Scarlett Johansson thinks Dylan Farrow’s Woody Allen op-ed ‘feels irresponsible’

FFN_KM_Captain_America_031314_51355124

Scarlett Johansson is promoting her alien-seductress movie, Under the Skin, at the same time as Captain America: The Winter Soldier, a confluence of promotional tours which I’m sure upsets Marvel. Also upsetting Marvel, I’m guessing? The fact that ScarJo can’t give an interview without making news on various divisive, controversial and politically sensitive issues. Scarlett is still getting SodaStream questions… even though she’s been very clear that she has no regrets about withdrawing from Oxfam in support of SodaStream and their West Bank factory. And in her new interview with The Guardian, she defends them even further. And she goes on the record (in the worst way) about her friend Woody Allen, who directed her in films like Vicky Christina Barcelona and Match Point. You can read the Guardian piece here. Let me excerpt the Woody Allen stuff first, and here it is in context:

Last month Dylan Farrow, Allen’s estranged daughter, published an open letter in which she accused him of abusing her and condemned the film industry’s silence on the matter. In it, she pointed a finger at actors who have worked with Allen, including Johansson. It must have been a very uncomfortable experience being named in the letter, I say. How did you respond to it? “I think it’s irresponsible to take a bunch of actors that will have a Google alert on and to suddenly throw their name into a situation that none of us could possibly knowingly comment on. That just feels irresponsible to me.”

And what has she made about the backlash against Allen? “I’m unaware that there’s been a backlash. I think he’ll continue to know what he knows about the situation, and I’m sure the other people involved have their own experience with it. It’s not like this is somebody that’s been prosecuted and found guilty of something, and you can then go, ‘I don’t support this lifestyle or whatever.’ I mean, it’s all guesswork.”

So, has it had an impact on her relationship or affection for him? “I don’t know anything about it. It would be ridiculous for me to make any kind of assumption one way or the other. “

[From The Guardian]

So… Scarlett says Dylan is irresponsible for naming her and other actors for working with Woody. And Scarlett sounds like she completely doubts Dylan’s story. While I think “irresponsible” is the wrong word to use, I do think that Dylan Farrow put dozens of actors (who have worked with Woody) in very awkward positions. Do they comment either way? Do they defend their director or do they malign him on Dylan Farrow’s say-so?

As for the Oxfam/SodaStream controversy… I don’t know, I can still see where she’s coming from. I know that’s not a popular opinion and like 90% of you think Scarlett is an idiot for choosing her SodaStream contract over her Oxfam work, but Scarlett has her reasons:

Was the whole thing just a bit of a mistake? But she shakes her head. “No, I stand behind that decision. I was aware of that particular factory before I signed it.” Really? “Yes, and… it still doesn’t seem like a problem. Until someone has a solution to the closing of that factory to leaving all those people destitute, that doesn’t seem like the solution to the problem.”

But the international community says that the settlements are illegal and shouldn’t be there. “I think that’s something that’s very easily debatable. In that case, I was literally plunged into a conversation that’s way grander and larger than this one particular issue. And there’s no right side or wrong side leaning on this issue.”

Except, there’s a lot of unanimity, actually, I say, about the settlements on the West Bank. “I think in the UK there is,” she says. “That’s one thing I’ve realised… I’m coming into this as someone who sees that factory as a model for some sort of movement forward in a seemingly impossible situation.”

Well, not just the UK. There’s also the small matter of the UN security council, the UN general assembly, the International Committee of the Red Cross, the International Court of Justice… which all agree that they’re in contravention of international law. Half of me admires Johansson for sticking to her guns – her mother is Jewish and she obviously has strong opinions about Israel and its policies. Half of me thinks she’s hopelessly naive. Or, most likely, poorly advised. Of all the conflicts in all the world to plant yourself in the middle of…

“When I say a mistake,” I say, “I mean partly because people saw you making a choice between Oxfam – a charity that is out to alleviate global poverty – and accepting a lot of money to advertise a product for a commercial company. For a lot of people, that’s like making a choice between charity – good – and lots of money – greed.”

“Sure I think that’s the way you can look at it. But I also think for a non-governmental organisation to be supporting something that’s supporting a political cause… there’s something that feels not right about that to me. There’s plenty of evidence that Oxfam does support and has funded a BDS [boycott, divest, sanctions] movement in the past. It’s something that can’t really be denied.” When I contacted Oxfam, it denied this.

[From The Guardian]

Yeah, I’m still on Team ScarJo here. Flame on! I’m defending her. I don’t think her decision was about greed at all. I think she believes in SodaStream, she was aware of the West Bank factory and she’s okay with it. And it feels like people are pissed off at her for not being able to solve the Israeli/Palestinian issue in a month. She’s right – if she had withdrawn from SodaStream, would that have changed anything in the West Bank? No. Is SodaStream going to close down that factory any time soon? Probably not, and that has nothing to do with Scarlett and everything to do with the company being loyal to their long-time employees.

FFN_KM_Captain_America_031314_51355133

Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet.

 

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

204 Responses to “Scarlett Johansson thinks Dylan Farrow’s Woody Allen op-ed ‘feels irresponsible’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

    • John Wayne Lives says:

      damn. yeah she’s lost fan.. but I also think a lot of this is new too many of the actors that have been called out. I’ve never liked Woody Allen but until all this came out I had no idea about the past accusations, andthe smear campaign he launched on his daughter. maybe all of this coming out will cause some of these celebrities to investigate for themselves the truth like many of us have. I can only hope there’s backlash and women of respect will refuse to work with him..

      • SW says:

        It’s a hard place to be. He hasn’t been convicted of any crime. Are actors supposed to avoid anyone who’s ever been accused of something? There goes half of Hollywood! As far as the soda stream controversy goes, Scarlett appears to have done her research, and based her opinion on her findings and beliefs. Good for her for not buckling to others demands and opnions! She’s not my favorite actress, but I do like how she’s handled things lately.

      • Lena says:

        Yep. I’m done with her. Throwing people under the bus for future work is evil. There is something inside all of us that tells us to be wary and that something is wrong, it’s evolutionary. Woody Allen has always produced that feeling in me. His movies have him with some young woman, way too young for an old man like him, he took up with Soon Yi as soon as possible–and I don’t care about this tale of him never feeling like a father to her–, and if he weren’t a director everyone would read “creepy pedo”.

        Its like Roman Polanski’s support and its not rape-rape to give a 13 year old quaaludes and anally rape her, because “no” didn’t mean “no” to a director.

        Hollywood is seriously screwed up.

  1. LB says:

    I sympathize with Dylan Farrow. But I really didn’t like how she called out specific people who worked with her father – people with varying degrees of knowledge on the matter. So if any of those people are on the defensive, I understand that reaction and won’t criticize their responses in what is an impossible and awkward situation.

    Defending Woody though? I’d leave that to him.

    • Seriously?! says:

      I agree. If Woody had been tried and convicted, I would be on board with Dylan calling out people who continue to work with him, but that’s not what happened here. Criticizing actors for working with a man who is–in the eyes of the law–not guilty of a crime just doesn’t sit well with me.

      • Renee28 says:

        This is what I’ve said from the beginning. It’s a slippery slope when we demand people condemn someone who hasn’t been convicted of a crime. We don’t know what other actors know or feel about the situation so it makes me uncomfortable
        to try and force their hand.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        I agree. If he had been convicted, it would be a much different thing. Also, as somone who is around Scarlett’s age, I didn’t know about the Dylan accusations. I had heard of the Soon Yi stuff, but that was more of a running gag on late night tv. I thought he was creepy, but I didn’t know he was accused of doing something illegal.

        As a public figure, I can see why people wouldn’t want to take drastic action based on hearsay and not proven facts.

      • Lauraq says:

        My brother was never convicted of raping anyone, but it still disgusts me that the rest of my family knows and still treats him like gold.

    • bns says:

      I semi-agree.

      I didn’t care that Dylan called them out, but I just don’t understand why people get so pissed off when the actors who were called out come out and say that they don’t want to be involved.

      Scarlett worded herself poorly here, but I understand what she was trying to say.

    • emmie_a says:

      I agree. I do sympathize with Dylan — but I don’t think it’s up to those she called out (other than Woody) to fight her battle.

    • lucy2 says:

      I agree as well – I believe Dylan and have nothing but sympathy and compassion for her, but involving people who had nothing to do with that situation was probably not the best way to do it. I understand her wanting to point out how he’s gone on with no repercussions, and imagine she’s frustrated to see highly respected actors working with him, but I feel like in a way it deflected some of the blame away from him.
      That said, I don’t think Scarlett did herself any favors here – while I can agree with that aspect of it, she’s worded it poorly, and calling it a “lifestyle” is not appropriate.

      • respect says:

        But they do have something to do with the situation. The cult of Woody goes on thankms to them…if it was your kid, Scarlett or Cate, how would you defend him?

      • nan says:

        I don’t know if her calling them out by name was right or wrong — it was probably not the best way to do it, that’s a really good way to phrase it. But I think I can understand WHY she did, because she is clearly still seeking support and justice. It was probably not the best way to handle things when her family dropped the suit against Allen. It isn’t just Dylan’s problem, she’s right, it’s a problem of society when powerful men can cause damage to a child but still enjoy worldly acclaim. But it seems like her family & supporters missed their moment to really help her when they decided not to pursue a case.
        Scarlett, to me, just comes off as a bit callous — she might feel differently after she becomes a mother.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        Respect, I disagree. The cult of Woody Allen doesn’t continue simply because stars work with him, it continues because he was never found guilty in a COURT OF LAW, therefore if they do hold anything against him it is based on rumor, not fact.

        I think that there is a lot of outrage at this situation, but IMO, it is not productive to direct that outrage at stars. The outrage should be directed at our legal system and should lead to a discussion about how to protect children and better prosecute those that harm them.

    • V4Real says:

      This is a tough one to call because like most of you have stated Woody hasn’t been charged or found guilty of anything. However, most of us believe Dylan. There could be celebs that believe her as well but due to no proof of these allegations they remain quiet about it.

      There are a lot of us calling out to celebs to stop working with that disgusting pervert Terry Richardson but if we were to be honest with ourselves, nothing has been proven with him either. He hasn’t been charged with a sex crime inspite of all these allegations. Now I have seen those pics and they even make me cringe. The only thing those pictures prove is that he’s a disgusting pig (sorry to insult pigs). It doesn’t prove that the girls were coerced into those sexual positions and acts. So would it be fair to say that we along with the models who have stepped forward shouldn’t call out the names of celebs that have worked with him. I’m sure almost every celeb who has worked with Richardson are aware of his risqué photos but since they have no proof of him raping these girls in his own subtle way, they don’t base their decisions on allegations. They remain neutral.

      If anyone is looking for people with morals I suggest they point their compass in the opposite direction of Hollywood. I’m not saying there are not any good people in the acting world, I’m just saying.

      • Marty says:

        @V4Real- This is a great response and worded beautifully.

        I would just like to add, whatever side you take on Allen or on people being called out, there is NO excuse for victim blaming. If Scarlett truly believes Allen is innocent until proven guilty, she should have kept her comments at that. Instead she puts the blame on Dylan and compares the allegations against Allen to a “lifestyle”.

        So for that, she deserves to be called out for her ignorant comments,

    • Sarah says:

      I agree. I totally sympathize with her but it all just seems so calculated at this point – she got mad that Hollywood continues to honor him with things like Lifetime Achievement Awards and Oscar nominations. I get that. I would probably be extremely hurt and upset if I were here. That being said, it isn’t as if he is Roman Polanski. Hollywood continues to glorify and support Polanski who WAS tried and convicted and then ran away rather than face punishment. I feel very confident in my opinion that Woody is guilty as sin with respect to Dylan. That being said – no charges, no conviction. File and win a civil suit against him and then I think Dylan would have more of a right to be angry.

  2. Tiffany27 says:

    She is on a mission to piss people off. Where is her publicist?

    • GreedJo says:

      she doesn’t care about anyone other that Scarlett is that not obvious enough she knows well and good what she has to say would be interpreted but does she care NO! Just as long as she gets paid.

    • MollyB says:

      I get the impression she’s not a terribly intelligent or empathetic person. I think she wants praise and attention for being attractive and money for shilling things and that’s about as deeply as she’s willing to consider any matter.

      • Cazzee says:

        Ladies and Gentlemen, we have a winner! Excellent summary of a person’s character in two sentences.

      • Hiddles forever says:

        I agree. I was not a fan but what she said to The Guardian really put me off her and her movies forever.

        Let’s hope Marvel fires her, after she gives birth, so I am not forced to watch her smug face in Avengers 3 or 4………

        I totally believe Dylan and as a rape survivor I know very well that 80% of rapists and child molesters get away with what they’ve done, so not surprised Woody Allen was not convicted (plus he is rich, famous and powerful, something that doesn’t get along with the word ‘jail’!)

      • Meredith says:

        Agreed. She can be described in many ways (beautiful, a good comic actress) but intelligent and empathic she is not. She just sounds so thoughtless and indeed a bit ticked off that she is being asked to use her brain and to be held responsible for her decisions. Well, Scarlett, I guess things are tough all around (sarcasm intended).

  3. GreedJo says:

    Yeah I am saying greedy she is totally greedy and self involved noone expect her to solve anything but it would have been a great idea not to support Sodastream does she need the extra money no! So she is greedy and her backing Woody Alleen speaks volumes about her character which is NOT Good I hope they replace her as Black Widow because she is No Good we know why she is ther man candy but there are loads of those in Hollywood.

    I hope she gets the backlash and then some. She is greedy selfish vapid woman good luck to her kid.

    • queenfreddiemercury says:

      I love your name! I agree with much of what you’re saying.

    • Tapioca says:

      Soda stream is one of the very few employers in the West Bank that provides a good wage to the people living there as investment in the region is obviously scarce. You could shut the factory down on principle, but then principle never filled an empty stomach and it would be harder for the local people caught up in the politics to feed their families – the Israeli govt would just shrug their shoulders in complete indifference, so who loses exactly?

      Woody Allen is innocent in the eyes of the law until proven otherwise and actors shouldn’t be asked to play judge and jury when they pick their roles. If they choose not to work with ANY director for any reason that’s fine too.

      Yes, SJ is hopeless as Black Widow.

      • Gretchen says:

        But if Israel wasn’t occupying the territory in the first place, investments wouldn’t be so scarce. Besides, they aren’t “investing” in the West Bank, they’re exploiting it. Would you say that Gap is investing in Bangladesh? Probably not. Even if such factories provide the national minimum wage to their employees, they outsource their labour to other territories because it is cheaper, not because they give a damn about a foreign economy or populace.

        Palestinians have no control over their borders, imports or exports, and movement within the territory – including the transportation of goods – is strictly controlled by the Israeli military, and it is these factors that has crippled any hopes of a functioning Palestinian economy. If SodaStream really gave a damn about the people of the West Bank they would denounce the government’s policy of subsidising the rent of stolen land to Israeli companies and pay the premium price of renting industrial space inside (Green Line) Israel.

        If this situation was transplanted to the bantustans of Apartheid SA, I doubt anyone would be so quick to defend it.

      • Diana says:

        @Gretchen, you said it! beautifully put.

      • 123 says:

        @ Gretchen, Thank you for explaining it so well to people! Kudos!

      • Ennie says:

        So it is better if the families of poorer countries do not have a source of income? They may be exploitive, but when the countries get tougher, the companies flee to cheaper place. HEnce leaving people out of work. Believe me, I live in one of those countries.
        The people who get education and are capable go to better places or countries to getdbetter pay (and then they “steal” those jobs from nationals), then there is the people with basic or no education, those who are justdworking at factories, farming, cleaning, the worst jobs. They are lucky if they get a job at a factory, and work double shifts to make ends meet.
        Even then the conditions are worsening everywhere, many times due to pension issues and many of them not having health services and outsourcing even in a country that is a recipien of outsourcing jobs.
        There is no win win situation, but I prefer the factories to stay, eveg iffthey pay less. The people who buy have the last word, not the poor people working there.

    • Jegede says:

      I’m more amused by the fact that she inadvertently revealed that she has herself on Google Alert!
      LOL Scar Jo often gave off the pretentious vibe of being ‘above all that’

    • Hiddles forever says:

      GreedJo

      + one million!!!!!!!!!

  4. danielle says:

    She is an idiot who thinks she’s smart.

  5. blue marie says:

    This chick tries so hard to sound smarter than she is, and she just confirmed she’s googles herself right?

  6. People irk me... says:

    I understand her for being upset for being stuck in that situation, but I pray to God she never has to know the pain Dylan went through. I don’t care if I was offered every last cent that America is in debt for, I would never work for him.

    • T.C. says:

      +1

      Taking out the Dylan issue, I wouldn’t work for a man who married his ex-partner’s daughter. A girl who he has know since her childhood and is a sibling to his own children. Just morally outrageous. Also sad that Scarjo would consider it just a “lifestyle choice” had he been convicted of child molestation. Let’s see how she feels about this when she becomes a mother.

      • decorative item says:

        THANK YOU!
        Why is it so hard for people to see that he doesn’t have to be charged with child abuse to be someone people should opt not to work with.
        Personally, I have a problem with a man marrying his son’s sister. Considering he was the only man she knew as a Father there are so many more issues going on here. He was more than twice her age, she was VERY young, naive and easily manipulated, but people like him don’t want equality in the relationship and there was obviously none in this one. And, SURE it all started the day she hit eighteen, because he has such HIGH moral standards.

        I do believe Dylan, but even if I didn’t, based on what he has been proven to have done, there is enough evidence to justify avoiding the man. Hell, I don’t know the owner of each and every Burger King but the fact that they promote the killing of animals is enough for me not to frequent them. I don’t need WA to punch my kid in the face for me to be able to form an opinion of the man based on his actions.

      • Hiddles forever says:

        I totally agree with everything you said!

        Scarlett is really a silly muppet.

    • mercy says:

      “I understand her for being upset for being stuck in that situation, but I pray to God she never has to know the pain Dylan went through. ”

      +1

      As for working with Allen, I acknowledge that it is a tough call, especially in a highly competitive business where an actor or crew member might not have a lot of other options. But they should not be surprised if his victim doesn’t appreciate their support for her abuser, or expect to get only the benefits of working with him.

    • Dreamyk says:

      She’ll be a mother soon. I wonder if she’ll let her child be alone with Woody Allen?

      That’s where the rubber meets the road, ScarJo. I’d bet good money that would be a big ass NO. And that, in itself, is an answer.

    • Tara says:

      @decorativeitem. What you said. about everything. You are awesome.

  7. claire says:

    She seems incredibly and willfully uninformed.

  8. amylynne says:

    I’ve always liked and defended her but this is I don’t like. Does she really think there is no issue at all in working with a man who may be a pedophile? Either she is so stupid and selfish she doesn’t make that connection OR she doesn’t believe Dylan. Either option is tough for me to understand. I personally believe Dylan, and I understand her anger at people who work with Woody ignoring her pain. On the other hand, I can understand ScarJo saying/feeling she doesn’t know the truth and these accusations don’t fit with who she knows Woody Allen to be, but she should say in a more respectful way. This response comes of as off handed, defensive and quite frankly shallow.

  9. Belle Epoch says:

    Cold. Cold heart. Cold cash. Not a shred of empathy/sympathy for Dylan. Don’t question the man who makes money rain down on your self-involved little head. Woody’s inappropriate relationship with Dylan was acknowledged by the judge at the time. His apologists are full of sh*t.

    • Artemis says:

      Yup, for all those who didn’t want to believe SJ was a bitch (not the good kind), here you have it folks. She really needed to stop talking at a certain point and everything would have been OK, neutral, but she kept running that mouth and showed her true nasty colours. 2014 is really dreary gossip wise!

    • Ennie says:

      Well. Dylan was calling her name out out of a huge list. If ahe is calling the people who work with Allen she should have written a HUGE list. it is bad what happened to her, but is she trying to smear some of the actors more than others? And what about the male actors? They have daughters as well.
      Dylan must be right, but calling names randomly is not correct.

  10. aims says:

    I have Dylan’s back on this one. I would also feel betrayed if someone knowingly participate with someone who hurt me. It’s about principles. I would not attach myself to an individual who has been accused of a horrible crime. In my mind it feels a little bit of guilty by association.

    If a person cannot stand up against someone who has been accused of crimes against a child, then that’s sad. I would absolutely run the other direction ith anyone who has been accused of something so evil. I don’t care how good the project maybe.

    • Josephine says:

      I get what you are saying, but there is a big difference in working with someone who was in the past accused of a crime, and not charged and not proven guilty, and working with a known felon. Although everyone assumed that Woody is guilty, and they are likely correct, the fact remains that none of us outsiders could possible know the truth, only guess. And “experts” came to conflicting conclusions when looking at the evidence, with one saying guilty and the other saying the opposite.

      I think her essential point is true — she doesn’t have any facts that would shed light on the truth, couldn’t possibly know the truth, and no amount of research is going to change that fact.

  11. Gretchen says:

    “It’s not like this is somebody that’s been prosecuted and found guilty of something, and you can then go, ‘I don’t support this lifestyle or whatever.’”

    Sooooo she views child molestation as a “lifestyle” choice? Between the SodaStream bull and this, I. just. can’t. with her anymore.

  12. Miss Jupitero says:

    “It’s not like this is somebody that’s been prosecuted and found guilty of something, and you can then go, ‘I don’t support this lifestyle or whatever.’ ”

    Uhmm, child molestation is a lifestyle now? Does she believe that? Does she hear herself?

    Whatever you might feel about Allen’s guilt or innocence, can we all at least agree this deserves to be taken seriously? She’s pissed because she was inconvenienced by her google alert going off?

    Sorry my read on all of this is that ScarJo doesn’t give a rat’s ass. This is as shallow as shallow gets. She’s not getting any admiration from me.

    This is not a “flame” btw. This is a legitimate point of view I’m expressing. I know some of us get very attached to our celebrities, but sheesh, let’s be thoughtful, okay?

  13. Welldun says:

    Scarlett’s punching above her weight again

  14. Talie says:

    I think she’s right — every time we talk about “backlash” it feels very overdone. I mean, his next film is still coming out this year — it’s not going straight to video, so… he’s still in the same position he’s always been in.

  15. nicegirl says:

    She’s pregnant, right? I wonder if her feelings about ‘irresponsibility’ will change, once the little one arrives. Like, when she’s a mom, years down the road, if she ends up finding out someone even remotely involved with her own child (GOD FORBID) was/is/has ever been accused of doing such heinous and inhumane acts, will she think it is ‘irresponsible’ then, to bring to light the allegations, or it is more ‘irresponsible’ to not speak/share the info? Hmmm

    • MrsBPitt says:

      If I was asking her questions, I would ask “If you have a daughter, would you let Woody Allen babysit her”…Years ago, I knew this guy that seemed really sketchy..single, and always having young, prepubescent boys in his home, taking them places…One day, a friend of mine and I were discussing this guy and she was defending him, and I said, would you leave your two sons with him, and she said “hell, no”…

  16. queenfreddiemercury says:

    I think she’s an idiot. And I don’t think she is self aware at all. The fact she is complaining about google alerts is silly & petty (while I don’t think Dylan should have named anyone in her letters) Scajo should maybe not talk about it she comes off awful here.

    As far Oxfam goes I would rather be associated with them then sodastream. It was all about money.

  17. pam says:

    I’m totally in agreement with ScarJo – you folks who call her stupid are out of line. If Dylan Farrow had published my name in an op-ed regarding an alleged situation that didn’t involve me, and wasn’t even any of my business – I’d be pissed. Not only was it irresponsible, it was mean-spirited. Whatever happened to this girl, we don’t know for sure and whatever happened is within the family. She had no right to call out Cate, Diane and the others…

    • bluhare says:

      They aren’t out of line. They have opinions just like you.

    • Izzy says:

      +1. Is she supposed to lead a lynch mob against him? She’s neither judge nor jury. She’s a working actress who took a job with what she deemed a good role in a movie she wanted to be in. I can’t stand Woody Allen for his personal life and I think most of his movies suck, but I don’t hold actors responsible for his actions either.

      • Miss Jupitero says:

        O, and nobody expects that. She could however say something like “The whole situation is so painful. It will never be resolved, I know, but I hope everyone finds some closure and peace.” That’s it. Complaining about your google alert and calling it a “lifestyle” is pretty much beyond the pale idiocy.

    • chaine says:

      i agree. it is mean-spirited to attack people who had nothing to do with the alleged molestation as if they are somehow retroactively responsible for it.

    • mercy says:

      I recognised Dylan’s words as the raw expression of someone who had been living with her pain for a long time while watching her abuser receive the adulation of his adoring public, inluding many people who have gained a lot by their association with Allen over the years, like Scarlett. I may not make the connection to the people who chose to work with Allen, but I’m not in Dylan’s shoes. Worrying about one’s name showing up Google alerts seems rather petty compared to what Dylan went through.

      • Josephine says:

        It may be petty, but not so petty when you see how many people are willing to persecute her and hold it against her. And just as you note that Dylan’s choice to call out celebs may not have been perfect, she got to think about and edit her language before publishing it. Scarlett was responding to a question. I find it hard to believe that people really think that she meant that child molestation was a “lifestyle.” No doubt a horrific choice of words in the heat of the moment, but as someone who is not particularly quick on my feet, I’m willing to believe that that is not what she meant. People hate her – I get it.

      • mercy says:

        Scarlett and other actors have benefited enormously from their association with Allen. If they have to deal with the downside for their choice to work with him, and in Scarlett’s case her own words defending that choice, so be it. I can say it’s not fair, but it’s small potatoes compared to what Dylan has gone through. They’re still making good livings in their careers of choice (and in Cate Blanchett’s case, still receiving well-deserved plaudits, both professional and personal.) What happened to Dylan had nothing to do with choices she made, and there was no upside to it.

      • Mystified says:

        @Josephine. very well said!

    • Artemis says:

      That’s right, celebs can only enjoy the perks and accolades of associating with Woody Allen, praising him for the person he is and thereby diverting into the personal aspect of his life. How dare they be put in a position where they are under scrutiny for the bad personal aspects of his life! For shame! Celebs should not be burdened with the mundanities of real people’s pain……expect when they have the chance to play a character that might win an Oscar, then they care all of a sudden.

      It’s always interesting to see celebs squirm when they are faced with issues that reach beyond the standard PR practices of ignore and deflect. Dylan put them on the spot for a reason, she exposed their detachment, vanity and greed that is inherent for these insecure people and she succeeded. They will never be faced with the pain that Dylan went through and still has to live with, their ‘inconvenience’ will only last for a bit, they don’t need your sympathy. They’ll always be fine. Rolling in money and irresponsibility makes everything fine.

      • tru says:

        I agree with every word you wrote. It’s so fascinating to see how uncomfortable celebrities become when actual pain (which apparently is fine to ‘act’ out but not experience) is shown to them. It’s a sad time when someone expressing the devastation of their abuse is viewed as more problematic than the abuse itself. And that the inconvenience of receiving a google alert trumps the reality of what Dylan has lived with since she was seven years old.

      • Hiddles forever says:

        @Artemis

        I couldn’t have said better! It also shows that actors would do anything for a role or money, including supporting paedos…. Are these people so desperate to act that they must choose WA over anybody else? Hmm… What a bunch of cowards!

  18. Jaderu says:

    She just doesn’t come across as being very bright at all. I mean google alert? Really?
    I don’t hold working with Woody Allen against her though. I really don’t. Just as I don’t hold it against Cate Blanchett. At the end of the day, if I chose to not watch a movie because an actor/actress has said something dumb before or worked with a known creep, I would never be able to watch a movie again. I do think calling out only a handful of people was the only problem with Dylan’s statements. If she wanted to go that route fine. But name every actor/actress that has worked with him (and that would go back to the early 90′s, because the abuse allegations are not new news) It’s unfair to single out only a few that then feel the pressure to say something publicly.
    Scarlett just needs to not respond or get a publicist or agent that gives her canned responses to the tough questions. Even the Soda thing. She’s saying dumb things there too.
    I think Cate has handled it better. She briefly mentioned it, stayed out of specifics or didn’t relate a feeling one way or another and moved on. Cate’s either smarter or has better PR.

    • Hiddles forever says:

      I do. She could have released a better statement. What she said is “how that Dylan biotch dared to include me in a list in her letter, I am too famous and important to be trashed that way”, sorry but I do hold against them that they basically help WA to support his ‘lifestyle’…

      Or do you think that Allen movies would open in many theaters without famous actors attached to his projects? Hmmm……

  19. mimif says:

    Very poor (shallow) choice of words regarding Dylan Farrow. As for the Sodastream controversy, she’s also full of shit and I honestly can’t understand how anyone could think her allegiance isn’t predominantly profit motivated.

  20. Huh says:

    What a dumb bimbo. She made no sense whatsoever

  21. lola says:

    God forbid your google alerts are tainted because of Dylan- ?????

  22. shellybean says:

    This is why I will never get aboard the Scarlett train. I do quite enjoy her as an actress, but I do not like her much as a real person. I disagree with her on almost everything that comes out of her mouth.

  23. Andrea1 says:

    She is b*tch am sorry to use that word! How pn earth could she have said that! If she even gave a non answer like Cate B it would have been better.
    I DO HOPE SHE GETS AN IMMEASURABLE ABOUT OF BACKLASH!!! She sure deserves it! She talks as if she isn’t a woman. Am So disgusted!

  24. Mia4S says:

    Oh my God she needs to shut up so I can at least tolerate her in the Avenger movies (otherwise, don’t really care). “Hopelessly naive” and poorly educated to would guess. If I may paraphrase: ‘better to stay silent and be thought a fool then to open your mouth and remove all doubt.’

  25. TheCountess says:

    Funny how Dylan – and Ronan and Mia’s – fervor for bringing this issue back to the forefront vanished once Ronan’s talk show debuted. I think Dylan has been an unfortunate tool in all of this, the victim of many of those around her – including, yes, her publicity hungry mother and brother.

    • Jaderu says:

      This is what has bothered me about this the whole time. The timing seemed odd. I mean the allegation itself is real, tangible. She made these statements years ago and has stayed faithful to them since. I hate that her moment when she is finally able to publicly stand up and make her story heard is tainted by her brother’s splash into TV, which came just a few short weeks later.

    • T.C. says:

      Woody Allen responded finally and Dylan replied to his response. To me it was a natural ending to the public airing. Dylan wanted him to respond to her charges. There is nothing more that can be gained if she goes on TV shows or does more interviews. She is not after fame, she is happy with her normal life. She simply wanted to let him and the public know that he hurt her. I respect her for the way she handled it.

    • Sarah says:

      Or maybe Dylan’s fervor had to something to with how Hollywood got busy kissing Allen’s wrinkled backside during the first half of the awards season. We don’t know for sure and neither do you. But it is funny how you decided to find sinister motive in how the victim and her family decided to deal with the situation.
      Whatever happens, it’s always the victim’s fault, right?

    • mercy says:

      Why isn’t she out there continuing to beat the drum for her brother’s show? Her comments ended weeks before his show premiered, and she never mentioned it or him by name. If her piece was timed with anything, it was yet another awards season where she would have to deal with the public honouring and fawning over her abuser.

    • Ennie says:

      I really though that when Cate blanchett won for Blue Jasmine she or Ronan would have something to say about it.

  26. Happy21 says:

    Her comments about the Woody Allen thing make her sound very unintelligent and stupid. I had to read it twice to try to figure out what she was trying to say. Is she usually this dumb sounding? I say this because I don’t usually read anything about her because well, she bugs me…

  27. Bridget says:

    Honest question: if Scarlett did come out and say ”you know what? I think there IS something hinky with Woody Allen and I think he did molest Dylan” could Allen choose to take legal action againt Johansson for libel? Because I can get her not wanting to be dragged into the discussion, especially since she and Allen have already stopped working together (they havent done anything since VCB, right?). Diane Keaton is on her own though.

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      She didn’t have to frame her response as an attack on Dylan. If she didn’t want to come out and say she believed Dylan, she could have said, these are serious accusations and I don’t feel it would be responsible for me to comment on them. My heart goes out to Dylan, or something like that. She didn’t have to make it about how mean it was for Dylan to inconvenience her with the truth.

    • mercy says:

      How about something like ‘It wasn’t my experience so I don’t feel like I’m in a position to comment on something so personal, but my deepest sympathies go out to anyone who has been a victim of abuse.’ Or ‘no comment.’ Almost anything would have been better than publicly branding someone who has been living with her pain for a long time and finally summoned the courage to speak for herself as ‘irresponsible.’

  28. Mallory says:

    Oh, boo-hoo… They don’t like being shamed about it. They want all the accolades, none of the responsibility. It’s even grosser when women defend Woody cuz he makes prestige movies that Academy pays attention too… Ohh, so what if we propagate a culture where abusers can act with impunity.
    I used to find Scarjo’s acting style annoying, but after Sodastream and this mess, she just comes off poorly. Just because she’s pregnant, it doesn’t mean she was given a carte blanche to talk about stuff.
    But honestly, if Blanchet had no problem with it and no cognitive dissonance arises in her mind when talking about feminism and about women problems worldwide and working with women alleged abusers, then what can you expect from Scarlett.
    These people should just cash in the checks, and stop talking about world affairs, human rights and whatever since they don’t even try to address the problems in their own backyard. No news here but Hollywood is a cesspool.

  29. GoodNamesAllTaken says:

    I try not to hate people, I really do. Especially people I don’t even know. It’s a waste of my emotions and energy, bad karma, and all the rest. But I’m having a hard time right now. Dylan summons the courage to publicly share her truth, her story and her pain. She just couldn’t stand it anymore, and she was beseeching people to understand how their working with and lauding her tormentor felt like a betrayal to her – and a complete denial of what happened to that innocent little girl. It made Scarlett uncomfortable. It was supposed to. And this is her response? That it was irresponsible? That it’s probably not even true? That pedophiles choose abusing children as a “lifestyle” that can be approved or disapproved of? She disgusts me. I will never look at her the same way again.

    • Hiddles forever says:

      Same for me! And it is really painful to hear those words from a woman….
      It is very true that if you don’t experience something directly you can act like it doesn’t exist for anyone else either.
      She is disgusting. Poor choice of words or not, you don’t call an abused woman irresponsible because your google alert went off for something ‘trivial’.

      She is a first class imbecile.

  30. Rabia says:

    Prior to reading this interview, I thought I liked Scarlett. I’d never seen/read an interview of hers. Now I’m thinking she’s a complete idiot. An idiot with zero self awareness who thinks she’s smarter than she is. The worst kind of idiot, really.

  31. aenflex says:

    Who gives a poo if Dylan has made other actors uncomfortable or placed them in an awkward position? Seriously. It’s that very mindset that keeps abuse of that nature hidden, and victims silent, regardless of social standing.

    And as far as Woody, there’s not a lot of guesswork here, the man’s a perv, generally speaking. Eeew.

  32. Leslie says:

    Does anyone really care what Scarlet Johansson thinks?

  33. Honeykitten says:

    As someone who has recently come back from Palestine, the argument that Sodastream workers should be greatful for their job is garbage. The workers work 12 hour shifts with no pay or overtime. Add to that the 2 – 3 hours travel time because they are not allowed to live anywhere near the factory because it is an area under Israeli control. They are often fired if they take a sick day and while their wages are relatively higher compared to the rest of the Palestinian population, they are still paid below minimum Israeli wage. And that in a nutshell is why the factory operates on stolen land – the government gives the company tax breaks to operate there and the wage costs are way lower than if they operated legally in Israel. She is using the same argument that was used during South African apartheid ie. the blacks are lucky to have a job under the whites. It doesn’t wash then and it doesn’t wash now.

  34. Alexis says:

    She should have said nothing at all.

  35. Mari says:

    I think Dylan had every right to name those actors for working with Woody and make them and other actors (hopefully) think, if it really is so desirable to work with Allen. I mean, what is their motive for working with an alleged child molester anyway? If their will to work with Woody is that great then they should be able to tell their reasoning also to their audience and face the critique of the ones, who think that being talented isn’t a good enough reason to escape social and legal responsibility in these kind of matters. One main point of that letter was to criticize, how society ignores the victims while continuing to praise alleged pedophiles. The fact that the case didn’t go to trial doesn’t mean that the victims need to shut their mouths and stop talking about the incidence, because talking about it out loud is considered inconvenient by people like Scarlet. Dylan is not the one being irresponsible with her comments. Scarlet is.

    • Ellie says:

      Well said Mari, I agree with every word. I don’t know how people can appear in Allen’s movies, I haven’t watched them since the allegations. I’m disappointed with all those actors, especially Cate, who I have admired so much over the years. I don’t give a damn about Scarlett, she’s always come across as cold and shallow.

    • Violet says:

      Alleged is the key word in all of this. After that, any other comment about how these actors are morally represible for working with him are meaningless.

      • Hiddles forever says:

        @violet

        What you wrote is what abuse apologism is. Oh it is alleged, never been proved! Sometimes I really get upset to see these comments because what you said is part of the pain that abuse and rape victims suffer. We are all liars, aren’t we?
        If people don’t stop believing these creeps instead of the victims, making the most incredible excuses for them, things will never change.

  36. cro-girl says:

    Like it or not Scarlett, you’re part of it now. Is it fair? Not really but at the same time you are a part of what is perpetuating rape culture. No one chooses this clearly, but its time to wake up. I really dont think she’s cold I think she’s just clueless.

    • Original Lee says:

      This. If being named in Dylan’s letter made her uncomfortable or brought shame to her Google Alert, then maybe she shouldn’t have worked with Woody to begin with. As someone else mentioned, she wants all of the glory for working with him and none of the backlash.

      Also, she’ll probably feel differently about child molestation being a “lifestyle choice” once she begins her family. I doubt she’ll be signing up for Woody Allen’s babysitting services then. Or hey, Scarlett if Woody isn’t available to watch your child maybe you’ll consider Casey Anthony. She wasn’t convicted either.

      And to everyone on this board defending Scarlett not wanting to be mentioned – do you have children? Would you willingly spend time with someone who is heavily rumored to be a child molester? Would you seriously not feel disgusted with the people who do choose to spend time with that person? I don’t have children and even then the answer is obvious. If you lie with dogs don’t be surprised when you get fleas.

  37. mercy says:

    How do you respond? Not the way she just did. I find her comments self-centred, ignorant, and insensitive. She seems to be more concerned about having her name associated with a mess than with all the evidence supporting the position that Allen is, at the very least, an inappropriate creep who is sexually obsessed with very young women, including his children’s sister and daughter of his long term lover. I understand it’s a tricky situation for everyone who has worked with Allen, but would it have killed her to say ‘no comment,’ or express the slightest bit of compassion for Dylan’s distress? Instead she calls her “irresponsible.” Lovely.

    She should ask herself why the SodaStream employees don’t have more options for employment or why they can’t commute to another location nearby. The answers are complex, but the soda jerks are part of the problem, not the solution.

    “There’s a lot of evidence Oxfam has supported and funded the BDS movement” fed to her by the company paying her millions no doubt. Oxfam denied they support the BDS movement but she trashes them anyway. Why did she accept the ambassador title then? No one was asking her to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in a month or ever. They were asking her to honour her commitment to Oxfam.

    • Tammy says:

      She appears to be clueless or arrogant or both. Take your pick. While I definitely understand that Dylan made her feel very uncomfortable by dropping her name, there was a better way to handle it. While I believe Dylan was molested by Woody Allen, he wasn’t convicted of it and Hollywood will continue to work with him. This a far different situation than Roman Polanski, who raped a 13 year old, was convicted, fled US to face punishment and he’s adored by many in Hollywood. So if a felon is defended by Hollywood, what chance do you think an alleged pedophile is going to be shunned or no one wouldn’t work with him?

  38. jwoolman says:

    I don’t blame Dylan because I think she really is traumatized- I just don’t know by whom. Her mom Mia Farrow easily could have manipulated her into her current memories, there are just so many oddities about Mia’s actions. Or the events might have happened but not with Woody- it’s not uncommon for abused children to blame someone safe because they are afraid to name the real culprit, and a child can get real memories merged with false ones much more easily than adults and so may come to believe the revision. Or maybe Woody really did do it, although the story requires super speed and sudden disappearance of his acute claustrophobia… I really think that other males who had access to her should be suspected. Perhaps starting with Mia’s brother, who is a convicted child molester.

    Anyway, the public statement by Dylan has the smell of her attention-seeking younger brother on it. She has nothing to gain but a lot to lose emotionally from it. But Ol’ Blue Eyes alleged son has everything to gain and nothing to lose. This stuff has given him name recognition that is like gold to someone with his ambitions, and he gets to play the White Knight denouncing predators. I know you all seem to get weak kneed looking into the eyes of this aging child prodigy, but I just don’t get a good feeling from him (even before all this). We may not know who his father is, but he is definitely his mother’s son.

  39. Sandy says:

    Why is she talking, and why is she being allowed to talk? As if the Soda Stream controversy weren’t enough to make her seem like a horrible human being (because who ISN’T for the Israeli enslavement of the Palestinians), now she’s going to weigh in FOR an accused child molester by saying it’s “guesswork” at least one respected judge wrote was evading criminal prosecution based on his celebrity.

    What, oh what, is she going to support next?

  40. Kelly says:

    So pedophilia is a lifestyle and rape claims are equal to guesswork???
    Oh man, you’ve really put your privileged foot in your stupid mouth that time. She’ll regret this.
    I bet she was trying to come off as incredibly diplomatic, smart and aloof, but she’s proved to be a cold-hearted a**hole.
    Good work honey, I’ll never pay for any film you make ever again.
    And seriously, in all honesty, would she leave her own future kid alone with Woody Allen, after all that we’ve heard and know about him? Well?

  41. break says:

    Good on the Guardian reporter for asking her fairly tough questions, and then not just accept the stock response and move on. It’s rare nowadays to see a journalist put a top celebrity on the spot.

  42. Shelby says:

    Woody Allen is just absolutely disgusting, my skin crawls when I see him.
    And I just don’t care for Scarlett at all…

  43. eliza says:

    Let’s all pray Johansson’s child always knows a normal, healthy protected life unlike the one poor Dylan experienced as a child.

  44. Meg says:

    i love how she mentioned ‘actors with google alerts’ so the real issue is she was bothered and wasn’t able to comment on it right away. that’s the issue. not the possible child molestation, she was bothered so that’s the issue. not selfish at all scarlett, not at all.

  45. Miss Jupitero says:

    I think we all need to stop expecting Hollywood stars to be smart, compassionate, and aware. The handful that are are the exceptions. Most would be lost without their handlers and care only about their own bottom line.

  46. Lexie says:

    I always hated Scarlett, always and I mean actual hate, so this doesn’t surprise me. To me Scarlett has never shown any kind of human behaviour that one would find attractive.

  47. Violet says:

    Dumber than a sack of hammers, and with as much empathy, ScarJo always makes me think of that old song — she ain’t pretty, she just looks that way.

  48. wtf says:

    Cute but stupid
    This will obviously be on her tombstone. You don’t get to wade into the middle of the Israel/Palestine conflict and then try to remain neutral. I would have more respect for her position if I thought that she had any idea what the settlements are and why people are upset about them. If you think that the settlements are okay, then fine. But you have to own that, and the ire that comes from people that think that they are illegal at best (the official position of the U.S. the UN the UK etc) and a travesty of justice at worst. Taking the money and working with them, is taking a side.
    As for the Woody Allen drama, B*tch please. If my father raped me and then you worked with him, you bet your sweet a$$ I’m going to call you out. I wouldn’t care about how speaking my truth was going to make you uncomfortable. Go ahead and hit back if you want. It makes you look like a monster.

  49. db says:

    We may never have undeniable “proof” about Woody, so the accusation will probably never be resolved. So there are people who simply don’t believe Woody did anything wrong, period. I put Diane Keaton in that camp. Still I kind of love it that Dylan and her brother are calling people out on their crap, most of whom would sell their grannies to succeed in this business anyway.

  50. Christina says:

    ScarJo has always been this insipid. It should be of no surprise. I thought I liked her as an actress for a hot minute after Lost In Translation, but quickly realized how unbelievably overrated she is. She is beautiful physically and that seems to get her by. I think she would have been better off not commenting at all. Whining about her Google alert really just made her look even more idiotic. While I believe Dylan’s story, I do think it was a little crass to mention the names of those who worked with Woody. However, those mentioned in the piece should realize that it came from a place of pain and frustration of not being heard or taken seriously. They should just err on the side of caution and not comment at all. It will help no one at this point. As for the Sodastream fiasco, I honestly don’t know enough about it to comment..though my thoughts are that ScarJo was probably being shallow and moronic as usual.

  51. FLORC says:

    She has always struck me as not too bright and this reaffirms it.

    How she’s defendable makes no sense to me. e has a right to her opinion, but at the end of the day she’s trying to shame an alledged victim of assault for saying she worked with Allen. And she did.
    And using “irresponsible” here shows her grasp on the english language is on par with Beiber’s.

    I just can’t stand her.

  52. Marianne says:

    She isn’t exactly defending Woody either. She says she has no idea what actually happened and she isn’t making any assumptions.

  53. mkyarwood says:

    Ugh, this vapid woman. Do you know how much soda you’d have to drink to make SodaStream worth it? She believes in soda! Like, OMGEEEEEEEE!

  54. Vl says:

    In my opinion, based on what Ms Johanssen has talked about in previous interviews, she’s dumb as fuck. I really don’t care for whatever she has to say on any subject in general, it is however unfortunate that when commenting on her peers(I use the term loosely as she’s more a mushy set of tits than an actress), whatever she blurts out will actually be given consideration and may effect the public opinions in matters.

  55. Karen says:

    I’m a ScarJo fan. I think she shouldn’t have said a word about the Woody thing. Literally replying, “Sorry, I’m choosing not to comment on this difficult situation”. Duh.

    I think her sodastream choice was fine as well.

  56. Tara says:

    Before, I just thought she was an idi0t. Now I know.

  57. annie says:

    If she has a daughter, will she let Woody around her?

  58. Karen says:

    Honestly, who cares if her switch to Sodastream was profit motivated? Girl’s gotta eat, and she’s entitled to whatever lifestyle she wants. In her years with Oxfam, she’s probably done more humanitarian work than a lot of us, so why the hate? She did her time and she’s done her part.

  59. bamabrasileira says:

    I agree with Scarlett. She and other actors working with Woody Allen may have had no previous knowledge of his past with Dylan. She (Dylan) called these people out as if they were some how involved in her alleged sexual abuse by Allen. Dylan made it sound like she had personally contacted each of those actors publically and been perposefully snubbed by all of them. I am guessing this did not happen. Being a survivor of sexual abuse does not give you the right to point your gun and shoot at anyone you happen to not like on that particular day.

    • Hiddles forever says:

      She only mentioned people working with her father. And as an abuse and rape survivor I found your comment quite offensive. Saying the truth (which considered any single situation is always different) is not like shooting randomly at people.

      People like you are the reason why people like me keep speaking out.

      • Miss Jupitero says:

        Dylan did not randomly shoot at anyone, harm anyone, or even cast aspersions on anyone. She asked a basic ethical question which was designed to encourage the people she named consider their own complicity. This is completely valid. ScarJo failed the test. Utterly. If her precious image is tarnished, it is because she put her foot in her mouth.

  60. joan says:

    I’ve never gotten her appeal. She does project self-confidence, so there’s that, but she doesn’t impress me.

    And the fact that she can’t articulate her position on either issue in a way that persuades me means that I’m not impressed with her mind, either.

  61. LAK says:

    At least she has opinions and she’s aware of the situations she finds herself in or rather the consequences. Whether or not I agree with her decisions, I at least know that she thought them out. Compare this with JLO or Hilary Swank who refuse to take responsibility and seem to have refused to educate themselves and happily blame it all on their handlers!!!

  62. Liroo says:

    Next up!

    Lady Gaga shills for a Innatron Enterprises. News breaks that Innatron has a factory in a poor Bangladeshi settlement. Gaga says she knows of the factory exploiting workers, but stands behind it anyway.

    Hell breaks loose.

    I get that she’s Jewsih, but most Jewish people I know don’t support illegal settlements. That’s just coming out in favor of apartheid. Imagine if Charlize Theron had hawked goods for a group that imprisoned Mandela.

    • Jennifer12 says:

      I’m Jewish and there is no apartheid. Land has been ceded over and over again and the reason they live separately is that the Palestinian authority has said repeated they do not want peace with Israel- or, as they call them, Jewish pigs. They are able to shop, go to restaurants, use the hospitals, get treated, receive aid- but since they keep lobbing rockets, grenades and plain old rocks at the Jews they loathe, the Jews stay away and stay separate.

  63. Paige says:

    She just wants to keep being in his films. She’s been in several films of his and he’s writing her paychecks so…..

  64. chauncey says:

    Right on Kaiser. I agree with you 100% in regards to the Oxfam situation and Woody situation.

  65. lambchops says:

    What she’s saying is she just doesn’t know what happened and so she can’t really make an appropriate comment about it. I don’t think that she’s coming down on Dylan Farrow, but what can she possibly say about Woody Allen when she really does not know what happened?

    • Amy says:

      If didn’t know what happened she should just said so but she kind of come down on Dylan so this won’t look good for her. The worst is she knows it and don’t care. She knew whatever she said about it would become news. In delicated situation like this you stay out of it. Nobody should point fingers. She comes off as ignorant and she already has a hollywood fame for being shady. The irony she just announced she is going to be a mom. She should at very least be sensible to Dylan situation and what she went through. No mom would want her kid to go through something like that.

  66. Elizabeth says:

    She sounds like an uninformed, rape-apologizing idiot. I’m so disgusted by her babbling in this interview. I used to be fairly indifferent to her, but after reading this BS I can’t stand her.

  67. Alyce says:

    I rarely talk badly about actresses on this site because I feel most of them get unfairly attacked for doing nothing wrong (ie. Jennifer Lawrence, Blake Lively, etc). That being said, I can’t stand Scarlett. The nicest way I can phrase it is she thinks she’s a lot smarter than she actually is. She has resources, there’s no excuse for maintaining her level of ignorance.

  68. aquarius64 says:

    Why couldn’t Scarlett say it’s a family matter, it was not her place to comment and keep it moving? Thanks to her mouth her is going to be tied to this tragedy, and she won’t look good in this. Marvel is starting to come off the pregnancy bomb (if they didn’t know) and now this. There’s still time to re-write her part in Age of Ultron. Just sayin’.

  69. Tina says:

    It was totally unnecessary Mia name dropping actors but considering the delicate situation Scarlet should not in any way tried to dismiss mia letter because it makes her Woody granter and i’m pretty sure she would never want to be in a similar position much less the child she is going to have in a few months. As someone who will soon become a mother she should have think better. The whole story is scketchy and delicate so is just better stay out of i like Cate and Emma did. To tell the truth her words didn’t surprised me. From all the mentioned actors i knew she would be the one siding with Allen.

  70. Jessica says:

    In a situation like that you would imagine people specially a woman who will become a mother would be more sensitive about it but i guess not. Scarlet was never know for her sensibility but you can always hope. How she would feel having her son/daughter experience something like that? doubt she would be so aloof. Scarlet stupidity. She is probably looking after herself after all woody’s movies are the only ones she can get nominations.

  71. Lark says:

    Scarlett is such a dumbass. And the thing about the google alert…ugh. She needs to get a reality check.

  72. moon says:

    Am I the only one who admires her? At least she has the guts to voice out her opinions, stick to them and not hide behind waffly, on the fence PC PR ones. I might not necessarily agree with her point on sodastream, but she’s not making a dumb case for her action – she’s taking a pragmatic one that’s also controversial. As for the thing with Dylan, I’m with her. Unlike Roman Polanski, Woody was never convicted (with only hearsay to back both parties up you cannot point out 100% on guilt) and you can’t ask someone to pass judgement on something that may or may not have happened. It was irresponsible and attention seeking to put in all these celebrity names just to stir attention.

    • Hiddles forever says:

      It was not irresponsible to call people out in connection with her father. If actors didn’t work with WA, he would be out of business, right?
      Normal rapists don’t get convicted. Do you really think that a child molester with money and power would? You might as well declare that we all live in Disneyland.

  73. Violet says:

    ScarJo has a point regarding Allen, and a valid one. But, unfortunately she has choose her words badly and she comes across as insensitive about it. She could have better comment as Cate did (which was a perfect response, emphatic with Farrow but not condemning with Allen as he is not been prosecuted at all. But still people criticize her and that I will never understand).

    About the Sodastream issue, the better I say the best as I do not support her views in the topic and could gave her a million of factual reasons to it, but I respect her opinion on it. At least she seems to stand by her choice.

  74. alan says:

    Of course she’d stick up for Woody. Didn’t she dump Ryan Reynolds to hook up with old man Sean Penn? She has some weird daddy issues herself, probably just believes Woody was being an affectionate dad.

  75. AnnieCL says:

    Well sexual abuse of a child is one of the worst crimes. I can totally understand Dylan ‘ s decision to name celebrities in her ‘campaign’. A sexually abused child should not have to ‘campaign’ for the crime committed against him/her to be recognised. I am always going to, first, believe a victim of such a crime over the alleged abuser as it is such a horrendous crime. Fair play to Dylan, & most ‘celebrities’ are d*ckheads – fact!

  76. The Mad Zak says:

    There are incredible double standards in Hollywood. Woody Allen has not been convicted in court of any sexually related charges. However, considering he started a relationship at age 57 with his common-law wife’s adopted 20 year old daughter, Dylan Farrow’s accusations should not be shrugged off as totally unfounded. In spite of possible (or likely?) child molestation, there are people in Hollywood defending Allen. On the other hand, Mel Gibson, an alcoholic who insulted Jews during a time where he fell off the wagon, is a pariah, and no one will work with him. Michael Richards hasn’t has much work at all since he used the “N” word on a heckler at a comedy show.

    I guess that’s the message Hollywood is giving us. Molesting children is OK, but god forbid you use a racial epithet.