Diane Keaton: ‘I’ve been Woody’s friend for 45 years, nothing’s going to change that’

keaton1

Diane Keaton covers the new issue of More Magazine. She’s 68 years old. Lord, that comes as a startling realization. I like Diane, although I do think she’s sort of loopy and sometimes she’s forcing herself to be kind of loopy. Anyway, Diane is promoting her new book, Let’s Just Say It Wasn’t Pretty, and she’s telling all (not really) about kissing leading men, marriage and Woody Allen. Some highlights from the More interview:

She’s dated/kissed Warren Beatty, Jack Nicholson, Al Pacino & Sam Shepard: “I have a list of all the men I’ve kissed. The only one I’ve missed, really, is Matthew McConaughey.”

She never married: “I told myself I wanted to, but I didn’t really want a man that I could have. I wanted the dream.”

Woody Allen: “I’m Woody’s friend and I’ve been Woody’s friend for 45 years. And nothing’s going to change that.”

[From Us Weekly]

45 years? Let me do the math… They’ve known each other since 1969? Okay, that makes sense. It surprises me that people don’t make a bigger deal about Diane’s romantic history with Woody – he wrote Annie Hall (and many other parts) for her, and they dated for years in the 1970s. Diane was his muse before Mia Farrow. Diane also doubled-down on the Woody-love in the new issue of People, saying:

“I love Woody. I don’t want to say anything about [his daughter Dylan Farrow’s accusations that he molested her, which he denies] except I’m Woody’s friend, and I believe him. That’s the bottom line for me.” She continues, “I worry for him and everybody else involved, and I hope it works out for the best for everyone.”

[Via Page Six]

Will Diane mostly get a pass, like Cate Blanchett? Or will people be completely “over” Diane now, like so many people were pissed off at Scarlett Johansson for defending Woody? Ugh. I’m tired of fighting about this.

keaton2

Photos courtesy of WENN, archival photo, More Magazine.

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

111 Responses to “Diane Keaton: ‘I’ve been Woody’s friend for 45 years, nothing’s going to change that’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Dani2 says:

    *Scratches Diane Keaton off favourite celebs list*

    • doofus says:

      yup, now I’m over her.

      I don’t think she has kids or grandkids, but if she did, and Molester Allen fondled them? would she still be as forgiving?

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      +1
      So sad.

    • blue marie says:

      + 2, she most definitely does NOT get a pass..

      • LilyT says:

        +3

        There are some things that end friendships, even 45 year ones. No exceptions, no excuses.

    • zbornak syndrome says:

      Yup, and just like that- no longer a fan.

    • LakeMom says:

      Ditto.

    • Hiddles forever says:

      Same here….

      She doesn’t get a pass Kaiser. She even dated the creepy Allen, what could people expect to hear from her mouth?

    • (The original) Violet says:

      Me, too. No pass from me.

    • ann valor says:

      Why? Because she’s choosing to stand by her friend until actual evidence is produced, charges are filed, and the prosecution wins the case? Yeah.

      • Eleanor Zissou says:

        Yeah, if she stood by him after charges were proved, then yes, I’m over her. But she chooses to believe a friend she knows for 45 years until it’s proven otherwise and I respect that.

      • Slim Charles says:

        Yes, what’s wrong with saying I’ve been his friend for 45 years and I believe him? After all, she knows him better than 99% of the people commenting. Maybe she’s wrong and maybe she’s a horrible judge of people, but she believes him and she has a right to say it.

      • Violet says:

        This a hundred times.

      • Becky1 says:

        I respect her loyalty. He’s never been officially charged or convicted. If I had a good friend who was accused of being a child molester and I didn’t witness anything that would substantiate the charges I would believe him/her, too. Maybe he did it, maybe he didn’t. None of us on this site know for sure.

  2. Kiddo says:

    Well, la-dee-dah, la-dee-dah.

  3. Marianne says:

    Really, nothing?

    I get he’s your friend and your probably believe his side of the story because you’ve seen nothing to suggest he would do anything wrong, but what if some undeniable proof did come out? Would you still stick by him?

    • Dana m says:

      I sort of admire her loyalty to him. Not many people would stick by a friend who’s daughter has accused him of child molestation. She chooses to believe him out of loyalty to their friendship.

      • winosaurusrex says:

        Ok. The claims are horrific. I get that. But as he was investigated and not charged-for whatever reason, I’m sick of all the “molester” claims. NONE of us really know what happened. We can choose what we want to believe-. I believe he’s a skeevy man who married his daughter (though she wan’ts legally his daughter) it’s sketchy and gross. But I always try to err on the side of indisputable proof. I’m not always successful but I try.

        ESPECIALLY when the person accused it a dear friend. I don’t blame Diane one bit. She knows Woody better than any of us-and probably has a better judge on his character than we do. Am I saying she could be wrong? No. But why are we condemning her for standing up for a friend-something any of us would do in the absence of irrefutable proof?

        This is not those people standing up for Polanski-he was charged and found guilty and ran. Judge those celebs all you want.

        That being said. the man really creeps me out.

        BTW how many of you saying Woody did it-with no evidence (I’m getting to the claims) except Dylan’s Claims (and Dylan is exceedingly brave), but are defending Bryan Singer and his ilk against the current claims? Yes, I’m stirring the pot but the point remains.

        *runs off before the pitchforks come out*

      • janeFR says:

        I’m with you on this and winosaurusrex said it really well.

      • mercy says:

        “She knows Woody better than any of us-and probably has a better judge on his character than we do.”

        True, but that also means she’s going to have a much more difficult time looking at the situation objectively.

        This is a tough one. I like Diane on and off screen. Her friendship with Allen pre-dates the molestation allegations by decades. They haven’t worked together for many years, but they’ve maintained a relationship. He’s probably like family to her. She’s probably not angling for another role or anything like that. She’s not going into a defense of him over the allegations. She’s not acting like no one should have a problem with him. She’s only speaking of herself and their longstanding friendship.

        That said, I have more reason to believe Dylan than Allen given the evidence in all the documents, his behaviour with his children’s sister, and his own inconsistencies and sleazy tactics used in defending himself over the years. So while I can understand where Diane is coming from, I can’t deny that my opinion of her is diminished by her longstanding friendship with Allen.

        I’m not as familar with the Singer case, so I’ll have to read up on that before I comment.

  4. Tswise says:

    Gross. I really hate this because I love Diane Keaton’s acting, but her behavior and words on this are an absolute no-go for me. Bye, Diane.

  5. QQ says:

    Right, cause friends and unquestionable or anything

    • Hiddles forever says:

      Exactly, friends can be monsters and rapists too…. Not surprised she is sticking to his version of facts though, it takes too much courage to stand up, movie actors are not known to be brave usually.

  6. Joy says:

    Call me hateful but the Soon Yi debacle would have been enough for me to be like welp, we’re done here.

    • Tracy says:

      Ugh. No kidding!

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      I don’t think you’re hateful. I think what he did was obscene, marrying the sibling of his own children and the child of his lover. That would have been enough for me, too.

    • Isadora says:

      This!

    • minime says:

      I’m with you on that.

    • PunkyMomma says:

      Yes! Did she think the nude photos of Soon Yi were just, what, art? Gross.

    • Dana m says:

      Joy: totally agree. Marrying your step child is unethical. I would have a problem with that is any of my males friends did the same.

    • mercy says:

      Yes. Me too. She had already known him for over 20 years when that happened, but that means she was in a position to try to talk some sense into him. I wonder if she did, or just stood by.

    • Green Is Good says:

      Yep. Ditto to that.

    • Santolina says:

      Exactly. The Soon-Yi situation is egregious enough. Personally, I had to end it with a dear college friend who did some publicly unethical things. I can’t “unlove” her, but I had to make the difficult decision to break off our friendship. I could no longer support her without going against my values.

    • Nina W says:

      It was enough for me, I have not watched, and will not watch any of his movies, since the Soon-Yi episode. I got into an argument with my mother over this because she wanted me to see one of his movies but I made this decision a long time ago, I don’t support his career, I’m over it, genius or no.

  7. Ag says:

    ugh. scratching her (and cate) off the list of actors i like.

  8. PoliteTeaSipper says:

    Wonder if she’s say the same if Woody molested a child of hers. Goodbye, Diane.

  9. daisy says:

    Wow I’m disappointed, but I guess I wouldn’t want to believe my close friend was a child molester either. I hope she is, at least, a little conflicted. If she had a daughter she might feel differently.

    • HappyMom says:

      She does have a daughter.

    • Renee28 says:

      She has a daughter and a son. Most people wouldn’t believe their friend was a child molester.

      • minime says:

        I don’t know. I think that even if you don’t want to believe there will be always some doubt in the air (sadly when it’s undeserved). I praise people who support their friends, mainly when they have strong reasons to believe in their innocence. Still, supporting and condoning are two different things. When it comes to this specific case, I don’t think Woody Allen has a good past history (even comments from himself in interviews) that support such a consistency of character.

  10. FingerBinger says:

    I get where Diane Keaton is coming from. 45 years is a long time to be friends with someone. When you love and respect someone you tend to stay loyal to them. She doesn’t want to believe her friend is a child molester.

    • ^^Yeah this completely…I wanna hate her like everyone else here does but I just can’t.

    • TX says:

      I agree. I personally dont believe him and I think he is a predator, but I get why Diane does not want to believe it. I think its really easy for us to sit here and say “if I were her I would not be friends with him”…well, they’ve been friends for almost 50 years (which is about twice as long as some of us on here have been alive), so I get why it is not so easy for her.

    • littlemissnaughty says:

      I’m with you on this one. This is not a Cate Blanchett or Scarlett Johansson situation. She has known the man for most of her adult life, she’s dated him for years for God’s sake. She’s probably never witnessed anything inappropriate or criminal (the Soon Yi thing is up for discussion but that was not illegal) and only knows him as a wonderful person. How many spouses/children/parents will swear on their lives that their loved ones are great people who would NEVER? And then they turn out to be someone they don’t even know. Some awful, twisted version of the person they thought they loved (and maybe still do). It’s so common, it happens every day.
      I do believe he did SOMETHING. What exactly, we might never know for sure. But let’s not forget that we don’t know any of these people so it’s much easier to pick a side. To tell someone you love to their face that you believe the accusations and want nothing to do with them anymore despite a 45-year history? How many times does that happen?

      ETA: I do, however, very much judge J. Foster for supporting Mel Gibson despite everything. There’s a line.

      • KatNotNice says:

        How is judging J. Foster for being friends with Mel Gibson any different from D. Keaton bein good friends with Allen despite everything? Because they don’t go 45 years back? I mean….

      • littlemissnaughty says:

        No, not because of that. It’s because there is NO doubt what Mel Gibson has been up to. It’s all out for the world to see so you can’t say that Foster just wants to believe him because of their history. There’s no room for speculation. She can, howevery, say that she doesn’t care about those things and will stick by him. Fine. I judge her for it. Diane Keaton might simply believe Allen because of their history. Foster cannot in all honesty believe that Gibson is not an a-hole. Of epic proportions.

      • Moore says:

        When did Cate defend him. I just remember her having some blah “I hope everyone is good” answer to try not to get involved.

      • Moore says:

        X2 sorry

    • poorimmigrant says:

      but she doesn’t have to brag about it in the interviews. she has no proof that he isn’t a child molester, so she should stay quiet, because that’s not like hollyweird is against him and he will never do a shitty movie again (ok, I like some of his movies) . there’s no need for defending him in the press.

    • mercy says:

      Yeah, I can understand why she doesn’t want to after all those years, but the evidence is there.

  11. Ivy says:

    I don’t know… I like her. Woody Allen seems to be an horrible person, but I can’t blame her for being a loyal friend. They still care for each other after 45 years and a break-up, he must at least be kind to her.
    Dylan deserves justice for sure. But even the worst man in the world can have a loyal friend.
    But she shoud’ve say “he’s my friend”, nobody needs her to take sides :/

  12. renata says:

    I’m getting really tired of the notion that being friends with someone must be politically correct. Why in the world do some here display the sentiment that this actress might possibly be at fault for having a friend? And who the heck am I to think that I can sit around and judge someone else’s choice of friends? Even more so when its on the basis of accusations and nothing more.

    It’s complete, offensive nonsense. I wish it would stop.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    BTW, how did I wind up with an avatar pic? Is randomly assigning them something new here? Just curious.

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      She can be friends with whomever she wants. But if she chooses to publicly defend a child molester and a man who took nude pictures of an underage girl, then married her in spite of her being the child of his long time girlfriend and a sibling to his own children, I’m going to judge her. She’s condoning his behavior. I used to be a fan, now I’m not. Actions have consequences.

  13. mj says:

    Here’s where I feel confused: I absolutely believe Dylan. I absolutely find this man’s actions abhorrent. But I think I understand coming from a place where you know/feel/sense someone’s actions are horrendous but you can still be friends with them. Not even in denial, just accepting. If that’s the case, what does it make her? I kind of think it makes her human. (Runs away quickly; grabs wig and different coat en route).

    • FreeBird says:

      I have a long time friend who was arrested for attempted sex abuse of a minor (was a cop under cover). At first, I was all, the person made a mistake, was being all stupid and caught in the moment in an internet chat. They plead guilty and I thought oh hey, they are taking responsibility for being a dummy. Then I read the chats, and found out it was not the first time, and I thought, welp, this dude has a problem. I still like the person, but can recognize they have a problem. And they are getting help and took responsibility. I can still be friends with someone like that, although yes indeed, side eye if they get around the target age group (sure they are banned from that).

      I took it upon myself to investigate; Diane has not. She’s got her fingers in her ears, la la la. For me, when I read that Woody was in therapy already before this all went down because of his inappropriateness with Dylan, I don’t think anyone unless they are willfully ignorant can say this is a “he said/she said and no charges” case. He was in therapy for his inappropriate touching. Finito. He’s got a problem, is not taking responsibility, is blaming his former partner and everyone around but HIM.

      Woody put himself in this position and where he has not taken responsibility, I see no reason to give him any benefit of the doubt. Did he ever say, “Yes, I made some choices that look crappy to you all? I acknowledge I had issues with Dylan, and at the time, I was involved in a situation that rightfully would look suspicious to any people of good faith, such as taking nudie shots of my partner’s under age daughter.” Nope, none of that. “The heart wants what the heart wants.” Ugh.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        I so agree with you. His abuse of Dylan continues by his denial that it happened. And it makes me so mad that people act like we’ll never know, etc. because it didn’t go to court. That was a decision made by the prosecutors because little children make terrible, unpredictable witnesses. If you do any research in the case, it is so obvious that he’s guilty. His therapy for inappropriate behavior towards her,other people’s observation of his creepy obsession, the judge that ruled Dylan needed to be protected from him. People like Diane don’t WANT to know. You were brave to see what was real and not what you wanted to see.

  14. FLORC says:

    Diane has always been this way. Loopy fits well. If Woody was caught red handed, but told her it never happened I believe Diane would be the 1st to defend him. This is their dynamic. She adores him no matter what.

  15. lunchcoma says:

    I strongly disapprove, especially since Diane considers herself a friend rather than someone who worked on a project, but it’s hard to be “over” her. It’s been a long time since she’s been in something I cared about, and I never really attached to her during her early years. I can see this being tough on longtime fans, though.

  16. V says:

    Time is not a measure of quality, just quantity. The amount of years you know someone doesn’t tell anyone how WELL you know them, but how LONG you’ve been aware of their existence. That’s a pet peeve of mine.

    Anyway, she’s said quite a few things that I’ve not been a fan of before these interviews, so her defense of this man doesn’t change my opinion of her.

  17. Happy21 says:

    As much as I think Woody is a sick, pedophile, Diane IS his friend and she has been his friend since long before any of this happens and she believes him based on how she knows him. That’s okay. Everyone is going to have people on their sides. However, I do have a problem with the new round of Woody followers who were not friends with him and did not know him and will not give his daughter’s story the time of day. Or the fact that he married his wife’s daughter. That all happened post-Diane & Woody and there is no reason that those actors and actresses who love him shouldn’t maybe thing he’s a sick pig and shouldn’t be worshipped the way he is.

    I suppose because I work in criminal law I can see it from both sides. People will always have supporters and it’s obvious that Diane supports Woody and I could see that she would be the one person who would but these newfound Woody lovers don’t know him so how can they stand by him. It’s kind of sad.

    • Jackson says:

      That’s pretty much where I fall on this. Old friends, from back in the day, before the accusations – I get that. “New” friends, not so much.

    • cubfan34 says:

      Soon-Yi was a sophomore in college when she and Woody began dating.

      Mia Farrow was never his wife.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        He took nude pictures of her when she was underage. I guess you wouldn’t call that “dating.” More like “abusing.”

  18. Anne says:

    I like she stands by her friend. The same with Scarlett. They know him and trust him and there’s nothing wrong with that.

    I believe Dylan but they believe him. People is entitled to their opinion.

    • mercy says:

      Scarlett acted like she didn’t know why anyone would have problem with Allen, and took an unnecessary shot at Dylan, calling her “irresponsible.” She started working with him after he began his relationship with his children’s sister. It’s a little different than Diane’s situation.

  19. lucy2 says:

    I think there is a world of difference in the relationships Cate and Diane have with him. Cate’s relationship seems professional in nature, and she worked with him one 1 film. Diane has had a personal relationship/friendship as well as a professional one with him for decades, knows his family, etc.

    I can understand not wanting to believe him, and wanting to be supportive of someone she cares about, but…yuck. The Soon Yi stuff should have been enough.

  20. Jenn says:

    Woody Allen is a Roman Polanski supporter. I believe he was there the night Polanski raped the girl.

    I’ve never been a Diane fan, so no further harm here.

    • Violet says:

      Allen wasn’t in Jack Nicholson house the night Polanski did what he did. You may not like him, but that is simply not true. Stick to facts.

  21. Megan says:

    Whelp. That’s it I guess. No longer a Diane Keaton fan.

    I have no patience for woody Allen supporters. Bye bitch

  22. Mena says:

    Why put her on the spot and even ask her? He is the one who hurt Dylan, why do we have to drag all his friends into it? I am sure even OJ has friends left. Some people are more forgiving than others. Especially when it comes to long time friends.

  23. Heat says:

    I’m not going to judge her, based on her loyalty to a long-time friend. That makes her a good, solid (albeit possibly deluded) friend.
    Being on his side doesn’t mean that she condones the behavior he’s been accused of. It means that she believes what she was told by a friend that she obviously trusts implicitly.
    The only people who truly know what really happened are Woody & Dylan.

  24. Sarah says:

    So NOTHING would ever change that? Like – if there were definitive proof or Woody somehow got religion and confessed – she would still be his friend? I cannot fathom anyone I know doing something like that and still considering them my friend. I understand he has been accused only – not charged and nothing proven in a court of law. But I get the feeling from this that unless he admitted it – not just charged and convicted – that he would still be her friend.

  25. MyHiddles says:

    But she did not defend Woody and she didn’t smear Dylan. She simply stated Woody is her friend, and that i can accept from her. I have family and friends that I would still love if they went to prison. I wouldn’t condone their actions, but I’d still love them.

  26. Bailie says:

    She knows him for 45 years and I certainly don’t.

    I’ m no fan of Keaton or Woody, although my grandma wanted to see Blue Jasmine for her birthday and we both really liked it. Cate was amazing. Woody is a great writer, I must admit.

    I have no idea what happened in regards to Dylan,
    but I wish her all the best.

    I found Woody weird, but it could be his artistic stuff, I guess, it doesn’t mean his a disturbed criminal.

    I don’t like Mia, there is something about her that doesn’t sit right with me, hard to explain.

    It was unsettling for me to read Dylan’s article in regards to the abuse claims for several reasons, one of them was the way she called out famous people, like Cate.

    They are not responsible for Woody’s actions, only Woody is and since he was never prosecuted and convicted…….well he is innocent until proven guilty.

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      I said this above, but I just have to say it again. The fact that he was never prosecuted means nothing. That was a decision made by the prosecutors because little children make terrible, unpredictable witnesses. Prosecutors don’t try cases unless they are pretty sure they can win. They had the word of a world famous, respected adult against a child. If you do any research in the case, it is so obvious that he’s guilty. He was at the time, by his own admission, in therapy for inappropriate sexual feelings towards his daughter. At the time the abuse happened, he was not allowed to be alone with Dylan. Other people, not just Mia, observed his creepy sexual behavior towards Dylan, such as getting into bed with her in his underwear, lying with his head in her lap, facing her stomach, while she was wearing only panties, sucking her fingers and making her suck his, etc. On the day in question, they both disappeared for about 15 minutes and when the babysitter found Dylan, she was not wearing underpants. A judge in the custody hearing ruled that Dylan needed to be protected from Allen. Then you have Dylan herself, who has nothing to gain by telling this story. Not to mention his complete lack of boundaries and appropriate behavior towards his present wife…taking nude pictures of her when she was underage for starters.

      I can see how it would be painful to acknowledge that a good friend had done such a thing. But it’s NOT a matter of oh well, innocent until proven guilty. He can never be proved guilty. It’s too late. But I would bet my last dollar that he is. And he’s gotten clean away with it because his “friends” refuse to see the truth. And he has two little girls. Nobody cares about that.

      • Emily C. says:

        This.

      • Violet says:

        Actually if you research on this case, you may notice that a prosecutor cannot decide if he can continue or not continue in prosecuting someone. It was because there was not evidence supporting the notion of Dylan Farrow being sexually abused, not because she was an unreliable as a witness or fragile as some try to make it out to be.

        Also, Allen was told by the judge that he could see the kids if and when he finished his relationship with Soon-Yi, which he refused and because of that he could not visited the kids at all.

      • Sam says:

        The truth is that nobody knows what really happened, but Woody and Dylan.
        I don’t know any of these people, but I understand what Keaton is saying, she has known him for 45 years. She has every right to stand by him. I’m a stranger to Woody and she is not.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        @Violet
        You’re right, in Connecticut, it was the State Attorney who decided not to prosecute Dylan. Not because of lack of evidence, but because, as he told a reporter, he would not put Dylan through a trial, and without her testimony he couldn’t win the case. As for the Judge you are referring to:

        In his 33-page decision, Judge Wilk found that Mr. Allen’s behavior toward Dylan was “grossly inappropriate and that measures must be taken to protect her.” The judge also recounts Farrow’s misgivings regarding Allen’s behavior toward Dylan from the time she was between two and three years old. According to the judge’s decision, Farrow told Allen, “You look at her [Dylan] in a sexual way. You fondled her . . . You don’t give her any breathing room. You look at her when she’s naked.”

        This is from 10 Undeniable Facts About the Woody Allen Sexual Abuse Allegations by Maureen Orth. I would suggest that you read it, but I can see by the way you have twisted the facts that you have made up your mind in favor of this disgusting pervert. You act as though Allen is victim. Out of respect for the rules of this forum, I just going to stop now.

        @Sam
        That’s exactly what abusers count on you to do. Nothing. Not my problem. Congratulations.

  27. Emily C. says:

    The evidence is very thorough: he molested his daughters. Yes, daughters, plural. He seduced his teenage adopted daughter and then married her, ffs. Why would anyone put anything past this man? Anyone who was still friends with him after THAT was already off my list. This just cements it.

    Basically: rich white men in Hollywood can get away with literally anything, but they can especially get away with sexually assaulting young girls. Victims of sexual assault are always disbelieved anyway, especially if they’re female. Most men in our culture can get away with sexual assault. Add money, power, and fame to that? They will never be brought to justice. The only solution is a social one, and as long as society refuses to hold them accountable, nothing will ever change.

    It actually did not used to be this way. In the 1920s, being a rapist actually could ruin a man’s career in Hollywood. Not any more.

    And if you asked Diane Keaton how she’d feel if it was her daughter, she’d likely say, along with the idiot Hollywood chorus defending Polanski, that HER daughter would never be in that situation. The entire Hollywood edifice is rotten to the core.

    • FreeBird says:

      So today, my thoughts turned to Soon Yi. You see, there are always pictures of a disgruntled Soon Yi, who appears harassed, or irritated, by the attention. A lot of us spat in her general direction for taking up with Woody, but today, I realized this.

      Woody chose to put Soon Yi in that position, but he chose to do that when she was just a young (maybe underage) woman. We’ve read varying reports of her mental capabilities, but the reality was that he was a much older man, dallying with a much younger woman. He made the choice. He should have said no, not because it was “wrong” so much as the repercussions on her life.

      Given the circumstances of the custody battle and molestation charges, the only scenario under which Soon Yi would have escaped unscathed, is the one where Woody left her alone. He put his “wants” above her happiness, no matter what she thinks. If he had dated her and then dumped her, he would have done so at the expense of her relationships with the rest of her family. He dated her, she disengaged from her family, and she is in that same place.

    • cubfan34 says:

      Soon-Yi is not his daughter.

      • Nina W says:

        Right, not his daughter, merely the adopted daughter of his girlfriend so that makes it okay, right? Because courting your girlfriend’s underage daughter is super cool and okay with everyone, right? There’s nothing skeevy or questionable in that behavior, is that your point cubfan34?

  28. Moore says:

    I can’t hate Diane Keaton I just believe she is wrong. I don’t hate the people who disagree. Even though it doesn’t support Dylan it doesn’t seem fair to hate on people who have the other opinion.

  29. Moore says:

    Im sorry my mouse is weird I keep posting more then I want. Refer to posts below.

  30. Moore says:

    When did Cate defend him. I just remember her having some blah “I hope everyone is good” answer to try not to get involved. Did she ever say anything else because I don’t find her in the same boat as ScarJ.

    • Violet says:

      No, she didn’t defend him (she actually was the first one in being asked, when she was honored at the Santa Barbara Film Festival the same night the NYtimes published Dylan’s open letter, in a very rude way by a reporter) or said more than “It is obviously a painful situation for the family and I hope everyone finds peace at the end” and still some people said she was insensitive, when in true she handle it in a very respectful way to everyone implicated.

  31. joan says:

    He hasn’t been convicted of molestation — but any person with common sense could put the facts together if they want to. He has a long history full of shady stuff.

    What kind of people are so cold that they can say, “Maybe he molested his daughter, maybe he didn’t, it doesn’t matter unless he’s convicted by a jury”?

    What kind of people CHOOSE to give him the benefit of the doubt when they don’t even know him and there’s so much suspicious evidence against him? What kind of people?

    • Pantheon says:

      The logical kind of people, who think for themselves and don’t get taken over by emotions or join the masses in picking up the pitchforks against someone who has not been proven guity in the court of law.

      • Nina W says:

        Actually logic tends to support a conclusion of guilt not of innocence of these accusations but since logical people think for themselves, you could figure that out for yourself. Personally I don’t need a court of law to tell me whether a grown man’s behavior is questionable or not.

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      The kind of people who use the excuse that he hasn’t been convicted in a court of law to avoid inconveniencing themselves with the truth. The kind of people who allow us to live in world where men like Allen flourish and their victims continue to suffer. The kind of people who don’t care about anybody but themselves. The kind of people who enable abusers or are abusers themselves.

      • Sami says:

        @GoodNamesAllTaken

        Sorry, but I do not agree with you. There is a reason why in a civilized society we have a judicial system and we don’t crucify people, just because we suspect them of a crime. You have every right to believe whatever you wish. I have a hard time believing that Woody would have not been prosecuted, if there was sufficient evidence. Yes, he is wealthy, talented and famous, but so was OJ.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        Yeah, and the OJ case was just a monument to justice, wasn’t it? In case you didn’t hear, he got off. You obviously know nothing about this case or about how difficult it is to prosecute a case against a powerful adult when your only witness was a small child. Civilized society, indeed. Keep telling yourself that while you do everything in your power to prevent it from being true.

  32. I’ve been a long time lurker, first time poster. Here goes…as a young child, when I was 5, I was sexually abused by a family member. It wasn’t until I was 19 when I was finally interested in males that I had a recollection of said event. It was overwhelming and for some awful reason, my innocence had blocked it out. I am not saying that this is the case for Dylan, I am just saying that as a young child, we block a lot of horrible experiences and have an “aha” moment, when we are old enough to understand what was going on. Maybe that’s why children make terrible witnesses. Even through high school and sex Ed, I could not comprehend what sex was. Please don’t judge me, that’s how my mind worked.

    What I’m getting at is this, it sickens me that people stand up for the perve and not the victim. That person has so much courage and it is not easy to say or speak of the disgusting acts that are done to innocent people. I am not sure what generation these people are from that are using the lame excuse “innocent until proven guilty” but it appears that they have been desensitized to human emotion and common sense. I hope that your loved ones never go through anything remotely close to this, bc you seem to be lacking empathy. We are taught not to judge others, but sometimes, that human and motherly instinct is spot on.

    • Nina W says:

      I guess people don’t realize how much sexual abuse is happening. I was 9 when I was molested by a neighbor and 16 when I was sexually assaulted by a family member. If you look at the statistics, the abuse of women and children is horrifyingly common and as long as people keep denying reality and letting the woody’s of the world skate, it will never change. I’m not suggesting pitchforks or crucifixion, merely common sense, abusers are not nameless faceless strangers but neighbors and family members and we need to be honest about that.

  33. John says:

    You can love who you love in spite of their actions, but to put on blinders and believe their denials unequivocally just because they’re your friends is beyond pathetic. I just keep remembering Dylan’s plea, “You knew me when I was a little girl, Diane Keaton. Have you forgotten me?”
    Heartbreaking.

  34. tredd says:

    Then this callous bitch is just as dirty (by association) as that pervert Woody Allen. Criminals; all of them.

  35. Lauraq says:

    Gross.