was being operated solely by Woody so we never quite knew where we stood."

the heart wants what it wants

(i think that's the organ)

i was gonna make a Zelig joke but the writer beat me to it

no big surprise that a writer-director-producer would have skills at manipulating people to do what he pleased

really reminds me of the Jimmy Page/Lori Maddox situation, just in terms of how Engelhardt looks back on it

no big surprise that a writer-director-producer would have skills at manipulating people to do what he pleased

― A is for (Aimless), 17. december 2018 21:03 (two hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

If this is taken for granted, then absolutely nothing involving Allen and Farrow is hard to figure out anymore.

WA sues Amazon for $68 M

https://variety.com/2019/biz/news/woody-allen-amazon-lawsuit-1203131466/

like i'm still reading these articles out of morbid curiosity but when i got to that part i just realized there's no way i'm ever gonna figure these ppl out.

I love how every accuser is always accused in turn for just doing it for the money, meanwhile Woody Allen is just out their claiming that he has 68 million on the line in a case where his camp has had some very nasty counter-accusations.

Nobody on the accusing-Woody side has been counteraccused of doing it for the money.

Allen's ruthless POS behavior toward his accusers just makes me think it's more likely that the accusations are true.

let's say he (or anyone) is innocent. What is the non-POS way to proceed?

(btw, there is one accusation.)

I am going to hang up and listen, bcz i'm not getting drawn into this Celebrity Mentalism shit.

A non-POS way to proceed could for instance be not to sue Mia Farrow for custody immediately after hearing about the accusation. That was a supremely POS thing to do.

was it also a "POS thing to do" when mia farrow abused her kids?

Difference is, my example was something that actually happened.

let's say he (or anyone) is innocent. What is the non-POS way to proceed?