Cate Blanchett makes a statement about Dylan Farrow’s open letter

wenn21045513

Here are some photos of Cate Blanchett at the Santa Barbara International Film Festival over the weekend. Cate was being honored with the “Outstanding Performer of the Year” Award for her work in Blue Jasmine. Cate wore this Maison Martin Margiela Spring 2014 dress. Thoughts? I think it’s an interesting design, just enough sparkle to be glamorous but not too much where she looks like Vanna White. I love the dress with that cream-colored coat – that’s a great look! My one complaint is the I think she should have pulled her hair back. Then this would have been perfect.

Cate made her appearance at Santa Barbara just as the NY Times published Dylan Farrow’s essay about Woody Allen. Dylan name-checked Cate Blanchett specifically, I believe in attempt to call out Cate and all of the actors who work with Woody. Cate did address Dylan’s essay specifically, telling THR: “It’s obviously been a long and painful situation for the family and I hope they find some resolution and peace.” It’s worth noting that Cate is not a Woody Allen regular – Blue Jasmine was her first time being directed by Woody, and he wrote the part specifically for Cate. He’s been campaigning for her too.

THR had an analysis piece on the timing of Dylan Farrow’s essay, and this THR writer seems to think that the Farrow family is specifically targeting Cate and her Oscar chances:

Is Cate Blanchett’s best actress Oscar for her performance in Woody Allen’s Blue Jasmine as assured as most people believe? Probably — but being called out on the New York Times’ website for associating with an alleged child molester certainly won’t help her cause.

…The question of the minds of many is why Farrow, who has heretofore maintained a low public profile, would choose to publicly discuss her history with Allen now? The timing and focus of her piece certainly suggest, to me, that she would like to derail any chance that Allen or those associated with him on his latest film, Blue Jasmine, have of receiving additional awards recognition at the Oscars on March 2. The film was nominated for three Oscars — best actress (Cate Blanchett), best supporting actress (Sally Hawkins) and best original screenplay (Allen) — on Jan. 16, and the final round of voting will take place from Feb. 14-25.

… Last month, Allen was presented with a lifetime achievement Golden Globe Award, in absentia. Kristof writes of Farrow, “She says that when she heard of the Golden Globe award being given to Allen she curled up in a ball on her bed, crying hysterically.” On the night of the presentation, Ronan Farrow, her 26-year-old brother and the host of a new show on MSNBC, tweeted, “Missed the Woody Allen tribute – did they put the part where a woman publicly confirmed he molested her at age 7 before or after Annie Hall?”

But Dylan Farrow, who described herself now as “happily married” (Kristof mentioned that she lives in Florida under a different name), noted that she has managed to handle Allen’s other recent awards recognition better. “Last [month],” she wrote, “Woody Allen was nominated for his latest Oscar. But this time, I refuse to fall apart.”

However, she then proceeded to rather provocatively target those who have professionally associated with Allen: “But others are still scared, vulnerable, and struggling for the courage to tell the truth. The message that Hollywood sends matters for them. What if it had been your child, Cate Blanchett? Louis CK? Alec Baldwin? What if it had been you, Emma Stone? Or you, Scarlett Johansson? You knew me when I was a little girl, Diane Keaton. Have you forgotten me? Woody Allen is a living testament to the way our society fails the survivors of sexual assault and abuse.”

Only Farrow herself can say what her objective was in writing this piece when and how she did. But, whether intended or not, the byproduct of her actions may well be that some Academy members will think twice before supporting Allen or those who have chosen to associate with him on Blue Jasmine when they fill out their Oscar ballots. And while that won’t matter much for Allen and Hawkins’ prospects — they were both considered to be long shots well before this brouhaha — it could, conceivably, make the road to victory for Blanchett, who is a heavy favorite — having already won best actress Critics’ Choice, Golden Globe and SAG, New York Film Critics Circle, Los Angeles Film Critics Association and National Society of Film Critics awards — a little bumpier.

[From The Hollywood Reporter]

While I found Dylan Farrow’s essay powerful and moving, and I’m at the point where I believe her claims and wish that there was some way to make Woody pay for his crimes, I’m uncomfortable with this idea that we should hold someone like Cate – or any actor who has worked with Woody – responsible for his actions. I’m also uncomfortable with the idea that Dylan Farrow’s op-ed comes in the heat of this year’s Oscar season, and I think THR is right that it seems targeted at Cate’s Oscar campaign. Just think… it was just two years ago when Woody won yet another Oscar for Original Screenplay for Midnight In Paris. Why not then? While I think Dylan has gotten to a point in her life when she’s ready to discuss what she’s been through right now, it does feel like the Farrow family is trying to make a point to target the actors who have worked with Woody in recent years when I believe this should all be on Woody. No moving targets.

Also, Ronan Farrow has tweeted his support for his sister and Woody’s lawyers are still scrambling to issue statements.

wenn21045498

wenn21046226

Photos courtesy of WENN.

 

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

317 Responses to “Cate Blanchett makes a statement about Dylan Farrow’s open letter”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. bns says:

    I agree that we shouldn’t hold the actors responsible. Cate and the other actors who have worked with Woody (except for Diane Keaton) are involved with him on a professional level, not a personal one.

    Some people are disappointed in her statement, but what else was she supposed to do? Bash him while promoting his movie?

    • MoxyLady007 says:

      I hold anyone willing to work for or with a known pedophile or rapist personally responsible for any further acclaim or societal acceptance that comes the a users way as a result of their association. It’s reprehensible to further the career of a monster.

      • Seattlemomma says:

        Absolutely agree 100%.

      • Tessa says:

        Ditto. Supporting and enabling the success of a pedophile isn’t exactly something to be overlooked and easily forgiven.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        I agree. I can’t separate the professional from the personal when it comes to harming a child or working with someone who did. It’s like making a public statement that the victim doesn’t matter.

      • Liv says:

        A known pedophile or rapist? Oh come on. We should take Dylan serious, but we should also consider the fact that there’s a possibilty that Allen is innocent. I suggest you watch “The Hunt” with Mads Mikkelsen.

      • Gretchen says:

        @ Liv

        Yes he could possibly be innocent, but I don’t know how watching a fictional film about a false sexual abuse accusation is going to inform anyone on the matter?

        Whether fictional or not it is a such a shame when media focuses on false rape/sexual abuse allegations as they are by far in the minority and give the general public the idea that false allegations are more common than they actually are. The perpetuation of this belief only makes it harder for victims to be believed and have the perpetrators face justice in real life.

        The idea in films like that of ‘innocent man being wrongly accused and whole communities siding with the victim’ are grossly misrepresentative of the reality that abusers are usually protected and their victims publicly eviscerated, humiliated and shamed.

      • eliza says:

        @Liv- If you are going to cite cases of wrongfully accusing abusers, please do not use a movie as an example. It really weakens your point tremendously.

      • Rose says:

        @Moxy I agree completely. I can’t in good conscience support him or Polanski or someone who wins awards for their movies. Maybe I’m overly sensitive on the topic but I just can’t.

      • Jem says:

        As a survivor of childhood abuse of this nature, I absolutely agree a gazillion percent.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        @Gretchen
        Very well said. I agree with you completely.

        @Liv
        How do you suppose Allen grew close enough to his current wife to take nude pictures of her when she was underage? When she was living in his lover’s home, as her daughter? He may be many things, but innocent isn’t one of them. Look at the pattern of his behavior. He has no boundaries or respect for appropriate behavior or fatherhood. I know he was not her father, but he had to use and abuse that relationship to get close to her. He married a “woman” more than half his age. He makes my skin crawl.
        I believe Dylan, and would regardless, but his subsequent behavior makes it seem even more likely.

      • stellar says:

        I agree…if you’re willing to work for a pedo rapist you’re disgusting. I’m tired of actors and musicians getting passes…if the guy who owns the bakery down the st had the same personal profile as woody Allen would u take it kids to grab a cupcake there? Would u drop in an application? No. They are only interested in accolades and money. Screw all of them. I’ve never watched a woody Allen film in my life and I’m not missing out on anything.

      • Liv says:

        @Gretchen: There was a case in Germany recently in which a teacher was accused of raping his collegue. He went to jail for years before it was made clear that the woman was mentally ill and made it all up. The film – in my opinion – shows how a life can be destroyed just because of accusations.

        Like I said, I tend to believe Dylan and I also agree that victims have to be protected more. In this case though, in my opinion, it’s not that crystal-clear, because he was never convicted nor did he admit the crime. That doesn’t mean that it didn’t happen, but what I want to point out is that we should try to consider all facts and not do a witch-hunt.

        @GoodNamesAllTaken: Please read my comments again. I said that I tend to think that Dylan’s accusations are true. I didn’t say that he’s innocent, just that there’s still the possibilty that he is. That’s not my opinion, that’s rationally thinking.

      • FLORC says:

        Agree with you ladies.
        Dylan has tried many ways to tell her story, but as always Hollywood will side with a person who could kill babies in the streets (extreme, I know), but as long as they’re making others money Hollywood will look the other way.

        And Cate isn’t addressing this directly. Her statement was very vague and PC, but at least she said something.

        Liv
        So many that have been violated keep silent to avoid undeserved shame and blame for the actions of someone else. The odds are if a victim speaks up they are telling the truth. Sadly, some people do tell fibs of being assaulted, but the percentage is so small yet taints the whole pool.
        It is your opinion. Rationality isn’t you scapegoat.

      • mellie says:

        Can I get an amen! If we are hearing about this stuff, then these actors and actresses have most likely known about this stuff for years yet continued to work for him so they could advance their careers…selfish. I hope she gets her a$$ beat come Oscar time…

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        @Liv
        Sorry, I didn’t mean to sound so hostile towards you. It’s the situation that upsets me, and I feel very passionately about victims of child abuse being dismissed while the predator is protected. The “oh I believe you, but I wasn’t there, so…” mentality. There’s no way for Dylan to prove this happened, and every award he receives or famous person who is thrilled to work with him must be a slap in the face. I just feel so helpless and angry about it.

      • nicegirl says:

        I agree, MoxieLady.

        Incest has touched my life (although I am not a personal survivor of such abuse), and the effects are devastating. Life long, never to forget, family ruining, devastation. And it did not even happen TO me.

        I love award season, and I will say that Dylan’s letter and the preceding recent acclaim of Woody Allen certainly has caused a lot of thought on my part about the perpetrator who hurt children in my family. I too have worried about his access to others (which he has) and I too have SOUNDED THE ALARM that this person is dangerous, unsafe near children, unworthy of accolades and the trappings of material success. However, NO ONE is listening. Even if you can prove allegations, the statute of limitations are an obstacle – and in my family, the survivors are still oppressed by others in the family, and have developed Stockholm Syndrome, so are unable and unwilling to pronounce the truth of the perpetrator. I have personally called the local authorities in his area (with new information, in addition to background from 20 years ago), made reports, contacted the military, with which he is a member, contacted the FBI, and yet, he prowls. I have called the family of his wife. I guess what I am trying to say is that at times, it has felt like I am a disgusting complicit a-hole for not shouting from the highest rooftop that folks should STAY AWAY from him! Like a public service announcement of sorts, I guess. It is so, so hard, and I admit, I have such a difficult time navigating my own world, because of these crimes against my family. The knowledge that one so evil is free contaminates my world, and I too wish I could do SOMETHING to make him unable to hurt anyone else, EVER.

        I commend Dylan. I am proud of her. I think, YOU GO, DYLAN!!!

      • Liv says:

        @GoodNamesAllTaken: I totally agree with you. I find this case so difficult. There are pros and cons and we just have to judge what is told to us. Like you said, Dylan can’t proof anymore that her accusations are true and Allen can’t proof that he’s not guilty. On the one hand you have to protect the possible victim, and on the other you can’t judge the possible offender without evidence.

        @Florc: I don’t know what your problem is. It’s just possible that he’s not guilty, you can’t deny that. Do I think that he molested her? Most likely.

      • Marya says:

        I agree completely, and I will never see one of his films. None of my money will ever go toward this pedo or anyone associated with him.

      • MyHiddles says:

        I heard that. No passes for anyone willing to work with pedos. As much as I love Cate, I’m not willing to give her a pass on that.

      • HoustonGrl says:

        Agree completely. My father was sexually abused and so I know first hand the cover-up, denial, pain, blaming-the-victim scenario that is associated with these situations. People still say things like “did this really happen?” or “are you sure your memory isn’t distorted?” I think it’s because as normal human beings, we cannot fully grasp the horror of such a situation and therefore denial is the first response. My father still cannot look at a picture of his abuser, more than 40 years later. I APPLAUD this NYT article because I am certain it took a great deal of courage for her to write it. These sexual criminals deserve to be completely ostracized from society, not only because of the heinous nature of their crimes, but because they pose a danger to society. Yet most of them walk free because these crimes are so hard to prove. The result is that we would rather put our confidence in a sick, mentally ill adult than in a young girl who has no incentive to lie and be humiliated and shamed. Imagine, this man (WA) raped a child, raped a child, raped a child. How many times does it need to be said before people hear it? Believe it? This is a man who was willing to destroy a child. He probably ruined her ability to enjoy sex as an adult woman. The damage cannot fully be assessed or quantified. This is the suffering she will carry with her until the day she dies, suffering that will impact future generations in her family. Yes, I agree with Moxy Lady, he needs to go. To jail, preferably. He certainly doesn’t deserve to be lauded by Hollywood. In this case, I refuse to make a distinction between personal and professional realms.

      • Violet says:

        I agree 100%.

        Cate Blanchett used to be one of my favorite actors, but I’ve lost all respect for her and all the people that continue to work with, or otherwise support, Woody Allen.

      • OGmutha says:

        You and the rest of the hysterical witch hunters ASSumes he’s guilty. Back in the 90s, when the allegations were first made (by a jilted Mia Farrow AFTER she discovered the affair with Soonyi), they were summarily dismissed on the grounds that Dylan seemed to have been “coached by her mother.” FACT.

        This is an emotionally charged topic, and you know what they say about opinions… I think what people are truly upset about is that Allen made the mistake of falling in love with his girlfriend’s adopted daughter. A big mistake for sure, but not one that merits being accused of being a child molester. Soonyi Previn was an adult when she engaged in an affair with Allen. He was never her “father figure,” that role was already taken by Andre Previn–her real adoptive father–a man who btw, was married to Dori Previn (Mia Farrow’s friend) at the time he had an affair with Mia Farrow. She was 25, he was 41, sound familiar? Dori Previn had a mental breakdown due to the betrayal and actually wrote a song about it called “Beware of Young Girls.” It was right on, as Farrow eventually left Previn for Allen’s greener pastures and brighter star. Does the irony escape not only Mia Farrow, but everyone else?

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JskHB-QRHu4

        P.S. Please people, get a life. Go to school, volunteer at your church, help others, stop shopping, whatever. Do something that will make you feel good about yourself. Cultivate love and compassion. Perhaps this will make it easier to understand a compassionate statement when it’s made (ie: Ms. Blanchett’s); and to stop wasting your time judging people online who are otherwise busy with awesome careers and lives. That goes for me too, I’m outta here, peace!

      • KB says:

        @stellar the claims were of molestation not rape

      • Meredith says:

        @ goodnamesalltaken :
        Exactly. Sucking up to Allen, starring in one of his movies, cooing about his genius. It makes the victim feel like they don’t matter. And I don’t understand why someone like Cate Blanchett who has star power to burn would do this. She doesn’t need to associate with someone like him. He’s not that great of an “artist”. Which leads to the obvious conclusion : maybe she just doesn’t care about children like Dylan Farrow and what happens to them. Pretty sad.

      • MiMi says:

        Yet Mia’s still a long time friend and supporter of Roman Polanski.

      • fairy godmother says:

        I am just relieved so far actors have not come out and openly supported Allen the way they did with Polanski ( they brushed over his pedophile conviction claiming he was an “artist”). What a heinous act to attempt on any innocent child- ever. I wish the facts were reported as well. Reportedly: Farrow found a vast collection of photos of nude children in his garage. They did not prosecute in order to prevent any further trauma on the little girl- even police report or prosecuting attorney said plenty of evidence was there.
        It is interesting to note the statues of limitations have not run out. Dylan could actually pursue this in a court of law now that she has found her voice and courage to speak so candidly. I am aware there were reports that Farrow and Allen split was rather nasty, but I do not believe Mia used her daughter to get back at Allen imo. Personally I prefer to form an opinion based on facts. Those are only a few facts I am aware of.

      • John Wayne Lives says:

        I have to agree. Im struggling with this. I really like her, but I am a survivor of over a decade of sexual abuse, and her response made my heart sink. I guess when I saw the title, I was hoping for a guns blazing for the abused kind of response… sigh. ..

      • ol cranky says:

        but he is not a known pedophile or rapist and, considering Mia Farrow’s inconsistencies when discussing Allen’s involvement with the children and the fact that the investigators/clinicians found no evidence of any molestation (which occurred during a supervised visit?), it is quite possible that there was no molestation by Allen. People are disgusted by his relationship with Soon-Yi (as am I) but that doesn’t mean he’s a pedophile. Farrow has her own sordid history and an understandable reason to hold a grudge, she may hold Allen as a pedophile because he engaged in a sexual relationship with her barely adult daughter and it is just as reasonable to wonder if Farrow created and cultivated Dylan’s memories of her molestation based on a very warped belief she was protecting her daughter. Someone did a number on Dylan Farrow but it is not clear who, exactly, that person was – the only people who know for sure are Mia Farrow and Woody Allen

      • jj says:

        I don’t know if he did it or not but he sure is creepy as hell, and if I were not completely broke and needed a job desperately I would not work with him. Besides his movies are lazy and lame, not that great, more like soap operas for the cinema. Never understood why some people said he was such a great director. I bet Cate is not really hoping for an Oscar win now.

      • mercy says:

        @OGmutha:

        FACTS: Prosecutors and child psychologists believed believed Dylan. Soon-Yi was the sister of Allen’s children with Farrow. He took sexually explicit pictures of her when she was a teenager.

        http://www.vanityfair.com/magazine/archive/1992/11/farrow199211

        OBSERVATIONS: You don’t sound particularly calm yourself. You subject Mia Farrow to the kind of “witch hunt” you claim to abhor, and are you not judging people? Seems like it. You have no idea what people do vis a vis charitable activities, work, etc. based solely on their message board comments. You only sound compassionate to Cate and to some extent Allen, imo, but no one has suggested you lead an anything less than “awesome” life because they disagree with you.

      • samr says:

        Until they are shunned from society they wont stop! They must pay for their crimes. You don’t let rabid dogs run around kids!

      • ncmagnolia says:

        As a victim of abuse myself, I agree. I love Cate Blanchett SO much. I’d like to see her win Best Actress bc she’s lost in the past for performances that truly warranted the award. Her performance as Jasmine was indeed an award winning turn. But after this misstep, or turning away from the (true, I wholeheartedly believe) accusations leveled at Woody Allen, she doesn’t get another ‘get out of jail free’ card.

        I believe with all my heart that Dylan Farrow is speaking the truth. Her words and feelings resonate far too personally with me. I have felt her words since I was six years old.

      • The Wizz says:

        Agree, but the guy has olny been subject to allegations, not to any conviction and is therefore not a known pedophile at all! Unlike Mia’s brother.

    • Liv says:

      Agreed. I don’t what I would do if I were in her shoes – I mean I don’t know if I had worked with him – but she can’t speak against him at the moment. It’s the busiest time of the year for an actor/actress right now.

      Plus she probably has other things to worry about. Apparently she was close to Philipp Seymour Hoffman and his partner and visited her yesterday.

      • annaloo. says:

        Well…. she could speak out against it, and take a stand. She would give up her Oscar and the goodwill of some people in Hollywood, but I think more would follow her lead because that would be BOLD. She’s Cate fucking Blanchett, she is respected and I think more people would stand up for victims. I’m not sure she realizes how much cultural power she has – I think she has quite a bit of it and she’s in a position to make a powerful statement.

        It is a line crossing move, but she definitely has a choice. I, too, do not know what I would do…

      • LAK says:

        No one is holding a gun to her head to accept the oscar. Marlon Brando and George C. Scott refused to accept their oscars. I fully believe that cate has the talent to overcome any such refusal like the afore mentioned actors.

    • LB says:

      I’m not disappointed in her statement – she said what she could.

      The way Dylan’s letter was written has the unfortunate effect of putting those in his movies and those who have watched his movies on the defensive. Including those who know nothing of his sordid history. It unfortunately puts these people on the same side as Woody in the sense that everyone has to defend their actions (not in the sense that they don’t believe her).

      Why should the audience and the actors all have to answer for what Woody allegedly did to the Farrow family when people have varying degrees of understanding on what happened? Some people just watch the movies; they don’t investigate the director. To date, my sister knows nothing of Polanski’s crimes. She doesn’t think knowing the backgrounds of those involved in the movie is relevant to the experience. I can’t presume people have equal levels of knowledge.

      I can imagine some of the self centered actors know very little of the sexual abuse allegations until now. I think Cate’s response, albeit neutral, was the only way for her to handle it.

      I feel terrible that Dylan was victimized. I’m glad she told her story. She could have done a better job of it though – put it in a way to inform the public without making them feel ashamed.

      • Tessa says:

        Shame is what she was going for. The public should feel ashamed for allowing him to thrive after what he did to her. That’s the point.

      • Lee says:

        I agree with Tessa.

        Those who choose to knowingly associate with child molesters should feel ashamed and then some. What’s the old saying? If you lie with dogs you’re going to get fleas.

        Dylan made an excellent point: what if it had been any of the children of Cate, Alec, etc who Woody preyed on. I bet they wouldn’t be so eager to work with him then. But since it wasn’t their child, then I guess it doesn’t matter to them.

      • DrM says:

        A classy statement from a classy lady. Do I believe Dylan? Yes I do. Do I like Allen? No I don’t. Do I watch his movies? No I do not. Do I tar Cate Blanchett with the same brush? No.

    • Stinky says:

      Cate’s reply was perfect. And I’m not saying anyone should or should not appear in an Allen film. I’m not passing judgment online (though who’s to say what’s in my heart).

      What I will say is that I don’t buy this conspiracy nonsense. Want to know WHY Dylan responded now? Because THE MEDIA made an issue out of Ronan’s tweets. Ronan tweeted his hilarious Father’s Day tweet LAST YEAR, and the media went into a tizzy and then it all died down. Mia was cagey about Ronan’s paternity in an article MONTHS AGO, and then the media went into a tizzy and then it all died down, except now people want to tie that somehow into Ronan orchestrating it so he could land a job at MSNBC? Please.

      Then Mia made her point in a non-confrontational tweet during the Golden Globes. It was Ronan’s subsequent tweet that worked the media into a frenzy again. Now everyone’s calling out the Farrows, Mia tweets in defense of her son’s tweet and people see this entire conspiracy. Articles are written about it, Mia is called a liar and brainwasher, Ronan is called Machiavellian, and everyone wonders why Dylan has never said anything. Her silence must mean it was all made up by Mia.

      So, with everyone getting on her family’s case, Dylan (Malone) writes her letter to shut up the ish-stirrers and let them know that she is not asking anyone else to fight her battles now. (Maybe Ronan, who IS in touch with his sister, unlike Woody, had seen what all this media hype around Woody and his films was doing to his sister and, like a protective sibling, had decided to speak out, the side effect being it ignited a firestorm, as he refused to let his sister’s suffering be swept under the rug. And Dylan decided enough was enough.) But now, because she finally spoke up for herself, Dylan has an agenda? She called out a BUNCH of people, not just Cate. Her more important and relevant issue was with Diane Keaton. But, no. That’s not media worthy, so we’ve got to manufacture an Oscar scandal. That’s the ticket! What a scoop! Blame the timing on the media and the rise in importance of Twitter to the MSM. In my humble, valid opinion, : ) if you look at the chronology of events, the timing of the Oscars is just coincidental.

      • bns says:

        I agree with this. My original comment was in defense of Cate’s response, but I am glad that Dylan wrote such an honest letter that will help bring her some closure, expose Woody’s nasty behavior, and help other victims of abuse.

      • Peppa says:

        ITA. I think her letter was a direct response to that Daily Beast article.

      • Zwella Ingrid says:

        Thank you. Well put @Stinky.

      • ParisPucker says:

        I totally disagree with you @STINKY, Cate’s response was most certainly *not* ‘perfect’. It was dismissive and meant to separate herself from the situation (even though i totally adore her as an amazingly talented actress, this careful crafted response was dismissive). Basically, I’m echoing all previous responses to bns’ comment that work and personal life should remain separate. Did the masses agree that the same should apply to Bill Clinton or any public official? If presidents aren’t excused, then why should a random director be?!?? Personal life is an extension of the person and to celebrate any aspect of that person is to celebrate choices that person made in their personal life. Giving an Oscar (elected by a committee) is validation of one’s work in film. The whole notion of creating awards is to separate the real gems from what else is out there, to highlight one individual for their ‘work’. Of course the timing is questionable – and good for Dylan for being so smart about her timing to reclaim herself after what this bastard did to her. It’s brilliant and I hope this gives her one iota of peace, something WA robbed from her without remorse (and worse!!) having any notion of what he did was wrong because clearly, this guy is a sociopath. He adds insult to injury by stating that Dylan is a victim of his mother’s manipulation in having this ‘memory’ implanted by her mother. Read the reports and countless stories from nannies, visiting friends at the house, and observations of Dylan’s behavior as a child that are classic children’s reactions to being victims to this type of abuse (the one that stood out to me was her ‘suddenly feeling sick’ or having a headache whenever her father would come over). Cate is obviously a real talent and seems to be a lovely mother and person; however, this does not excuse her shielded support of Woody Allen by releasing such a dismissive message to Dylan’s open letter to the media. I don’t claim to know what would have been the proper response, I just know that this wasn’t the one.

      • I Choose Me says:

        My feelings on the subject also.

        I will add to that if Cate works with Allen AFTER THIS then she will in effect have made her stance clear and I will have to cross her off my list of actors I admire.

      • Ctkat1 says:

        @Stinky: totally agree and you laid it out better than I could. I don’t think she chose now to derail Cate Blanchett’s Oscar chances; I think she chose now because her story was once again in the media, and this seemed like to time to tell her side.

    • L says:

      Except Cate gushes about him during every awards she’s won this year. Woody’s such a great writer for women, Woody’s such a great director for women. Other that when Penelope Cruz won for Vicky/Christy/Barcelona-there hasn’t been that kind of praise for him in the last few years.

      Plus this isn’t new. The first reports came out over 20 years ago, there was the VF article 18 months ago-hollywood just doesn’t mind working with someone that abuses children. Look at Polanski. I’m sure Dylan Farrow woke up a week ago and thought, “I’m going to throw my entire life into turmoil to make sure Woody doesn’t with a fifth Oscar.” /sarcasm Her timing is probably based on years and years of processing the horrible things done to her. Sure, maybe his recent lifetime achievement award and the support of her mother and brother gave her the courage to speak up about it, but to think it was calculated to throw off award’s season voters is incredibly distasteful.

      • bns says:

        I’m not questioning Dylan’s timing and I don’t care about how it effects Oscar voting. My point was that Cate is getting a lot of backlash for releasing such a neutral statement, but I don’t blame her, or any of the other actors who have worked with Woody in the past, for not wanting to get involved.

        However, after hearing from the victim herself in such a powerful letter, I would side-eye anyone who chooses to work with Woody after this.

      • LeLe25 says:

        Cate gets shade because the reason he still gets work in Hollywood is BECAUSE great actors are willing to work with him.

        If I know enough as a everyday consumer to avoid Woody Allen’s work, then she as a Hollywood insider certainly knows the tale and chose to work with him anyway.

      • MorticiansDoItDeader says:

        @nicegirl, you did the very best you could do.

        As I’ve stated here previously, I’m a childhood sexual abuse survivor and, although I didn’t tell anyone until the age of 28, I recently had a chance to stand up to a convicted pedophile (and those protecting him).

        The boyfriend of my husband’s aunt was convicted of raping his 3 year old son, and the family kept it secret from us. My Sister in law found him on the Megan’s law registry and told us. I immediately made the decision never to bring my children around him again and was disowned by the family. They called me judgemental and said he was “wrongly accused” (even though he was accused, convicted and signed a plea agreement). None of the family cared to hear about my experience and why I felt it important to error on the side of caution. I know I did the right thing, but it pains me knowing that he has access to other small children (cousins who are still brought around).

      • katy says:

        @Morticians, I think you did the absolutely right thing.

        My mom had a lot of brothers and sisters (9 of them!) and the eldest boy was accused by two of the youngest girls (his sisters) of raping them. Nothing was ever done to him. One aunt of mine gets anxiety attacks so badly she can’t leave her room for a full week (although she’s stayed in there longer).

        The other aunt can’t let a man sexually touch her without feeling sick to her stomach (the shocking thing is that she got married to a wonderful man, who understands completely what she has gone through and how it affected her, and wouldn’t make her do anything she didn’t want to do).

        After my own mother found out, she refused to let my sister or I be around the uncle. She got a lot of crap for it, but she said that our safety was more important.

        So kudos to you for keeping your children safe.

      • Zwella Ingrid says:

        @Morticians, You are to be congratulated for doing the right thing, and proactively protecting your family. Shame on those who would cover this up and put other children at risk!

      • Nan says:

        +1 @ bns

        Until now there were rumours that were not supported by official investigation which had cleared Allen. There is no justification to blame people who opted to work with him. (And that makes his case different than Polanski’s who is publicly avoiding justice). After Dylan Farrow’s open accusation the situation is naturally different now but blaming people who have worked with Allen in the past … nah.

  2. Kinchicago says:

    Did all of the Farrow/Allen children change their names or just Ronan and Dylan?

  3. T.fanty says:

    While I fully agree that she has no obligation, I think Cate looks unfortunately self-interested turning up to collect an award only a day or so after the letter was published. I think that decency might have dictated a more low-key response. Cate may be gorgeous and talented, but here she just comes across as typical Hollywood.

  4. LadyMTL says:

    I’m torn about this, because on one hand I do agree that it’s not right to hold actors responsible for Woody’s actions. On the other hand, it would send a powerful message if some of those same actors said “You know what, I don’t want to work with him because of allegation XYZ.” I mean, look what happened to Roman Polanski or – to a lesser extent – Chris Brown. Why should Woody Allen and those who work with him be given a pass (so to speak) ?

    • Red32 says:

      Plenty of people are still working with Polanski, they just have to go to Europe to do it. He’s won awards that he can’t collect. It’s the US authorities who are after Polanski, not Hollywood.

    • KB says:

      Christoph Waltz, Kate Winslet, Jodie Foster, and John C. Reilly all worked with Polanski on Carnage (2011).

    • mayamae says:

      Members of Hollywood have taken a stand in the past. I particularly remember Elia Kazan (who named names and contributed to others being black balled in Hollywood) being honored and the reaction. Ed Harris, Amy Madigan, and Nick Nolte sat with arms crossed, while the rest stood and applauded. It was calm and non-confrontational, but they stood by their beliefs.

      There is no reason Cate HAD to take this roll. She’s at the top of her game, she could work with anyone. For some reason she wanted to work with Woody Allen. If we were talking about Natalie Portman or Gwyneth Paltrow, beauty and red carpet looks wouldn’t even enter the conversation. They would be flat out vilified.

      Hollywood loves money way more than they love Woody Allen. If fans didn’t see his movies, he would not get backing for his films. It’s that simple. So while we’re pointing fingers at the actors, let’s point the finger at fans as well.

  5. SamiHami says:

    I get where she is coming from. At least from here forward any actor who associates with Allen is just as bad as any actor that associates with Polanski. In either case they are supporting a predatory pedophile. Actually, I though Allen should have been shunned after he married his daughter (OK, I know she isn’t biologically his daughter, but her was her father figure and that definitely makes it all seem very incestuous). It has been obvious for many years that there is something terribly wrong with Allen and while these revelations about Dylan are distressing, they are, sadly, not particular surprising.

    • Mallory says:

      Sure but what most find disturbing and horrible, in the Hollywood cesspool is perfectly acceptable. And this argument about making all about Cate, is incredibly shallow and ridiculous. So what if it shames the actors and actress that work with Allen, it’s not like it’s gonna stop them from winning future awards. So it’s a straw-man design to switch the attention from the issue at hand. Like the one about her brother’s new show at MSNBC – sure to bring all the haters out.
      It’s the victim’s right to speak when it’s convenient for her, it’s not ours to judge when she does that. Or how convenient it is cuz oh my, the Oscars, always a great opportunity to celebrate rapists, pedophiles, women beaters, homophobes, transphobes and other abusers.
      I like Cate, the role was too good to pass out, but she should know better. To hijack a Woody supporter: “art is [not] more important than rape”. Unless it’s awards season, then God forbid, Dylan’s confession should ruin Cate’s chances.

  6. Boxy Lady says:

    I was thinking about this over the weekend. If she is going to call out the actors who worked with Woody Allen, she needs to be fair and call out ALL the ones who worked with Woody since she was 7 and not just the recent ones.

    • Mallory says:

      Why talk at all… if she has to humor everyone’s popular demands. Why not from when she was still an embryo? This type of righteousness is absurd. And to what purpose, should she do that? To show how many in Hollywood are and have been enabling a pedophile since forever. Since when do this guys have a moral fiber in their body? Exceptions be noted.

    • Gretchen says:

      I can’t see how it would possibly be her responsibility to do that, and I daresay the NYTimes editors would probably not want to include a list of names 100x longer than the letter itself. If people want a list of all of his co-workers over the years they can put on their big girl panties and go look it up on IMDb.

    • Meg says:

      And to be fair she called out Diane Keaton who knew her when she was a little girl and this abuse was occurring. I find this whole thing horrific and as a survivor of incest I can put myself in her shoes and I just find it absolutely horrifying to be revictimized over and over the way she has been by people dismissing her claims in the most insulting ways. She didn’t choose to live in this crazy family, she didn’t choose to be abused, she didn’t choose to have people worship the man who abused her. I just find her incredibly brave to put herself out there the way she did when she really didn’t have to. I am proud of her and I do hope the people she named and all those who have worked with him and are considering working with him think about her now. But they probably won’t.

      • Sloane Wyatt says:

        The first major actor who’s worked with Woody Allen who stands up and says “I regret working with a director who married his lover’s daughter, and I in no way wish to be tainted with any hint of child abuse.” would be lauded for their strength of character. They also would be unlikely to work again because of how many powerful scumbags there are in Hollywood with their own skeletons to hide.

    • Boxy Lady says:

      I remember when these allegations first came to light in the early 90s. And I’m sure anyone else who paid any attention to news stories back then remember as well because it was *everywhere*. Blue Jasmine is not the first Woody Allen movie to be released since that time. So why mostly use the names of those involved in that one film? Dylan’s side of the story wasn’t even published until last fall but Blue Jasmine was released in July. What about those who chose to work with Woody in the 90s when these allegations were fresh in everyone’s minds? What about, for example, Mira Sorvino and Penelope Cruz, who both won Oscars for their performances in Woody’s films and are now members of the Academy and can vote for or against the performances nominated in Blue Jasmine? And yes, Meg, I saw that Dylan called out Diane Keaton and I’m glad to see that. My point is, if Dylan is so compelled to name names, why did she pick those specific ones?

  7. Annie says:

    There’s nothing the actors can do because there is no evidence on this. These are serious allegations and if you know the guy, you cannot approach them as if they were bible because you don’t know for sure. You’re just working together. You cannot throw away your job for something that was never proven. Not even Michael Jackson got that treatment from people. And this is not like the Polanski situation, who BY THE WAY, Mia Farrow is still very good friends with. Bet you hadn’t thought about that, huh? Guess what else? She’s supported him in the past. She’s stood by him. This guy flee the country and Mia has publicly supported him in the press as recent as 2005.

    • Tessa says:

      Was Mia molested? Do you know how many victims of abuse don’t ever see justice because their parents are shoddy witnesses? Michael Jackson got away with everything for this reason. The victim was Dylan, and she will never see justice because her mom is a nut. It’s sad, not some kind of vindication for Woody.

      • LILA says:

        Soon yi like many other children has repeated the patterns in her family somehow. She is a victim as well, but the adults around her were not the beat examples. Mia herself was marrying much older powerful men, not being the most ethic while doing so. Her child Soo. Yi repeated the situation in an even more scandalous way, she was probably looking for the stability she lacked in her own terrible childhood. Woody is a predator, but Mia was very guilty too, and that includes her decades friendship with Polanski. I hope they get to find peace without hurting more people.
        And if they are going to call out actors form this year, the. Call out everybody since the scandal started, including the cameramen, grips, etc. why single some people out. That is unfair too.

    • Drea says:

      Mia Farrow sent out a tweet 2 days ago denying that she is friends with Roman Polanski.

      https://twitter.com/MiaFarrow/statuses/430053378107142144

    • eliza says:

      Incorrect about Mia still being friends with Polanski.

    • Soporificat says:

      Of course there is something actors can do. They can choose not to work with someone this immoral. I don’t really blame any struggling actor who has chosen to work on a Woody Allen film. It’s tough out there for actors. The people I have a problem with are the famous ones, who obviously had no moral qualms about working with him.

      As for Mia Farrow, she is not friends with Polanski. That is one of the smear tactics that Woody Allen’s supporters are using. She testified in his libel case on a factual matter of whether or not he was in New York. She didn’t sign that horrible letter of support for Polanski that was going around a couple of years ago which so many actors signed. She had publicly said she is not friends with him.

      However, as Tessa pointed out, none of that matters, since Mia Farrow is not the victim here. Dylan Farrow is. They are not interchangeable people, and Dylan is not responsible for her mother’s actions.

    • Artemis says:

      Who’s throwing their job away though? Is CB a struggling actor? Is it mandatory to work with Allen and do you get blacklisted when you refuse? No, no and no. So please spare me with these feeble excuses. Allen only works with (known) accomplished serious actors, A-listers. People with clout and visibility. People who latch onto goodwill causes for their image all the time but can’t for the life of them pick right from wrong when it’s about things they really care about: themselves and their career. Money and fame always precedes.

      And no, they’re not just ‘working together’. CB said in an interview she watched Weide’s documentary about Allen, she picks her films by director among other criteria and the film-making process is quite intimate process and requires promoting the director and his work usually. It’s not like she sits in an office detached from her boss, knowing nothing about his personal life. It’s all out there, she researched Allen and still wanted to work with him so you can take a seat.

      The Mia Farrow part is typical deflection. Dylan said her piece, it’s up to you to decide if you want to believe her.

  8. Little M says:

    For what I know, what happens tou you in your early life usually comes to haunt you as an adult. I think Dylan is now 28 years old and might have found the strength to do something about it.

    Are we sure she is the one who decided on the timing? I mean, maybe she is ready now and she wasn’t 2 years ago but it is obvious that the Oscar’s campaing is the right moment for the press to run the op-ed.

    As for Kate, and the other actors. I don’t know. I guess their can’t bite the hand that feeds them and WA is quite powerful. He is a creepy guy making creepy films but probably women in the industry have a thicker skin than I do and can tolerate his ways.

    All I can say is that I find many of his films offensive as a woman, and I think he considers us objects for his pleasure, so I don’t watch them. There are many other directors I’d rather support.

    • Christin says:

      The last part of your post describes why I would politely avoid working with him. I think his work is overrated, plus there is something far beyond quirky about him.

    • Latisse says:

      @Little M: I have never seen a Woody Allen film expressly because of the whole Soon Yi issue and reading the first Vanity Fair profile on the Dylan issue a couple years back — so I don’t understand what you mean about his films treating women like objects but I am honestly interested. Could you explain further?

    • Kiddo says:

      After seeing a few of them, they remind me of Elvis films with a running theme of good versus harpy/bad women, only with much better cinematography, and more sophisticated dialogue at an R rating. The women who are older seem to fall into a few categories: crazy or very neurotic, shrew-like or materialistic, (to name a few). The protagonist finds salvation in the company of the more naive, younger and less established female.

      The other theme is that the characters have no qualms about affairs within a small circle of friends, even between themsleves and best friends’ wives, and/or sisters’ and brothers’ significant others and whatnot.

      Granted, I haven’t seen all of his films, so my assessment is based on those that I have seen.

    • Artemis says:

      If only they wouldn’t allow themselves to be fed by shady people. CB isn’t poor and unaccomplished. It was her choice so I don’t pity her for receiving some backlash. She doesn’t have to work a day in her life anymore and she’ll still be rich and legendary.

      I find that his films all have a running theme of a crazy ex-gf, older men etc. Sorely dissapointed in Cate.

  9. Mata says:

    I believe Dylan’s claims. However, there was never an arrest or conviction. For anyone outside the family, the facts are muddy and mired with rumors. I can understand Cate or any other actor working with Woody a lot more than I can understand anybody supporting Polanski (as Mia Farrow has done).

    This has nothing to do with Cate or any other actor and I think continuing to stay out of it is her best option.

  10. lucy2 says:

    No one else is responsible for his actions, and though I have the utmost sympathy for the people he hurt, I don’t know that it’s appropriate to put a burden on people who have a purely professional relationship with him.
    How much of this terrible situation has been public over the years? I was really only aware of the Soon Yi thing for a long time, and just recently heard of the other abuse. It’s possible many of the actors didn’t know the full extent.
    I do hope that all of this becoming so much more public will put an end to the praise of him though, and now more actors will decline to work with him.

    • Latisse says:

      In the same way that we call out celebrities that pose with Terry Richardson, actors that work with Woody Allen should be called out. By working with him, they are validating his continued existence. If they are shamed out of working with him again in the future, then perhaps he can fade away entirely instead of continuing to remain at large; revered and respected.

  11. Greyson says:

    I think Dylan is right to raise the issue. When Mel Gibson had his freak out! the man was SHUNNED by Hollywood with the exception of a few longtime friends. The movies he directed after he funded himself and his career still hasn’t recovered.

    With time Hollywood loves to “forget” the scandals and crimes of their power players. This is the resurgence of Allen’s career with regards to regaining mainstream respectability. Dylan and her family wants what he did to NOT be forgotten. Cate, Alec, Diane and others are part of the problem because when they sign onto his movies they give him further legitimacy.

    Sucks for Cate, and while I’ve enjoyed her in many other movies, when you work with a controversial director it is to be expected you may be tainted to some extent for that role! It’s public knowledge — the allegations, his LOSING custody to his kids (you know something major has to happen to lose all visitation), and marrying his longtime partner’s teenage daughter.

    I don’t feel pity for ANY of the people mentioned in the letter. They want Allen to be exonerated because THEY BENEFIT as well for the roles they’ve played in his films.

    • Tessa says:

      You said it better than I could. This x 1000!

    • Mallory says:

      Precisely.
      Not to mention the double standards applied to women for lesser offenses.
      Winona Ryder lost her career for doing something that harmed no one, taking her years to come back to secondary roles.
      Meg Ryan cheated on Dennis Quaid with Russell Crowe, she’s black-listed, Crow goes on to win the Oscar. So on and so forth….
      This bitching about what amounts to banalities – “The poor actors. What must they be going through during this period” – is in poor taste and shows where do our priorities stand.

      • Gail says:

        Well said Mallory. Women are vilified but men are lauded. Even in this case, Mia is called crazy, Dylan is delusional but Woody is above all criticism.

      • Mallory says:

        Or they argue that “Well there are pedophiles out there but also in some cases the mothers’ coach their children like in that episode from Law and Order”. As if the sides are on equal footing. As if there are as many pedophiles out there as spiteful bitches traumatizing their children out of pettiness. This is what patriarchy does to women yet we choose to ignore it on a daily basis. Imagine if it had been a woman of color instead.
        And just because Mia’s been vocal about the issue and doesn’t take it meekly and submissively like any good woman should. Oh but she’s a hypocrite, a Polanski apologist. Slander, slander, slander, maybe something will stick.
        Protecting your kid from a predator does not make the mother, insane or maniacal or hysterical. Or as Stephen King put it “palpable bitchery”.

    • Holly says:

      Well said Greyson. We’re in an entirely different world than when Woody (and Polanski) were accused – now there are platforms for victims that didn’t exist before. Hopefully it will change the way that the scandals of the rich and famous have generally been handled, and they will no longer have the option of burying whatever the facts are, or being considered too talented to follow laws that are meant to protect children.

      There’s no right way for a kid/now-adult to handle this, and that’s just a fact. Even if no abuse other than growing up in that household and having her “father” start a sexual relationship with her underage sister took place, it’s still horrendous in it’s own right. I despise how the media is debating it as though it’s a matter of detail.

      Cate and anyone else is free to work with him, but there should be consequences, even if it’s only being called out and questioned; it’s just the negative side of working with someone married to their former daughter, period. Just saw Blue Jasmine this weekend and I don’t feel it was worth the struggle I went through about whether or not to watch it, and – sorry Cate (’cause I love you beyond all words) – but it wasn’t an Oscar-worthy performance or role (JMHO). I was struck by how Cate had morphed into Judy Davis from another WA movie (even down to the anthropologist bit), and the voice was unmistakable. A waste of her talent for the most part, honestly…

  12. Putchka says:

    What a mess this nebbish little man created. I don’t think Cate B. should be held accountable for his actions though. Also sick of hearing about The Daily Beast article. It was written by a friend and supporter of Allen’s.

  13. Tessa says:

    I do hold the actors responsible for working with the likes of Woody Allen and Roman Polanski. It’s such as ‘do as I say and not as I do’ attitude in Hollywood. If this was a conservative politician, or if these claims were made against one of the Duck Dynasty guys for example, he would be burned at the stake. But it’s Woody Allen, and Hollywood needs him and respects him, so you know things like molesting a seven year old can be overlooked. He got a tribute at the Golden Globes FFS. Actors have a choice, and they work with him, like molestation smolestation, I want to win an Oscar! It’s pathetic.

  14. queenfreddiemercury says:

    I disagree. Dylan talked about the abuse last year in Vanity Fair. And this was a big deal in 1992. I hate how this is being framed how poor Cate might not (but probably will) get her Oscar because of Woody Allen. We all knew who he was before she decided to work with him. My sympathy is with Dylan.

  15. TorontoE says:

    I think one of the reasons she called out actors is because WA knows all the facts and obviously feels no remorse, but she’s optimistic that others might stop (or at least stop and think) before working with him.

  16. whipmyhair says:

    So I have a question. An honest, no shade or judgement question.

    Why do you think that Dylans response to Woodys lifetime achievement award was curling into a ball and sobbing?

    I don’t quite understand the connection to her assault (which I believe happened) and the award. If anyone has some insight or comments it would be appreciated.

    • Kali says:

      Having to see her (alleged) abuser feted and celebrated by most of Hollywood and a loving tribute paid to him by a woman she knew as a child around the age of (alleged) abuse probably wouldn’t have made for an easy day, I guess?

    • starrywonder says:

      I think it was the fact that though Woody was rightfully ostracized by the acting community for a time he was welcomed back after 9/11 at the Oscars and started his comeback and started to be seen as well renowned again.

      Maybe it bothers her (it would me) that after having to live with what a man you considered your father did to you that everyone in Hollywood just hand waved it away and applauded his genius. It would feel like to me what I went through in the end didn’t matter. And in a sense she is right. Allen is still seen as ‘off’ by many of the mainstream public and I know tons of my friends don’t go to his movies. However, after being snubbed by Hollywood for a while he was forgiven and everyone started clamoring to be in his movies all over again. Allen is still seen as a 100 percent sure bet to be nominated for an Oscar or at least his movies are nowadays. If you’re an actor and all you want is to get an Oscar you may not care that the man was accused of molesting his kid.

      Frankly I don’t get Hollywood. No one really says anything about Woody Allen (Hollywood) and others are still clamoring for clemency for Polanksi but you have others yelling about Chris Brown still (and by the way Chris Brown sucks and always will suck to me). I don’t get why those who are famous are so ready to excuse what one of their own did. It just boggles my mind.

  17. eliza says:

    Personally I do not care if these actors are only involved with him on a professional level (although I tend to disagree that Keaton is only involved on a professional level and others as they also claim friendships with the director) they know who he is and what he has been accused of.

    I see no difference between Allen and Polanski, yet people rail on Polanski and his supporters yet somehow want to give Allen a pass because he was never convicted of molesting his adopted daughter. The fact that he married a woman who he knew as a child tells me all about Allen that I need to know. I said this yesterday in response to tjose that said he was not a father figure. I call bullshit on that. If you are a daily presence in the lives of your girlfriend’s children for TWELVE YEARS, you ARE a father figure whether the Allen supporters want to admit that or not.

    Actors do not care about scandal if it comes to them working with a gifted director or furthering their career. Blanchette and others are not living in caves. They know what this man has done but turn a blind eye for the chance at accolades and awards.

    • Mallory says:

      But didn’t you hear… we’ve been wrong all along. It’s not pedophilia, it’s ephebophilia. Sure. Semantics save the day and make everything all better.
      The pro-Woody arguments are such a joke, and they are even more pathetic considering how some are coming from people who never met Allen and will never meet him.

    • starrywonder says:

      I agree Eliza! I don’t give him or Polanski a pass. It’s just gross that everyone in Hollywood is even still trying to get Polanski’s sentence overturned. He raped a child. He plied her with drugs and raped her. The poor woman has to live with that and the fact that her mother was also instrumental in it happening. I don’t get how Hollywood can say poor Polanski can’t come back to the U.S.

    • sapphoandgrits says:

      I’ve known someone since she was 11 and I was in college, and she’s now 31, and there’s a bit of a spark there between us, but I honestly can’t get over the mental thing about how I’ve known her since she was a child. I just can’t. And, this was my long-term girlfriend’s child or anything.

      I mean, that’s just really creepy and disgusting he did that. How can anyone not think the Soon-Yi thing isn’t creepy and disturbing???

  18. Tippy says:

    Woody Allen is a low-life pedophile.

    I rather doubt that any of these celebs that are circling their wagons around Allen would dare to leave their children alone with him.

  19. smee says:

    I’m not a WA apologist, but he is NOT a convicted child molester. These are all allegations that have been made yet not proven. Since this is the case, I would not expect any actor or person involved in the film industry to shun work with WA. Roman Polanski, on the other hand, was convicted of child molesting (well, unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor) and I can totally see professionals avoiding work with him, despite his talent.

    • Lady D says:

      The rumours about him have been around for a long, long, time.

    • G says:

      You lost me when you quantified it with “well, unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor”, but you are right Polanski is a straight up convicted rapist, I don’t care what legalese is used.

    • Becky1 says:

      Agreed. Roman Polanski is a convicted rapist. The situation with Woody Allen is not as clear. Honestly, although I was aware of the Soon Yi situation (which is very creepy) until very recently I did not know there had been allegations of sexual abuse.

      I don’t think it’s fair to judge Cate Blanchett or any of the actors Woody has worked with unless they knew for a fact that he had molested a child and then chose to work with him anyway. I don’t know whether he’s innocent or guilty but I think it’s completely unfair to target actors who have worked with him. If it’s a situation like Roman Polanski (where there was a trial and a conviction) or if Woody confesses to the crime than it’s obviously a different story. Until then, I think the actors should be left out of the debate.

  20. Lilacflowers says:

    While I sympathize with Dylan, and I do believe her allegations against Allen, the fact is that, although charges were filed, he was never convicted, which does separate him from Polanski. An additional fact is that this all happened over 20 years ago. Was Blanchett supposed to know about something that happened decades ago? Is she supposed to hold Allen to a higher standard than our own justice system did?

    • kibbles says:

      Come on. Everyone in Hollywood (or at least those old enough during the public custody battle) knows about the molestation accusations made against Allen as well as the nude photographs of Soon-Yi. Everyone in Hollywood knows that Allen married Soon-Yi Previn, the adopted daughter of his former romantic partner Mia Farrow. They’ve mostly turned a blind eye and perhaps really believe that it is a family matter separate from their professional relationship with Allen. However, just imagine if you knew of an artist who married the daughter of their former partner/wife and that another daughter accused him of molestation. Even if he was never charged, would you be able to stomach having a working relationship with him (if you could afford to choose any role you wanted as an A-list actor)? Would you be okay with posing with him and wrapping your arm around him on the red carpet? Would you be his friend? These are the choices that many people in Hollywood have made over the last 20 years by starring in his films and giving him accolades for his work while ignoring his really creepy personal life and the very high probability that he did get away with molesting Dylan Farrow.

    • Seen says:

      What clouds the water for me is that Mia’s brother is a pedophile. I can’t help but wonder if that influences her or their family’s version of events.

  21. kibbles says:

    I think Cate as an actress is lovely. I must say that I was disappointed by her statement even though I realise that there isn’t much else she can say on this issue without choosing sides or turning against Woody whilst campaigning for an Oscar for a role in his movie. She’s stuck between a rock and a hard place in this matter. Sure, Dylan finding her voice now is inconvenient for the cast of Blue Jasmine, but should that even matter considering the more serious issue of Allen probably being a pedophile and getting away with it with Hollywood’s nearly unanimous support over the last two decades? I said this yesterday in the original Dylan Farrow thread, but I hope Cate does not win for this movie. Her award would always in my mind be associated with Dylan Farrow’s op-ed and Cate’s acceptance to work with a likely pedophile. I want Cate to win for another movie that has no controversy such as this one surrounding it. I can imagine Cate receiving a ton of backlash if she wins the Oscar this year. Many people would be disappointed, not because of Cate’s acting abilities, but because any win for Blue Jasmine would be an affirmation of Hollywood’s acceptance of Woody Allen despite the allegations against him. This would be a slap in the face to sexual assault victims everywhere. I hope it doesn’t happen.

    • Putchka says:

      Kibbles, totally agree. Well said!

    • Leah says:

      @kibbles Likewise if she doesn’t win, and bear in mind she has won every single award up until now and is considered miles ahead of every other contender. Whoever wins will not be seen as the rightful winner and it will be seen as they were just given the oscar because Cate was held responsible for something that happened 22 years ago when Cate had barely started acting.

    • Patty says:

      I think Cate should win the Oscar. She have a fantastic performance; she shouldn’t be punished for WA actions. When she wins I don’t think there will be any backlash against her either. Everyone has known about the allegations against WA for years. In fact I recall reading an article a few years ago that described the alleged abuse almost word for word as Dylan’s recent op ed.

      I’m not saying it’s right, but. If there was going to be backlash, it would have aready happened.

    • emmie_a says:

      I mentioned this yesterday but I was not disappointed with the statements from Cate or Alec. Dylan has been healing for years and has thought about her public statement for who knows how long and took her time to write and publish what she wanted to say. Then ‘boom!’ her statement is published and – with social media (Twitter, in Alec’s case), we expect an immediate, heartfelt response from those she named? I don’t think that’s fair. Who knows who will say what or if Cate or Alec will expound on their initial statements. But if we want anything other than the generic publicist written response we have to give them time to think about and form their opinion, just as Dylan has had time to come to terms with her abuse. I’ll also add, just because Dylan is ok with discussing her abuse on a public forum, it doesn’t mean everyone else is ok w/sharing or discussing such sensitive, intimate details w/in social media.

  22. Kiddo says:

    I think it’s important for people to acknowledge that she is in pain, regardless of the origins, whether you believe that what she said was true, or if you believe that her mother instigated the charges from the start, and/or the timing of the open letter.

    Yes, it was a private issue, but it isn’t anymore. If Dylan wasn’t molested, she feels no less burdened, which is obvious in her letter. Her pain is genuine.

    Those who immediately blame her mother for the letter, are missing that whatever the catalyst, her mother’s revenge, or abuse in childhood by her father, this woman’s psyche is broken. It’s as if everyone is talking over her, or around her, about Woody or Mia. The best that strangers could hope for her is healing. There is no doubt that her childhood was toxic and unhealthy, and at this stage in her life, she still isn’t mended.

    Whether actors consider the abuse she suffered, (and she did, whether or not you believe she was molested, that family was obliterated by, at the least, the Soon Yi affair and fallout), is something that they have to weigh versus the ‘value’ of working on Woody’s films.

  23. Mindy says:

    Okay…throwing this out there.

    Why NOW and not when Woody won for Midnight in Paris or when he was nominated a million times over since the molestation? Could it be that her brother, Ronan, has a new tv show debuting February 24? Could it possibly be that Ronan insisted she write her op ed piece to keep his own name out there?

    Just saying… Ronan seems very exploitive. The insinuation he made that Frank Sinatra MAY be his father, just as his show was announced… He sure seems as though he is working the media to his favor.

    • cr says:

      Mia was the one who insinuated that, and that rumor has been out there for years. He just made a joke about on Twitter.

    • Kiddo says:

      Oh I definitely believe that he and his mother were incredibly calculating when they tossed that into the universe.

    • Artemis says:

      Why not now? It was her time, that’s all that matters.
      People should focus on the content of her letter, not trying to deflect to other matters.

      And how is Allen’s abuse going to further Ronan’s career? Most people take the side of Allen but you think his son is ‘working the media to his favor’ . As it stands now, A-listers would never choose Ronan over Allen so it doesn’t make any sense for him to push his sister to write a letter when he has shown he’s perfectly capable of ripping his father to shreds himself.

      Ronan also has work coming up so it doesn’t matter, his name will be in the media for months to come. He’s also on Twitter and doesn’t need to worry about exposure, he’ll do fine on his own because he’s extremely smart and funny. He can do anything he wants (seriously, his background is more than impressive).

      This is another tactic to deflect from the real issue: Dylan’s abuse and what it means for Hollywood to keep celebrating these types of men.

    • emmie_a says:

      Mindy: Interesting point. I agree that Ronan seems very exploitive. I read (from an ‘insider’, so who knows how true it is but I can see it being true) that his bosses at MSNBC weren’t comfortable with his Twitter about Woody after the Globes because they have strict social media policies and Ronan was crossing the line. But, hey, it got him headlines and that translates to viewers so I could see him wanting to keep the ship sailing.

    • pleaseicu says:

      The VICTIM gets to choose when it’s most convenient and when she’s strong enough to tell her story. This deflection from Dylan telling her own story is just so disheartening. Would everyone stop taking agency away from Dylan, as if that wasn’t done enough to her by the adults in this situation growing up, and implying she had no choice or freewill in telling her own story and deciding now was the time to break her silence in her own words!

      Sorry if it inconveniences HW that Dylan decided during awards season to expose them for the cesspool they are.

      The Golden Globes didn’t limit their award praise of Woody to just his film work, they turned it into an industry-wide tonguebath of Woody the great man, Woody the great defender and writer of women. Think that maybe had something to do with her timing of speaking out and specifically calling out HW for enabling Woody to have the career and success he has and for giving him the power he has to get off scot-free?

      Maybe Bob Weide, Woody’s BFF and biographer and professional butt kisser and who owes his entire career success to Woody, shouldn’t have written an article painting Woody as the victim and telling the world that Dylan doesn’t know her own mind during awards season? Her story in her own words came out within days of Weide’s article defending Woody. Think that might have something to do with her timing?

  24. Jade says:

    I find Cate’s statement fine as its become very ‘he said, she said’ now, she and the other actors shouldn’t have been brought into it.

  25. dagdag says:

    Woody Allen has been proved to be a ruthless man by marrying his lover´s daughter being his childrens sister, causing deep pain to his once family and stripping his wife Soon Yi of her family. All that for his own satisfaction.

    Having a choice, no, I would not work with him.

  26. Jen says:

    I don’t have any doubts about Dylan Farrow’s motivations. HOWEVER, I think that both Mia and Ronan are being shady and calculating as hell. They’re bringing this all back up again right for Oscar season, AND right before Ronan’s new talk show premieres. They’re milking this and it’s gross.

  27. Artemis says:

    It’s obviously been a long and painful situation for the family and I hope they find some resolution and peace.

    What a cop-out. She wants her cake and eat it too. Nothing will stop her Oscar campaign.

    She doesn’t address Dylan’s question, she doesn’t address why an A-lister like herself feels the need to work with a pedophile when she can have ANY role. She doesn’t care. During her campaign, she has shown, more than ever that she’s perfectly capably of biting back when something doesn’t suit her. Even if she does it in a witty way, you know she’s not messing around.

    Dylan has every right to write her letter since Vanity Fair recently published a spread on it (nobody balked at that). The Daily Beast is allowed to write an article about it to defend Allen but Dylan, the victim isn’t? It’s pretty logical why she decided to write it now with Allen growing again in popularity in recent years and being honored. People decided it’s okay again to embrace him so Dylan’s timing is quite perfect.
    For her, this will never go away and she is allowed to talk about 24/7 for the rest of her life. It won’t stop people working with him but I’m glad that they’re at least a bit shamed in the media for it. After all, to work with Allen is merely because it’s good for their career so I’m glad Dylan called them out for it and it takes the shine of their accolades.

    The Farrows shouldn’t care about anybody’s career as nobody cares about pedophiles running rampant in Hollywood and destroying so many lives. This is proven over and over again.
    It’s a bit flippant to take pity on people who couldn’t give a damn about the pain Hollywood inflicts on others when they’re RIGHT next the perps! Working with them, promoting their work, praising them and not even batting an eye when they get called out. Without Hollywood and its actors supporting Allen, he wouldn’t have a career. It’s really simple. So anybody supporting him is guilty of perpetuating the filth that is common in Hollywood.

    I have so much feels about Cate’s lack of involvement (like most actors). All they do is ignore this crap and never do they stop and think about how lucky they are with all their wealth and privileges. Not once can they stop putting themselves first and just pick a director that isn’t a piece of trash. Nobody’s career will fail if you refuse to work with people like Allen or Polanski.

  28. Sarah says:

    It depends. Is Cate going to get up there and thank Woody Allen for being a legend and oh so amazing? If so, I think it is fair. Diane Keaton with her ridiculousness at the Globes is DEFINITELY fair game. There have been several who have worked with him over and over (Scarlett being just one). Yes, this is Cate’s first go but I think Dylan is now fighting back with the only thing at her disposal – public shaming. I’m not willing to take that or any weapon away from her or any victim of abuse.

  29. Ferris says:

    Maybe we should start a lynch mob. Gather everyone up who has ever been accused of child molestation ( but never convicted) and send them to a deserted island where they can never be part of society or work again.

  30. Soporificat says:

    Personally, I think the reason Dylan chose to publish her letter now and bring it all out into the open was in response to the disgusting Daily Beast article. That article was a real smear piece, and if I had been in Dylan’s shoes I don’t think I would have let it go by without a response.

    Here is what I think the timeline was: 1) Woody gets a GG Lifetime Achievement award and Diane Keaton rambles on about what a wonderful human being Woody is, and how great he is for women. 2) This is intolerable for Dylan, she falls apart and Ronan tweets angry and sarcastic remarks about Woody, reminding everyone about the scandal. 3) Weide gets worked up that people are now talking about the issue and so he writes the Daily Beast article to protect Woody Allen. He repeatedly implies that Dylan is a pathetic, damaged, hysteric who was manipulated by her harpy, shrew, slut of a mother. 3) Dylan decides to put everything on the table and demand that people examine their conscience when it comes to working with Woody Allen.

    So, good job, Weide! I’m sure that Woody Allen will really thank you for triggering Dylan to bring it all out into the open. Karma is a bitch, as they say.

  31. Leah says:

    As terrible as this situation is and as much as I feel for Dylan.This has nothing to do with Cate, it would be a really shame if this ruins her Oscar chances. I hope not. She should never have been brought into it.

    • I Choose Me says:

      Really? Look, I’m a big, big fan of Cate and I have no problem with her carefully worded response but who gives a shit if this ruins her Oscar chances? It’s an award for acting. Not the fricking Nobel Peace Prize. Cate will be fine if she doesn’t win another award.

      • Leah says:

        No one said it was the Nobel prize don’t be silly. But within her profession its the biggest movie award. Her performance is head and shoulders above the rest so yes she should win regardless of the directors past because an acting award should be judged on the work she did not the directors past history. And Look, another thing is that Woody Allen projects have been nominated for Oscars many times in the 20 or more years since that story broke. Its a little odd that everyone has suddenly decided this year should be the year he and people who worked with him should be boycotted. Many actresses has praised how he writes for women, many people have sung his praises. Including the guy who everyone on this site think can do nothing wrong Hidddleston. You are on a slippery slope if you are going down this road, you’ll literally have to bar half of hollywood if you don’t want people that worked with him winning awards.

  32. LahdidahBaby says:

    As others here at CB can attest, it can take years, decades even, to be ready to admit that you were molested or a victim of domestic violence. I say “admit” because that’s how it feels: like a confession. “Admit”, “confess,” “secret”: those are words we generally associate with guilt of some kind, and that’s the very heart of the problem: After the abuser’s acts, you feel dirtied, somehow to blame, and you’re humiliated at the idea of the world ever knowing this dirty secret about you…because it IS “about” you as much as it’s about your abuser, simply because by his act he has remade you into a flawed and tarnished thing. Or anyway, so it seems when it’s yourself.

    Years can go by after what was done to you, decades can pass – most of a lifetime, even – and then one day you happen to see or hear something that suddenly triggers the thought of it inside you in a different way entirely than ever before. You feel this weird urgency, this push, this sudden desperate need to get it OUT of you, to finally just free yourself – and in so doing, to maybe prevent further abuse from happening to others. Nothing can stop you all of a sudden, you just begin talking or writing about it, it’s like you’re vomiting out the words, the memory, the act itself that was perpetrated on you.

    And let’s face it, by its very nature that spontaneous telling of such a dirty secret isn’t likely to seem “proper” or polite in the moment in which you do it! It startles or even offends people because you are, to their minds anyway, befouling their environment, upsetting the status quo, being disruptive of their lives, their peace of mind. Now they wonder if they’ll be expected to sever relations with your abuser, and this throws their lives into chaos because they feel damned if they do and damned if they don’t.

    And when your molester or attacker happens to be a prominent, revered person (mine was), it can be a personal, social, or professional liability for anyone to take sides, or even to address the issue at all. It’s just so much easier for them not to believe you, because then nothing is required of them except maybe to show concern or pity for misguided, manipulated you.

    I wasn’t brave. i kept my mouth shut for WAY too long because of fear of my abuser and of his power and influence, and just shame, really, and embarrassment, protectiveness of my own privacy. Then one day, in the middle of a big gathering of academic women 3,000 miles from my hometown where it happened, someone said something unrelated to me or even to the subject of abuse – it was about standing up for something, bearing witness – and it was like my head caught fire! I had no time even to deliberate – I just started speaking, kind of quietly at first, but I could feel myself revving up, gaining in assertiveness as I spoke. No one said much right then, and I felt like the biggest idiot.

    Later I tormented myself about what I’d done. I was embarrassed and scared of how I’d shamed myself, had probably lost standing among my peers, all that. I literally hid out in my tiny office the next day, not wanting to face anyone. I was f’ing mortified at what I’d done. But then the strangest thing happened: one by one, at odd moments over the next couple of days, 4 of those strong, independent women came to my office, one at a time and in kind of a secretive way, to confess their own similar experiences. One of them was a lawyer who worked pro bono for victims of abuse – a woman who seemed like a tower of power to me – and yet, she said, she herself had been abused and had for several years moved all over the country to hide from her abuser. Then one day she had HER epiphany and decided to go to law school and change things for the victims of abuse.

    Ever since that day when I first told my dirty little secret to a gathering of complete strangers, it’s felt like if I see another woman struggling in that same way, I need to speak up about it, just the way those women came to speak to me. So, while I can understand how/why Dylan’s revelations may seem oddly-timed, or timed to cause maximum damage, I truly believe that something triggered it in her – maybe Diane Keaton singing a creepily sing-song little nursery rhyme during her acceptance for Woody Allen of his lifetime achievement award – but something in that event caused all the constellations to line up, and her head or her heart caught fire.

    So although I can see where people might logically question the timing of Dylan’s revelations, there truly is no logic or deliberation necessary with a thing like this. Dunno if this will make sense to anyone else unless they’ve been through something similar (and I imagine plenty of you have), but this is one of those moments when it feels to me like I have to say something and can’t for the life of me STFU. Sorry for the length of this.

    • Soporificat says:

      Thank you for sharing that. Your explanation is so evocative and clear, and I’m really sorry that you have had to carry that burden for so long.

      The thing that I have the hardest time tolerating is when people respond as if a survivor is doing something wrong when they tell their story, and then they try to punish and shame the survivor for speaking out. The profound selfishness of that attitude makes my head spin.

    • mercy says:

      Thank you so much for sharing. There is no “right time” or “right way” for a victim of abuse to respond in order to have their experience acknowledged and the crimes committed against them taken seriously.

    • Nina says:

      That was a powerful story. I was also abused by a relative. And I have not been able to talk about it with even friends to this day, as I was made to feel ashamed and guilty about it by the abuser and, later, by a society that still seems to view the victim as crazy or as making it up. Even the comments on this post reflect skepticism among different people, who disbelieve Dylan. Why wouldn’t she have a hard time taking about it in the past?

      As for cates statement, I don’t know what to think. It could have been far more heartfelt for Dylan, but she would then have to acknowledge the truth of the matter. Its possible too that prior to dylans column, one could proclaim that one didn’t know whether the accusations were true and/ or that one had forgotten about the accusations. I don’t know whether I can blame cate really, given that Ive cseen woody Allen films, including blue jasmine. Now I feel guilty for having watched the film. After reading dylans account, I will not support his films again.

  33. cro-girl says:

    He was never convicted because he never stood trial, they had sufficient evidence to make the charge but everyone decided it would be better for Dylan’s 7 year old self not to go through that. You have to understand that Woody’s lawyers would have grilled her.

    This is not the same as not being convicted. I am with Dylan, I don’t understand how people can step back so far from facts and use the crutch of him never being convicted.

    How do you really feel Cate? Go drop your kids off to be babysat by that vile predator.

  34. Jaded says:

    I saw Mia Farrow speak at a conference 10 years ago and she touched upon the subject. This isn’t an issue that just raised its ugly head after years of laying low. She said from the minute Woody met Dylan he had an unhealthy obsession with her, to the point where he would ignore the other kids completely (he even ignored his own supposedly biological son). She castigates herself constantly for not doing something about it sooner. She also mentioned that Dylan has suffered horrible post-traumatic problems all her life as a result – can you imagine the pain both those women have had to deal with since then? I can’t. If it were my daughter I too would spend the rest of my life trying to find justice.

    Woody’s selfish and sick behaviour both with Soon-Yi and Dylan has devastated and divided a family but still he gets a free pass and support from people who would rather throw an innocent and horribly wronged child and her mother under the bus. But Mia’s a strong woman and I don’t see anything wrong with her fighting back to set the record straight. And if it means that Dylan can finally come out of her comfort zone to tell her story, then Mia’s fight has been successful. That it comes out at Oscar season will serve to remind all the sycophants who continue to laud Woody that his past behaviour was vile and reprehensible and Hollywood needs the occasional kick up the arse to remember it.

    • Jayna says:

      Woody was more important to Mia than her own child. Had he not dumped her and taken up with Soon-Yi, I wonder if Mia ever would have left him of her own accord even with his behavior towards Dylan. She turned a blind eye it seems because she wanted him. Talk about unhealthy. We will never know.

      • Mingy says:

        i agree, and wonder if dylan has ever asked her mother why she let a predator around her for so many years if she knew right away that woody “had an unhealthy obsession with dylan”. i suspect mia also had an unhealthy obsession with woody. the more i’m remembering her memoir (i read it about 3 years ago) the more pissed i am for dylan as mia details a lot of his strange (and disgusting) behavior but never did anything about it until the attic incident.
        the part of dylan’s essay, when she asked if we’ve forgotten her has really gotten to me…it brings back awful memories for me as a child and anger towards my parents.

  35. pnichols says:

    I know I will catch absolute holy h*** for this, but I never thought he was guilty. Not a fan. Only movie I’ve ever seen is Blue Jasmine. It seems that in 1992 Mia was all hush hush because of the childs age, so why now? It’s going to hurt the child (now adult) just as much to relive it all. I always felt that Mia was a woman scorned. Bitter and angry. Brainwashed the kids. Now before everyone flips….this is just my opinion.

    • Hiddles forever says:

      I was not brainwashed and I was abused. Your comment is really disgraceful and it saddens me a lot. If you think that at seven you are not able to remember such stuff, well you are wrong.

      I still remember my father burning me with cigarettes when I was 3 and a half and be sure it is not my mother who implanted that in my brain.
      Mia Farrow can be crazy but not so much in the end, because if Dylan was my daughter the creep wouldn’t have made it to the trial, believe me. She has been far too good in this instance.

    • pnichols says:

      I am not trying to minimize anyone or anyone’s situation who has been abused. This is just my opinion for this specific situation. My comment is not disgraceful, it’s my opinion. I apologize if it saddens you, That was not my intention.

  36. Calabar says:

    The fact that Woody Allen married his adopted daughter is proof enough for me.

    It means something must have been going on with suni li , before he decided to marry her.

    That is just wrong on many levels. So yes I believe Dylan.

    No I do not believe that Mia Farrow would instigate this, to get attention. Come on people, are you kidding me. Put your family through this for what?

    Again Woody Allen married his adopted daughter. That is all

  37. Luca26 says:

    I believe that everytime Allen is in the public eye and that he is awarded and celebrated by Hollywood it is painful to Dylan. I absolutely believe it’s an Anti-Oscar campaign and I don’t think that lessens the power of what she is saying one small bit. It’s a horrifying prospect to think of having an abuser who is one of the most celebrated film makers of the last century. I applaud her for speaking out. Is Cate Blanchett responsible for Woodys’ behavior absolutely not but she’s part of a culture that celebrates the abuser and marginalizes victims of sexual abuse so calling her out and asking her to answer those questions is fair. If we lived in a different society Woody Allen would probably be in jail or at the very least unable to adopt more children but he is powerful and he is rich and he is a brilliant artist(I admit begrudgingly) and a man so he has been protected.

  38. OhDear says:

    This whole “Mia Farrow is a psycho jealous b*tch” and “the only reason Dylan Farrow’s speaking up now is because her brother has a TV show to promote” smear campaign is exactly how abusers work – never take responsibility for their actions, blame and smear someone else.

    There was another piece in the Guardian by some Vanity Fair contributing editor who essentially said that Nicholas Kristof only published DF’s letter because he’s friends with Mia Farrow. Of course, he doesn’t say the same thing of the guy who wrote the Daily Beast piece.

    If Dylan Farrow is lying, Woody Allen has a clear case for libel. But none of these anti-Farrow commentary address what Dylan F. actually wrote. They merely defect that Mia Farrow is crazy or Nick Kristof is unbiased or Ronan Farrow is milking the situation for publicity. Woody Allen himself, though he says what she wrote is “untrue,” has not said anything other than that he’ll respond later. To me, that response says a lot.

    As for Blanchett, I get that she feels she’s caught between a rock and a hard place. But her response was essentially “it’s a private matter,” which is absolute BS. It’s not DF complaining about not getting enough in the will or that Woody Allen disapproved of her career choice, FFS.

    • sapphoandgrits says:

      I was just coming to write almost this same exact thing, but you did it better than I could. Well done.

    • emmie_a says:

      “But her response was essentially “it’s a private matter,” which is absolute BS.”

      I disagree. Just because you and I are comfortable talking about such a sensitive and horrible topic — and speculating on a public forum doesn’t mean Cate is comfortable doing so. And actually, yes, such abuse is usually a private matter, especially more so in certain cultures (I’m not saying that’s right, it’s just fact). Just because Dylan made it very public doesn’t mean that everyone else has that comfort level. We don’t know what Cate thinks or feels so how can you call BS on her feelings? I don’t blame Cate for her statement.

  39. Lori says:

    IF I was Cate I would remove myself from the Oscar compaign. No one can know what information she used to make her decision to work with Woody Allen at the time. Perhaps she did think that since he was never tried, then he must not be guilty. I do think less of her as a person for having worked with him, I do believe Dylan’s accusations. But now that Dylan herself has spoken out for herself, the game has changed. If she has any conscience at all, she should remove herself from the Oscar race.

    • JUSTICE says:

      great comment !
      wow …
      she is a POS for working with him …
      people who sit idly by & condone child abuse ’cause they don’t want to ‘upset the applecart’ or worse ..are slime …
      you BET your opinion dropped , just as mine did …
      that’s because you have ethics & would defend a child if you had to ..
      this beee-yatch would look the other way so she could keep her job …ugh ….

    • emmie_a says:

      My opinion is expecting her to withdraw from the Oscar race is taking things a little far. And thinking less of her as a person for working with Woody? What if you found out that your boss had been accused of child molestation… Would you think less of yourself because you worked for him? Would you quit your job? It’s not like Cate is out there telling everyone that Woody is her best friend and she loves him, warts and all. She worked with him on a movie. That’s all.

      • Tatiana says:

        I agree with you. She has not take on this and no right to say anything other than that neutral statement she has made (and she said that because she was rudely ask about it just hours after the release of the open letter). To do it otherwise would be totally fruitless.

  40. Nance says:

    I agree. As much as I think that if she was abused she had the right to tell her feeling, even if I think a court battle would have been better and I would also have prefer that her article would have been more toward Woody Allen and not about “shame on you” on everyone, the ones who likes his movies (not necessary him as a person) and the actors who play in his films (which is a professionnal relationship, not personnal). I know why some people are inconfortable with this, it’s personal justice over persons that didn’t do anything to her personally.

  41. Eileen says:

    This entire melodrama has been going on for far too long. I think calling out actors and actresses who work with him is wrong,personally because relying on others to affirm you in such a public way will lead to disappointment for this woman. Very doubtful actors will refuse to work with him.Somehow through intense therapy,love and support she should focus on her future and building a happy,empowered life.

  42. Ginger says:

    As an abuse survivor myself I cannot hold an objective opinion. I adore Cate, she is my favorite actress. I was disappointed when I found out she was working with Woody but I don’t hold her fully responsible for just working on a film. I’m glad at least she said something to address Dylan. She certainly didn’t have to do it. I hope this does make people think a little more before working with him in the future.

  43. Jeanette says:

    Maybe it is targeted at this years Oscars. SO WHAT! If I saw that the man that should have been my father, (fail!) also the man who molested me, GLORIOUSLY successful, EVERYONE, so publicly singing his praises..I think it would be a little much for me too.

    I too would want to take his sorry ass down a peg, or a 100.

    Just because its ruining his Oscar campaign does not make it any less true. AND so freaking what! Sometimes people forget, that PEOPLE, REAL PEOPLE, and feelings, and care, and consideration are more important than a damn awards season.

  44. The Original G says:

    This guy belongs in a criminal court of law and possibly a prison. Reopen the case.

    The attempt to make actors, or the Oscars, or tabloids a tool of justice is misplaced. I have a really hard time understanding how this messy eruption will really serve this victim.

    • JaDeRu says:

      I wish more people would see it this way.
      Who cares if you sanctimoniously state you will no longer support anybody that works with Woody Allen. I suggest you take a look at WA’s IMDB page and I bet you’d be surprised that your fave has worked with him.
      Why is the media focused on what the effect on celebrities will be when it should be focused on a woman who had the courage to talk about her pain in front of the whole world and what that might mean to other victims of abuse.

    • The Original G says:

      Instead of boycotting the Oscars, how about arresting Woody Allen?

      • mercy says:

        Maybe the renewed attention to the case will lead in that direction, but it is tough after so many years have passed. Maybe getting her truth out there, bringing attention to the issue, and derailing his career will have to be enough.

      • The Original G says:

        Many child molestation cases are made when the victims grow up. See the Catholic Church cases. If there is a case, he should be arrested and tried and if found guilty jailed, have his access to children curtailed and put on a child molester list, etc. Where are the police and the DA on this?

        Casting shade on the entertainment industry does nothing for justice.

      • prayforthewild says:

        The statute of limitations has run out. This happened when she was seven, she is now twenty-eight. It is legally too late for that option, unfortunately. This is why so many survivors never see justice. Perhaps she sees this public letter as her only way.

        The cases against the catholic church you are referring to were brought because there were enough victims willing to come forward, past and present. And, a systematic silencing by the church itself to protect pedophile priests.

        Dylan is alone (as far as we know) in her case. That’s not enough for a prosecutor to throw aside the statute of limitations.

        I agree with you completely about justice not being served, but this was her only option, or to do and say nothing, as I’m sure he wishes she had.

      • The Original G says:

        @prayfor the wild. You’re unfortunately right. :(

        “In criminal cases, the statute of limitations in New York is five years from the date of the alleged molestation. The limitation period does not start until the victim turns 18. This age was implemented to allow for victims who suffered when they were younger.”

  45. Hiddles forever says:

    For God’s Sake, Blanchett has so many awards she could play chess with them.
    Do we want to cry all over the place that she won’t get an Oscar because of WA?

    If I was in her shoes, I wouldn’t have bothered to even reply, most decent thing to do.
    Instead she released a comment saying pretty much “not my business, WA could be a rapist and an abuser but he is such a wonderful director and maybe I can get an Oscar thanks to him!”.

    I lost any respect I had for her and anyone who started defending that creep.
    HW is a haven for cowards (cuz I believe that there someone surely knows how WA is, as it was for Polanski).

  46. Lila says:

    I’m not going to shade her for working with him. I feel like there should be a recognizable space between saying someone is good at their job and saying someone is a good person. For someone like Woody Allen, those two things have little to do with each other which is where the Golden Globes tribute went so very wrong IMO. I will shade Diane Keaton any day and every day for her friendship with him. I won’t shade every actor who works with him and calls him a great director. He is a great director. He is also IMO a deplorable human being but unfortunately for Dylan, that will always remain only an opinion on a he said/she said issue without any definite resolution because he can’t be prosecuted anymore. Woody is awful. The people who defend him as a good person are awful. Everyone connected to his work and/or who do not deny his talent are not IMO. This is on Woody.

  47. JUSTICE says:

    if ya’ll wouldn’t leave your children with him ..
    you shouldn’t be working with him ..
    though the actors are not responsible for his crimes , they are CONDONING & ENABLING ..
    sorry but pedophilia ain’t cool & he should be hung up by his shriveled up balls & locked up forever ..
    tough noogies about his ‘films’ & the selfish actors who know dayum well what he is ..

  48. Devyn says:

    I don’t care how “brilliant” the guy is, i would never work with someone who has a shady and twisted past as much as woody Allen. I believe Dylan 100%. The guy always gave away creepy vibes to me. Disgusting.

    I won’t hate actors for working with him, but you better believe I’m gonna side-eye the Sh!t out of you…

  49. too says:

    I think many commenters are missing an obvious point.

    Of COURSE we shouldn’t hold Cate accountable for Woody’s choices. We should hold her accountable for HER choices.

    And she chooses to avoid the moral consequences of working with someone who has a long history of questionable sexual choices with young girls.

    It has to work both ways – we have to celebrate women’s empowerment and capacity to choose and then also hold them accountable for those choices, good and bad.

    You can’t just praise women for choosing right, you have to call BS when they choose wrong. Cate is choosing wrong, period. She is deliberately avoiding acknowledging her agency in this situation. Why do some here enable this?

    It’s not about money, fame, celebrity, or Oscars. It’s about this woman playing a social game to avoid acknowledging a glaring, obvious fact. It’s not ‘shade,’ or whatever. It’s basic moral responsibility. How would you fell if your neighbor ignored evidence of pedophilia with your own daughter? Would you say, “Oh, it’s not right to blame her for the pedophile’s choices?”

    No, you’d be furious and say “Both the pedophile has a responsibility and so do those around him who know about it.” Period.

    IF Woody is guilty, that’s a separate issue, since we presume innocence. But we should NOT let her off the hook, we should not let her play political games and let’s pretend. Who gives a damn about the timing? Why not bring it up before the Oscars? Cate should be held accountable for her moral cowardice. If she doesn’t know if Woody is guilty, she should simply say we don’t know yet. But we should not accept her silence for any reasons.

    To those who’d just say, she is involved with him on a professional level, ok – just remember that rationalization when it happens to someone you know. Try to maintain that it’s just ‘work’ and that moral issues don’t trump the boundary between work and life. Is that boundary absolute? Hardly, when sexual abuse is the issue. Her silence is still a deliberate choice, and she’s responsible for it. Her silence has consequences for future girls. There’s a pattern here. Cate gets to make the choice to be silet, she doesn’t get to be absolved of the moral consequences of that chocie. None of us do, ever, especially regarding children.

    • Nicole says:

      THIS!!!!

      We’ll said.

      The personal is political. The choices we make say everything about who we are and what we value.

      I confess I have had no hardship disassociating from the actors who have worked with him in the past but La Blanchette and Mr. Darcy are going to hit me hard.

  50. morgane says:

    what do people expect cate to say? it’s none of her bussiness, she’s not woody allen’s partner in crime and i bet she isn’t his friend.

    Hopefully she’ll get the oscar she deserves. Sadly, this is Hollywood, people don’t and won’t care about woody’s actions for much longer

  51. nicegirl says:

    Just wanted to say THANK YOU, from the bottom of my heart, to all the survivors here @CB who have shared their bravery, and the show of support from other Celeb-tches.

  52. JaDeRu says:

    I should have known my comments calling out Hiddleston for praising WA wouldn’t get posted.
    Why are we discussing whether or not Cate Blanchett should or shouldn’t be caught up in this when this site will openly support Tom Hiddleston when he has publicly praised Allen?

    Even Leonardo DeCaprio (I’m a Leo fan, but he should be called out as well if we’re going on a witchhunt here) has worked with him and he’s nominated.

    It’s just all so sexist and hypocritical.

  53. Sue says:

    Not interested in shielding or feeling bad for highly acclaimed and powerful adults with access to extreme economic, social and business resources. That is exactly what everyone of the actors Dylan called out is. Take responsibility for how your actions in furthering your career looks to kids and young adults being victimized at this very moment. They are mature adults and to ask people of power to account for what they do with that power is something they should expect.

    Dylan said “yes it happened” last October, but the response has been this: in the last month Allen is given ANOTHER award/praise, Woody’s friend and HW insider writes an article claiming Dylan’s brainwashed for “The Daily Beast”. So I’d say her timing? Is a mix of perfect and fed up.

    After everything Dylan’s been through, HW was practically begging for this open letter from the kid they want to forget.

    Has anyone thought Dylan’ s also probably trying to make room for any allegations that may one day come forth from Dylan and SoonYi’s kids?

    Blanchett had a sorry answer. The “nice” version of Baldwin’s which is not nice at all. Automatic pilot: “None of my biz, where’s my Oscar, suck it.” In Blanchet’s case I bet she didnt even read the open letter at all, or, maybe I just hope so as her answer was so cold and detached it depresses me to think she did.

  54. Rebecca says:

    Why should we not hold these actors responsible for their actions? Working with Allen sends the message that it is o.k. to be an accused child molester and not be held accountable as long as you are rich and famous and have famous friends. As a famous person you are now sending the message to those who have been molested that they are far less important than fame and money. Yes, they should be held accountable for associating with Allen. I would never do such a thing if I were an actor whether an oscar was at stake or not. I sometimes wonder if Allen were conservative in his politics, would they have stood by him the way they are now? (I am as liberal as you can get, so don’t reply thinking I am a conservative and that is the only reason I would say such a thing.)

  55. Nymeria says:

    Woody’s power and invulnerability come from his position as a highly desired Hollywood director. Ergo, actors and actresses who work for him with full awareness of what he allegedly* did to Dylan are directly supporting that power and invulnerability. They are saying that what he allegedly did to Dylan is okay. So yes, they should most definitely be held in contempt for their role in supporting alleged pedophilia.

    Blanchett’s mealy-mouthed mumblings of “Oh, I hope the family finds some peace” are such a cop-out. They’re a way of sounding compassionate without actually being compassionate towards Dylan and her family. Working with Woody Allen, despite knowing full well the well-grounded accusations against him, is showing support directly for him and, implicitly, for pedophiles in general. That is the antithesis of compassion. What she’s really saying is that Woody Allen is such a great director, and as such being in one of his films is such a career boost, that she wouldn’t care if he’d raped his own mother. The career boost means more to her than defending victims of sexual violence.

    She can go to hell. She and all the other douchebags who continue to support Woody Allen.

    *I, personally, believe he’s guilty as sin. But libel & all that.

  56. Ladyray says:

    Kaiser, please take a look of this 1976 People Interview of Woody Allen.
    http://www.people.com/people/archive/article/0,,20066950,00.html

    Here’s this disgusting comment he made on sexuality:
    “I’m open-minded about sex. I’m not above reproach; if anything, I’m below reproach. I mean, if I was caught in a love nest with 15 12-year-old girls tomorrow, people would think, yeah, I always knew that about him.” Allen pauses. “Nothing I could come up with would surprise anyone,” he ventures helplessly. “I admit to it all.”

    Additionally, I find it odd that Woody’s lawyers haven’t pressed charges for libel at this point. If this is so false, why not?

    As a person who has been molested in my pre-teens, I couldn’t even stomach reading the whole story.

  57. Kelly says:

    Yes of course it’s not Cate’s fault and she deserves her Oscar.
    However, this is how this game works unfortunately. Allen covered up his crime and got away with it because he is a powerful Hollywood player. And now they’re targeting powerful Hollywood players in the midst of their self-congratulating and self-elevating yearly vanity fair in order to get the most attention and hurt Allen the most, potentially also putting off any actors who might wish to collaborate with him in the future.

  58. lnd says:

    In what other profession would a man who hooked up with his long term partner’s daughter (someone he watched grow up before his eyes) be given a free pass for this type of action especially once the action became public knowledge? And to add to that the accusations of child molestation of a 7 year old from who he was stripped of parental rights. That individual would not be able to thrive in my profession; he would be summarily shunned. I find it astonishing that Hollywood can rightly shun Mel Gibson for horrible racist rants but would ignore the creepy aura that surrounds this man. How can someone as polished as Cate Blanchette consent to be anywhere in his vicinity. Are we not judged by the company we keep?

  59. olivia says:

    Funny how Cate is now Public Villain #1.

    • mercy says:

      No, in this situation that would be Woody. Cate is one of many who has worked with him.
      Some people are understandably disappointed with her, and maybe themselves, for forgetting or ignoring WA’s history and his victims.

    • Tatiana says:

      It really surprises me how she is being dragged in this. She has absolutely nothing to do with this. And to the ones who say she shouldn’t win the Oscar, it is for excellency in film not about if you have worked in a movie directed by someone who was never legally prosecuted about sexual abuse. So yeah, she is going to win (because the Academy has awarded a lot of his actors since the scandal broke) and deservedly so.

    • Sloane Wyatt says:

      If she’d maintained her silence to Dylan’s plea, then Cate would not be in the news now. However, she did release a statement that says nothing except ‘peace be with you’, and folks don’t appreciate it. I know I don’t.

  60. Ligaya says:

    Why now and not then? Because Woody Allen received the Cecil B. DeMille award now, and not then. Because the Cecil. B. DeMille award is a high & high-profile, industry wide honor. Because Allen is lauded for this & accolades keep coming. Maybe it was the straw that broke the camel’s back, and Dylan couldn’t stand it anymore. There’s no “right” time and/or “right” way to break the silence – sometimes you just have to do it to keep from being sick physically and your soul from dying. Speaking as an incest survivor.

    And to have a glorious speech in honor of his writing strong women’s characters? It must have been gut-wrenching, and maybe vomit-inducing.

    I don’t think this will keep Cate from winning an Oscar, I think people can discern between someone who committed the crime & someone who worked with him once. Besides Dylan standing up for herself, I think this is more in the way of raising awareness of how our society shunts aside victims-survivors (a la Catholic Church) and bows down to the rich & powerful (including their rich & powerful friends). It might be shaming of future actors who can’t say Dylan didn’t speak, and *still* decide to work with him. It might be something like divestment & boycotts, like anti-apartheid divestment & boycotts of South African sports before apartheid was taken down.

  61. Aagje says:

    http://www.nytimes.com/books/97/02/23/reviews/farrow-verdict.html

    A link on the custody verdict. Very telling and eye-opening, especially to all the people bringing up the team from Yale-New Haven responsible for getting evidence from Dylan when an investigation was conducted. The judge presiding over the custody-case actually threw it out, considering it not reliable and that state-psychologists found Dylan’s story to be credible.

    But now, a bit more of an unpopular opinion. Do I think all actors who have ever worked with him should hand in any and all awards or refuse any recognition from a WA-film? No.

    Dylan’s case in particular was largely overshadowed by his marrying Soon-Yi Previn (which was disgusting enough in its own right) and I do think some actors who chose to work with him dismissed it, too easily but alas. A lot of people still went out and basically supported WA by seeing his movies. I sincerely hope that after Dylan’s letter, the masses will boycott him until he is a miserable old man who finally becomes aware of what he did and how he destroyed not just Dylan’s life but all of the people who he was in contact with when it all went down.

    First and foremost, I will be supporting Dylan, even from the other side of the world and on my computer. Child abuse, even from twenty years ago, should and cannot be ignored and we as the people actually have some power to make sure he doesn’t get away with it, even if it’s taking away what he clearly loves doing professionally.

    Cate’s statement was short, succinct and appropriate. But I think that if she now publicly thanks WA in any acceptance-speeches, she will be metaphorically hanged for it, as she should. Work and personal matters don’t mix, but this quite clearly has become a public matter. Kudos to Dylan, because what she did takes guts.

    • Carolyn says:

      This x 100%. Couldn’t have said it better.

      I’m on Dylan’s side. I hope the truth comes out and justice prevails. Woody Allen is a creep and it beggars belief that he’s been protected for all these years.

      I have a friend who was abused by her step-dad. To see her in emotional pain 30+ years after it happened, that she wasn’t believed, that quite a few people in her life at the time and now think it should be kept in the past, and that the perpretrator hasn’t had any consequences is disgusting and difficult to reconcile from a rational person’s viewpoint.

  62. LilyRose says:

    I wish the focus remained solely on Woody and not the people he’s worked with, dragging anyone else seems unfair – though I understand that visceral reaction, the impotence and frustration. Looking at all the commenters renouncing to ever watch another movie or support a project by ANYONE who has ever worked for Allen is… I don’t know. I understand the instinct yet am conflicted about the mechanics/rules of the problematic . What are our responsibilities as consumers of media? And in what direction should I point my finger? It seems absurd, doesn’t it. And impossible or nearly impossible. Look at all the people he’s worked with in the last 20 years via IMDB:

    Emma Stone, Colin Firth, Maria Gay Harden, Jacki Weaver, Eileen Atkins, Cate Blanchett, Joy Carlin, Alec Baldwin, Sally Hawkins, Andrew Dice Clay (I know), Bobby Cannavale, Judy Davis, Alison Pill, Roberto Begnini, Jesse Eisenberg, Greta Gerwig, Penelope Cruz (no more Almodovar), Ellen Paige (home slice), Owen Wilson (so no more Wes Anderson?) Rachel McAdams, Michael Sheen, Kurt Fuller, Carla Bruni, Tom Hiddleston, Corey Stoll (he was great in House of Cards), Kathy Bates, Marion Cotillard, Léa Seydoux, Adrien Brody, Anthony Hopkins, Naomi Watts, Freida Pinto, Antonio Banderas, Josh Brolin, Gemma Jones, Larry David, Samantha Bee (I love her on the Daily Show), Yolonda Ross, Evan Rachel Wood, Patricia Clarkson, Rebeca Hall, Scarlett Johansson, Chris Messina, Kevin Dunn, Javier Bardem, Julio Perillan, Ewan McGregor, Colin Farrell, Michael Fassbender (but was cut out of the movie) Clare Higgins, Hayley Atwell, Andrew Howard, Ian McShane, Romola Garai (she is superb), Hugh Jackman, Jonathan Rhys Meyers, Matthew Goode, Penelope Wilton (cousin Violet), Emily Mortimer, Mark Gatiss, Brian Cox, Wallace Shawn, Neil Pepe, Radha Mitchell, Chloe Sevigny, Jonny Lee Miller, Will Ferrel, Amanda Peet, Andy Borowitz, Jason Biggs (I don’t watch his movies anyway, and he’s the only crappy thing on OITNB), Fisher Stevens, Danny Devito, Christina Ricci, Kadee Strickland, Jimmy Fallon, Diana Krall, Stockard Channing, Adrian Grenier, Téa Leoni, Debra Messing, Treat Williams, George Hamilton, Tiffani Thiessen (that surprised me too), Bebe Neuwirth, Michael Emerson, Helen Hunt, Dan Aykroyd, Charlize Theron, Tracey Ullman, Michael Rapaport, Jon Lovitz, Larry Pine, Hugh Grant, Isaac Mizrahi, Sean Penn, Melanie Griffith, Kenneth Branagh, Winona Ryder, Leonardo DiCaprio, Kathleen Doyle, J.K. Simmons, Joe Mantegna, Famke Janssen, Gretchen Mol, Sam Rockwell, Hank Azaria, Allison Janney, Julia Louis Dreyfus, Lynn Cohen, Tobey Maguire, Richard Benjamin, Stanley Tucci, Demi Moore, Kirstie Alley, Julie Kavner, Elizabeth Shue, Jennifer Garner, Paul Giamatti, Billy Cristal, Tony Sirico, Edward Norton, Drew Barrymore, Alan Alda, Natasha Lyone, Gaby Hoffmann, Lukas Haas, Natalie Portman, Goldie Hawn, Julia Roberts, Isiah Whitlock Jr, Tim Roth, Billy Crudup, Robert Khakh, Olympia Dukakis, Helena Bonham Carter, Peter Weller, Mira Sorvino, Jack Werden, John Cusack, Dianne Wiest (for which she won an Oscar), Jennifer Tilly, Chazz Palminteri, Mary Louise Parker, ROb Reiner, Harvey Fierstein, Edie Falco, Debi Mazar, Angelica Huston.

    And the list will grow in the coming years. So how does it work? and what does it say about any of us who still like Julia Louis-Dreyfus in spite of her previous work with Allen? Am I tacitly endorsing Allen and his actions if I watch The Hour, Nurse Jackie, Sideways, Veep, Fried Green Tomatoes, The Addams Family, Heathers, The Way Way Back, Inception, Monster, Wolverine, Sherlock, Volver, The King’s Speech? None of which he had a hand in making or writing but star people he has worked with. What does it say about morality, individual and collective, when we hold others accountable or complicit (even by association) for one individual’s actions? And what does going cold turkey accomplish? These are sincere questions, btw.

    • The Original G says:

      I agree. Apparently, everyone is responsible BUT Woody.

    • Sue says:

      I do hold these people responsible. It’s corrupt and so disgusting to me to make light of sex abuse. In their positions of influence? — I believe “to whom much is given much is required”. After realizing how much power and influence Harvey W has, and seeing the list of Polanski supporters– — since then Ive only been to two movies. I admit I didn’t check to see who produced them. But I just get movies from the library now. The corruption in HW when it comes to this issue gives me chills. I dont want to support it. I applaud Dylan Farrow forhelping make a new world in which an Allen/Polanski type turns into what a Mel Gibson type is. Child sex abuse is as disgusting as prejudice is.

  63. Tatiana says:

    Well, having follow the case closely since the nineties (as a child advocate lawyer it really caught my eye and I have research about it) and this case has had so much inconsistencies from the very beginning. I want to say that for me Dylan Farrow is the only real victim here. But even there, facts cannot be overlook.

    The presumption of innocence is one of the most sacred principle of any democracy. Any person outside the people actually involved in this particular case have no business having any position whatsoever regarding the case since the case was dismissed, no prosecution even started, and hence for society Allen is innocent, period.
    Suggesting that the mere accusation should make people not work with or not award Allen is anti-democratic and deeply unethical and rotten. As ridiculous as it sounds, it’s really is as easy as that, as clear-cut as that, no grey areas here: for society, he didn’t do it, so he must not be ostracised, and anybody who wasn’t directly involved in the events has no right whatsoever to ostracise him, to morally judge him or to emotionally judge him, period. It may suck because many real abuse cases go un-prosecuted due to lack of evidence, but for any society it would suck even more that the mere accusation implied the conviction. Anybody who wishes ostracism to Allen without being a part of the case and without knowing the truth is morally and ethically rotten.

    It is still irrational and dangerous for society, for all of us who live under the sacred principle of the presumption of innocence. It simply must not be tolerated under any circumstance, period.

    Now the only facts we have about this case are (and no, I haven’t based any of this in the Dialy Beast article, which I don’t see how it is being dismissed only because of the writer’s association with Allen. I have read it and all the points it mades are valid, even if they come as an attack on the Farrows. That I found it to be tackless) are this:

    - First and most important, the inconsistency of Dylan’s own statement as to the facts. It appears on the record that she was very inconsistent with the details.

    - The incredibly suspicious timing of Mia’s accusation, in the midst of a custody battle.

    - Allen’s lack of any antecedent or ulterior case, even though he has later adopted two children passing all controls as to his capacity.

    - The fact that Dylan’s statement is recorded by Mia herself, not in a single shot but in several edited shots.

    - The help declaring that they were pressed by Mia and retracting their statements.

    - The help not remembering at all Dylan without underwear that day.

    - Mia’s own child Moses (the eldest when the events supposedly happened) declaring Mia brainwashed them as children and being nowadays estranged from Mia and in good terms with Allen

    - This new letter, written already as an adult, that is very harrowing.

    Does that mean it’s impossible that he did it? Of course not! But it means that his case is complicated, both for those who cry for “the separation of the artist and the art” and for those who are ready to convict him.

    To get to my point about Blanchett and all the others that have work wih him, it is important to note that they nothing to do with this. Let’s just stop with that because it is utterly misguided and wrong. Here it is a very good piece that does make for some interesting arguments that did resonate with me about this topic: http://thefilmexperience.net/blog/2014/2/3/a-personal-note-on-allenfarrow-and-a-plea-for-sanity.html

    This may come across very badly for some of the readers here, but even if they don’t agree with my take on this I hope you can understand my position and why it bothers me when people make some assumptions about this delicate matter.

    • mercy says:

      Your “facts” don’t all seem to be absolute facts, though. There is enough evidence on record that contradicts them for me to not regard them as such.

      And what are we supposed to infer from “facts” like “The incredibly suspicious timing of Mia’s accusation, in the midst of a custody battle”? Dylan herself said Allen used the Soon-Yi affair to distract from the truth.

      Allen is a wealthy, famous man with many powerful friends and he escaped legal charges. Not surprised at all that he found a way to adopt.

      Adults sometimes have trouble with making consistent statements when pressed repeatedly, so not surprised if a 7 year old dealing with sexual abuse might have inconsistencies. Some experienced psychologists and prosecutors still believed her.

      Observations allegedly from “the help” are in the Vanity Fair article. But I would not be surprised if they wanted to stay out of this. They could be held responsible by future employers for anything that happened on their watch.

      Haven’t heard a peep from Moses about Dylan, or seen him quoted anywhere, for that matter. I will search for some, but I won’t take the word only of Allen employees.

      Bottom line for me is I don’t know what happened, but I have a lot more reason to give Dylan the benefit of the doubt than to believe Allen. The sexually explicit pictures he took of the teenage Soon-Yi — sister to his own children — is enough to know something is terribly wrong with this man’s moral compass.

      • Tatiana says:

        Mercy, I like your insight in this, but actually those facts are true. Firstly, the Soon-Yi affair was before those allegations were made. That happened.

        Next, you said because he is wealthy and famous, and that could have been a factor for which he was allowed to adopt. But it could be, we don’t know, so I don’t think it is wise to make that as something certain.
        Then you mentioned about people sometimes being inconsistent when making statements, that is right but in this case Dylan was very vague and didn’t say much. The video that Mia took of her recounting the events is known for being paused by Mia to make Dylan talk about how Allen abuse her.

        Also, the help was under oath when they retract their claims about Allen and completely dismissed them. The other part you say about them being afraid, it is a presumption in your part as we don’t know how they feel. All we have is that they denied their claims.
        It is actually known that Moses is stranged from the Farrow family and has reconect his relationship with Allen. Those are his words, not mine.

        To your last point, well he took those photos when she was an adult (Soon-Yi words again) and I see how those it shows Allen as guilty of this. And I agree as you said, we don’t know what happened so everything is speculative and I’m merely stating what we do know about this case. That is my point.

    • pru says:

      Woody Allen is a director, he makes movies. Cate Blanchett is an actress, she makes movies. Both are in the public eye, by choice. Both are a part of the Hollywood elite, where both gain criticism and praise at the highest levels, for their work and the things they do outside of work. Therefore, they are going to be tried in the court of public opinion.
      Having never been found guilty in a court of law is not going to stop any of this from happening.
      If we do listen to Dylan, and see her as the victim, we as the audience of their movies have a right to decide if we want to honor/award/applaud or just plain sit ourselves in a movie theater based on what we know about them.
      As an audience , it is our decision to make. It is a moral one and doesn’t make anyone anti-democratic, unethical or rotten for doing so.

      • Tatiana says:

        One thing is to have a personal opinion on the matter, and another one to ask society to act by said personal opinion, which is when some said actors should not work with Allen simply because an accusation happened. Or to publicly but anonymously throw stones and un-sustained accusations. Having a personal opinion is natural. Not doubting such opinion, going through the net calling names and slandering and wishing ill to someone because of said opinion, and asking society to live under your own assumption (like when people say that Cate deserves to loose because she worked in an Allen movie or saying she is somehow part of this case for she didn’t publicly support Dylan although she gave a resonable answer given the time of it) an ostracise a legally non-guilty person is irrational. That is what I say.

    • Nicole says:

      I’m concerned that as a child advocate, you may not appreciate the issues that apply to child witnesses.

      Yes, they are often inconsistent. But that doesn’t mean they don’t know what the truth it. It is a given that children will be inconsistent. The concerning factor would be if her story didn’t vary – that suggests coaching, not inconsistencies.

      Secondly, children have limited attention spans, especially when dealing with stressful events so it is not surprising at all that Dylan’s statement would have been made in stages.

      With respect to motive, why would Mia need to bring it out in the custody battle? She had all the evidence she ended about his inappropriate judgment – the entire reason for the custody hearing was because of his inappropriate relationship with Soon Ye. It only muddies the water and any lawyer worth his or her salt would have recommended against the timing of the disclosure at the time.

      What is not surprising is that given the upheaval in her life at that time, Dylan would choose to make the disclosure. It is also not uncommon for oldest sons to identify with their father figure in a breakup and cope by rejecting the mother who they see as responsible as depriving them of the father figure they desire.

      I’d like to think that if this matter was dealt with in Canada, even in 1992, it would have been handled much differently. But knowing what we know now about child witnesses in respect of traumatic events, your comments about what was found in those dark ages of understanding are misplaced.

  64. yoyo says:

    are you kidding me? So let’s say you learned that your boss was a pedophile but hey he’s a great boss you’d just keep on working for that individual?

    The day it was announced that that pervert had developed a relationship with his adoptive daughter because “technically” she wasn’t adopted by him, he got struck off from my book as some deranged pedo forever. Obviously, considering his age at the time I was quite sure he’s also done other pedo acts prior (you don’t suddenly wake up pedo at 50 or whatever) What has transpired since with Dylan breaks my heart for her. That no one believed her ever victimized her over and over again. She was brave enough to tell the truth , to ask for help and had to endure some added humilitation from other adults as a child. And now there is this barrage of gaslighting that is sickening. Now imagine that this powerful, rich man was DENIED any rights to his children…well that says everything to me.

    As for Cate and anyone who’s worked for him since he got married to his daughter (I am HORRIFIED that he was allowed to adopt more daughters!) they are struck off too. Just like all those disgusting actors who try justifying working with Polanski.

  65. lnd says:

    I remember in one of the many award ceremonies that have bestowed honors on Cate; she attended with her son and told him as a funny parting line “be thankful that this character is not your mummy”. All I could think was “be thankful Woody is not your dad”! Blue Jasmine is apparently about a “vengeful wife” who destroys her family (which includes an adopted child) after discovering her husband cheated on her. Hmm…I wonder where he got that narrative. Many of his movies seem semi autobiographical and many involve older men involved with teenage girls. It really truly is creepy. I’m amazed that with his track record anyone would question the veracity of Dylan’s claims. I hope she reclaims her power; she is a very brave woman.

    • Nicole says:

      “Blue Jasmine is apparently about a “vengeful wife” who destroys her family…”
      Mmmm actually that’s not what Blue Jasmine’s about at all. I know what scene you’re referring to in the movie but the movie as a whole it’s not about vengeance by any means. Also the wife isn’t the bad guy in the movie, She’s a very complicated character and everything but really the husband is the bad guy. In fact when you finish the movie you just feel sad for Cate Blanchett’s character. Movie is pretty depressing to be honest.

  66. Dark Nation says:

    Most people are against the death penalty because “what if even ONE innocent person is executed?”

    Allegations as serious as child molestation should be handled in the same way. Automatically believing the accuser because the odds favor them speaking the truth is a terrible way to mete out justice. Its effects on the accused are nearly as life-altering as a lethal injection; I know people who still can’t show their faces (in certain areas) today due to 30 year old events that were proven FALSE.

    It is because people are emotional and selfish, and do tell lies of being wronged that we must, for the most part, remember that the good of the few is as important as the many.

    Rationality IS the only way to go. Jury pools could learn a lot from it. Mia should have pursued charges back then; imfo, I believe she so completely let down her daughter that it’s keeping her hatred for WA from abating, even a little.

  67. RubyGloom says:

    Hollywood sc*m. Awards, me, me, blah, blah, more awards, me, me, fame, recognition, me, me, me! :(

  68. Junegorilla says:

    Mr King isn’t very kind to women. I recall him suggesting that the Bush twins get water boarded. And don’t think that he is a man of the people for a moment. He is an angry dry drunk who lives in a mansion in Osprey Bay. And poors like us aren’t even allowed near the property even though it’s a private road

    As far as Cate is concerned I can’t wait to hear her acceptance speech. Should prove interesting

  69. Londerland says:

    I have to admit, I find Cate’s statement to be pretty weak (and I’m a big fan). Hoping “the family” will find peace hardly seems sufficient when the victim (okay, alleged victim) has called you by name, has asked “What if it was your child?” To comment on the situation without actually answering her just seems insulting – to ignore her is another way of silencing her, of erasing her from the narrative just as Woody has attempted to do by saying that her memory is false and unreliable.

    Cate Blanchett hopes the family finds peace. For Dylan Farrow, peace means speaking out about the abuse that has blighted her life. Peace means challenging the adulation of the man who abused her. She won’t have her peace until people like Cate Blanchett answer her, because child abuse is not and should not be a private family matter. Abuse thrives in secrecy and it thrives when otherwise well-meaning people turn their faces away.

    If Cate Blanchett thinks Dylan is misremembering, or lying; if she hasn’t studied the case and feels unqualified to offer an opinion; if she’s been given pause for thought and is now regretting having worked with Allen; if she feels you can’t know for sure and she has no way to know; if she trusts the court system and believes Woody is innocent – if any of these things are what she believes, then she should say so. If she thinks Dylan is out of line to call out the people who works with Woody Allen, then she should say so. But when a victim is effectively pointing in your face and asking you to justify working with their abuser, patting their hand and saying “I hope you find peace” is not enough. May as well say “I just don’t want to hear it, honey, I don’t want to bother my pretty head with your pain”.

    • Tatiana says:

      I concur with you that the statement is very neutral and not telling about what she really thinks, that is the only correct answer she could come across. I mean she cannot prove if Allen did something or if Dylan is lying, if she would have said something that would have condem the other part (both Allen or Dylan), it would have been worse. Her statement was correct given the circumstances, but really I think whatever she may have said, she would have been equally criticize (which I don’t agree, but everyone is free to say otherwise). Sadly, I think she stil going to face this kind of questions (specially since she is going to be in the public eye more than ever all this month till march 2) even though she is not realated at all.

  70. TheOriginalWaffle says:

    Kaiser, I want to commend your gentle handling of the subject. I have been quite disappointed in other media outlets’ representations, and I was glad to see this take.

    • Aurie says:

      @Waffle,

      Actually I’m disappointed with the way many media outlets are handling it as a case of “always believe the accuser no matter what”.

      Someone on the last thread about this wrote an interesting, supposedly inspiring quote that many people liked…something along the lines of “we should always believe an accuser because it is basic human decency.”

      That to me is a gross statement and I don’t care how many of you people love it and think otherwise. I for one am glad America takes the stance of innocent until proven guilty and they proved their dedication to that belief by not charging Woody, despite all the people here claiming he would have been guilty if Dylan had been strong enough to stand trial. Too much so called evidence was iffy.

      I do agree I like Kaiser’s handling because she wrote that she believes Dylan and Dylan is a victim, but she doesn’t really attack Woody or anything.

      Finally, I do also believe Dylan is a victim but that doesn’t mean Allen (if innocent which I personally feel he is) isn’t a victim too and it’s gross to say that anyone defending Allen is guilty of victim shaming. What about the disgusting victim attacking of Allen? Since he was never convicted, legally he is a victim of all the slanderous lies you people are attacking him with.

  71. joan says:

    Even those of you who mean well don’t realize how condescending and judgmental you are when you question why Dylan wrote her letter now.

    Telling a sexual assault victim WHEN she should deal with it publicly is really not your job. Nor is it your job to decide whether or not you believe her, as if you’re her judge and jury.

    If you’re ever assaulted I promise you’ll look back on your attitude and cringe.

    • Aurie says:

      @Joan,

      I hope you don’t realize how condescending and judgmental you are when Allen was never convicted. Offering up your slanderous attacks on Allen when he was never convicted is disgusting.

      It’s not your place to judge Allen nor to continue to promote what are considered “legal lies” (since he was never convicted) against him.

      If you ever get falsely accused of something and it ruins your life, I hope you look back on your attitude and cringe….although I highly doubt it as was proven in the case of the McMartin situation and the Azaria Chamberlain one.

  72. Kosmos says:

    If there is truth to this, then WA should be held responsible…..look at what happened to Roman Polanski. I’d like to hear from Mia Farrow as to whether the facts are truthful. I believe that Mia would be honest about this. WA apparently allowed himself to get emotionally and affectionately close to their adopted daughter and then married her, so it’s entirely possible that he might have also been attracted to the younger Dylan as well. However, it’s a horrible thing to be ‘falsely’ accused of something like this. Only the people involved and the family members know the truth, I guess.

  73. DanaG says:

    I lived next door to a pedo and he owned a local business he was blacklisted by all the locals you don’t support someone so disgusting. By choosing to work with woody allen these celebrities are all supporting him albeit indirectly. No he hasn’t been proven guilty in a court of law and that chance has now passed but his behaviour has been so disgusting it isn’t hard to take the leap to believing he is guilty. Someone with a backbone would say no to working with him, Cate is a great actress she get’s offered plenty of roles and I can’t believe she didn’t know about these allegations. She chose to work with him she could have said no. I think the timing is in part to the fact Dylan can now open up about it and she is probably as disgusted as most of her family with all the bowing and scraping Hollywood is giving to Woody. Getting awards and being talked up as some sort of great man which he is far from. This has gotten her more publicity because of the timing and more and more people are becoming aware of her case and what victims of child abuse go through. Woody can get his lawyer to bitch about Mia and Dylan all they want they just trying to deflect the real horror of this story and the fact that Woody to this day takes no responsibility for his own actions and he never will. People like him don’t see it as anything wrong. Doesn’t he have a daughter?

  74. Lexie says:

    I don’t think cate should’ve spoken at all, she seems to have made things worse. Whilst oscars are no where near as important, I do wonder 1) if she will still win 2) if she does what her speech will consist of , I feel it will be a woody allen love fest.

  75. hmmm says:

    This is a woman more ambitious than compassionate. Considering her A+ list status and her freedom to choose roles, thinking a WA film elevates her into the pantheon of greats is very telling. That an Oscar matters to her so much, that this is her Holy Grail is telling as well. Hollywood’s approval matters so much more to her than standing for something worthwhile. Deep down inside, besides her brilliance as an actor, is there anyone of substance there? What is she teaching her boys?

    Dylan is a gazillion times braver than she could ever be in her acting. And yet we worship the likes of Cate.

  76. Jag says:

    @ nicegirl – I applaud you for all that you’ve done to protect the children around you!
    Even though you wish you could do more, you have made an incredible difference.

    I think that Woody is a pedophile. I also think that Mia has some problems since she’s good friends with Polanski. It reminds me of where those who were physically abused as children grow up to marry an abuser. (I almost married one.) Instead, she married an alleged (I think he did it) pedophile and is friends with another. So disgusting the entire situation.

    I, for one, wish that Woody had been in the headlines instead of Philip Seymour Hoffman this past week, but for the same reason. (Rest in peace, Philip.)

  77. daniel says:

    Here’s the bottom line: Working with someone is business. BUT, when you go on national TV and present an award or give public praise, accolades, etc. to them, THAT’s where I draw the line!

  78. Lark says:

    My issue with Cate is that she has basically slobbered all over Woody about how he “creates” real roles for women. My issue is that Emma Stone agreed to present a lifetime achievement award, or that Tom has slobbered over Woody too. That is my problem, that these people go on at length about how “wonderful” he is and agree to present awards to him. And as disgusting as a POS child rapist as Polanski is, I do think the fact that Polanski’s own victim has said that she wants to be able to go on with her own life and that she wants Roman Polanski to be able to go on with his and work makes a slight difference. Here, Dylan is obviously not okay with it. And from what I understand, Kate Arthur from Buzzfeed and a few others think the main character in Blue Jasmine is supposed to be “slightly” representative of Mia Farrow. That plus the Golden Globes awarding him a lifetime achievement award may have been what set Dylan off in terms of going public….having to see her abuser lauded like that.

  79. Luce says:

    Separating the art from the artist… the age old question. Do I stop listening to Marvin Gaye, John Lennon, Michael Jackson, The Mamas and the Papas, Phil Spector and Ike Turner-produced songs etc? These artists’ music hugely influenced and shaped who I am today and I am a very good citizen, I assure you. But they were also men that were known or accused abusers of women or young children. How do we draw the line between an artist’s moral aberrations and the phenomenal work they create? Even R. Kelly… I’m sorry, but I like some of his songs, but I know he is a total monster who lives by his own set of rules. But I don’t know how to just abandon everything that I’ve built my identity on because of my own personal judgements and what society might think if I didn’t. I think artists all face this dilemma. I know it pales in comparison to being a victim of sexual abuse, but it’s irresponsible to think that humans can be reduced to such black and white code of conduct, Cate Blanchett et al. included.

    • veggieaddict says:

      I agree with you. I was/still am a huge fan of Woody Allen movies, though I sincerely believe he might have abused Dylan after reading her article. The thing is, until Mia Farrow’s protesting against WA’s honorary GG, I didn’y know a thing about WA as a possible pedophile. Granted, I always thought it weird that he married his ex’s adoptive daughter, creeped me out, but I somehow distanced myself from his real life persona and still enjoyed his movies. I generally do this with writers, directors, musicians, doesn’t matter, especially when I loved the man’s work before finding out what a jerk/monster was in real life. You can’t help it.
      I never was a huge Polanski fan, so it was easy for me to not watch any of his movies after I knew about the child rape accusations, but with Woody…I’m torn… I won’t watch any of his work for a long while because everything will be child abuse tinted, but I’ll always love Annie Hall no matter what.

      As for Cate, I can’t impute her anything. If she would have done a WA movie after Dylan’s article, I’d probably be disappointed, but as it is, maybe she didn’t know the details about the alleged abuse or chose to handle it professionally, not caring too much about her co-workers personal issues/life. I know I am like that.

  80. Spicy says:

    Yay. Hollywood is finally listening now that some people have been called out. Diane Keaton, particularly.

  81. impychan says:

    maybe it’s because they realized just saying things about him wasn’t enough. if stars aren’t effected by association, and held accountable, as they should be, no one will care enough. i say it’s a good move but i don’t think it’s to specifically bring down Cate. She named other people. I believe it also has to do with her being prepared, can you imagine trying to take on your molester famous father in public? bless dylan and thank goodness she is happy and can speak out.

  82. jwoolman says:

    I believe Dylan was a victim. But I am not sure if her abuser was Mia or Woody. There really is much room for doubt because of Mia’s behavior, even Dylan’s own siblings are in disagreement over this. If her older brother Moses, who was 15 at the time and has worked as a family therapist, has changed his view of it and now has reconciled with his father Woody- I think we can allow other people to likewise feel differently about it than the lynch mob. It is wrong to assume that people associating with Woody despite the accusations are accepting of pedophilia. They simply may not believe Woody is a pedophile, and maybe he isn’t. These are often people who know both Woody and Mia, and they may have a real basis for not believing Mia’s version of events. Dylan’s memories may or may not be of real events, she was young and sensitive enough to be easily influenced by her mother. It simply us not that clear cut a situation because of Mia and how she proceeded.

    Woody was willing to go to court at the time, Mia was not. I don’t believe the reason is that Dylan was too fragile, even then there were ways to protect child witnesses. There were many problems with the way Mia videotaped Dylan’s statements that do suggest the child was coached. That’s a horrible thing for a mother to do to a child – if criminal activity is suspected, you get a proper interrogator familiar with children and how sensitive they are to leading questions, to provide a chance to get reliable testimony with least trauma. The prosecutor’s statements (that he was not pursuing the case but thought Woody was guilty) were highly unethical. He was grandstanding – we had one of those here, and he nearly destroyed a local teacher with false charges of child abuse in pursuit of his own political ambitions. It is much more likely that there was too much chance a conviction would not be obtained. Woody took (and passed) a polygraph test administered by an apparently experienced interrogator; Mia refused. Experts did not all agree, and witnesses of the supervised visit where the attic/crawlspace incident allegedly occurred had serious doubts about Mia’s claims. Woody himself did not immediately go running to lawyers when the accusations began, which would be consistent with someone who really didn’t do it and thought it was just a charge made by an angry ex in a custody dispute that would be easily dismissed.

    Accusations do not automatically mean guilty. My neighbor was falsely accused of rape. The woman was indeed raped, but she simply made an incorrect identification with no malice intended, and he happened to live in the neighborhood where it happened. He went to trial and was declared not guilty. But the trial was devastating for him and his young family, because of people like many here who believe accusations equal guilt. Woody never got his day in court on this matter, so he never got a chance to present evidence and witnesses corroborating his claim of innocence, and his lawyers never had a chance to cross examine people like Mia and her witnesses. The fact that Woody has been relatively silent recently does not necessarily mean he is guilty- it can also mean that he doesn’t want to put Dylan through more grief even if it was induced by her mother rather than him. Likewise he might want to let Ronan’s behavior go, if he knows it is caused by the way Mia contaminated his thinking. We probably will never know the truth of the matter. Unfortunately, Dylan is traumatized regardless of whether her memories are real or manufactured by adults.

  83. MIchelle says:

    TBH, I’m completely off the Dame Blanchett Can do No Wrong train. Sorry, you *are* judged by the company you keep. And it bothers me that this site doesn’t seem to get that. It’s even worse coming from someone like Cate, who has all the money and connections in the world, it’s not like working with Woody was her only shot at fame and fortune. Yuck, shame on her, bad move, it’s cost her at least this fan.

  84. cinders29 says:

    Someone upstream mentioned the song Dory Previn wrote about Mia Farrow. Dory also wrote “With My Daddy In The Attic”. Mentions a clarinet too.

  85. Sam H x says:

    What baffles me is that actors/actresses who are parents overlook what he did?! I really can’t wrap my head around that. Even the other actors/actresses do they not realise what he did was consciously wrong. It saddens me so much to see that people are implying Dylan is lying and Mia has put words into her head. None of these women have anything to lose, Woody has. No wonder victims are afraid to come forward or tell someone. From what I’ve read he sounds like he wasn’t afraid to use this power/influence and did his utmost to paint himself as the victim everytime. It sickens me that this man is applauded and celebrated. Where have the morals & conscious of these people gone? I stand by you Dylan, you are a very brave and strong woman. Everyone who has shared their stories of survival on here I take my hats off to you, you are all really strong and brave women.

  86. Harriet says:

    I hold anyone willing to work for or with a known pedophile or rapist personally responsible for any further acclaim or societal acceptance that comes the a users way as a result of their association. It’s reprehensible to further the career of a monster.

    Completely agree!

  87. call me cynical... says:

    “…it was just two years ago when Woody won yet another Oscar for Original Screenplay for Midnight In Paris. Why not then?”

    Well the only difference that I can see is that Ronan Farrow, her brother is launching a new show on MSNBC, so it makes it harder to believe that this is a coincidence, since he’s also being very vocal in his support of his sister and her story.

    I don’t know what the truth of the matter is, none of the public does. It’s a family matter and only the two people directly involved know the actual truth and to what extent this abuse occurred, if there is any veracity in her charges against Woody and should be left there, in private.

    This situation was already pursued criminally and through the court system. You have to wonder why charges were never brought against Woody during all that time. The authorities have become far more sensitive to the needs of the victims and tend to believe children accusers, when there’s evidence to corroborate at least part of their story. This was such a high profile case, it makes no sense to try to drag Cate Blanchett into this family crisis.

    • Miss Jupitero says:

      This is an incredibly naive statement that ignores so many facts I don’t even know where to begin. Prosecutors are very sensitive to child victims and this is why they will do anything to avoid putting them on the stand– it’s a highly traumatic experience even under the best of circumstances. The fact is and the attorney general stands by this to this day, they had cause to arrest Allen.

      This is not a private matter. The perp is a public figure who use his power and influence to escape punishment. The victim has chosen to make this public. Before you criticize her for doing so, bear in mind that victims of priestly sex abuse also feel strongly that this is not a private matter (seriously, who the hell are you to say it is?) but a wider cultural problem. We worship power and influence; we allow people who carry a lot of authority (or celebrity) to get away with hideous offenses because we just can’t bear to question them. Hollywood’s cult of celebrity is no different, and it is a huge part of the problem.

      • call me cynical... says:

        you didn’t actually comment on what I said did you? How does this have anything to do with Cate Blanchett and how are you absolutely SURE this has nothing to do with the timing on Ronan’s new show?

        The question was posed about why THIS TIME and not the LAST TIME Woody was up for an Academy Award and I was commenting on THE TIMING…

    • Miss Jupitero says:

      This article should provide some needed context for you. Allen effectively escaped prosecution by making sure that Dylan was good and traumatized during the custody trial:

      http://m.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2014/02/woody-allens-advantage-how-the-law-protects-celebs-accused-of-abuse/283595/

  88. Mari says:

    Please…. That has to be one of the most stupid theories I have heard, that the reason why Dylan is coming forward now as an adult woman is that she tries to destroy Cate’s Oscar campaign! Unbelieveble bs! Who would want to get this much crap and victim blaming from Woody Allen’s fan boys and girls for that? I mean, please! Isn’t it more logical that she is now for the first time strong enough to tell about her abuse? It must have been so hard for her to write that letter, knowing how hard peope will try to defend Woody and justified his actions. The writer of that article must be himself a fan boy of Woody Allen.
    Here’s a good article about this defender of Woody Allen:
    http://www.slate.com/articles/life/culturebox/2014/02/woody_allen_s_biggest_defender_robert_weide_s_attack_on_mia_farrow_and_her.html

  89. poppy says:

    This has probably been said….but as the mother of two girls I have tried to imagine how Farrow felt…. finding indecent, nude, photographs of her child (Soon Yi was 21 at the time, he was 56) in your partner’s home, that IS what happened. Allen met Soon Yi when she was 10 yrs old, he watched her grow up, he was a father figure (though not officially her father). So how old was Soon Yi when that started? Just pretend none of the other stuff even happened. So now it’s all kosher because they’re in a traditional marriage? Try to imagine YOUR partner…YOUR daughter, would you be ok with that? would you not think it was immoral?
    BTW, this is exactly what the Farrow family should do….what many campaigns against injustice have done (e.g. blood diamonds, apartheid etc) make people accountable for their choices.

  90. Caroline says:

    She’s such a wonderful actress, but the Academy award her with an Oscar would be inappropriate.