Just as I was reading the story about how Roman Polanski’s attorney are arguing that his rape case should be thrown out because of a “a remarkable, astonishing record of misconduct” by the judge, I got an email alert to a story reporting that his film Ghost Writer had gotten a US distributor.
Not just any distributor, but Summit who is released New Moon and Twilight and is now loaded thanks to all the money that women and girls have spent on the film over the last couple of weeks.
Do you see my problem? It’s not like Roman Polanski’s movie are money makers. His highest grossing movie was Rosemary’s Baby in 1968 with $33 million which New Moon made in less than one day (more like ten minutes.) His Oscar winning movie The Pianist grossed only $32 million. So unless Summit believes this is a huge money making venture (which is contrary to his track record) it is unclear what they get by getting into bed with a rapist.
These folks at Summit have at least two more films in the making based on the Twilight saga, and I for one am pissed that a man who is now under house arrest in his Swiss chalet for RAPE can now be seen as benefiting from a movie that had primarily a female audience.
It may be a brilliant movie, but still, what message does it send?
Really? you’re surprised? Have you seen the assessment Bella & Edward’s relationship as abusive floating around the internet? http://io9.com/5413428/official-twilights-bella–edward-are-in-an-abusive-relationship.
I find it interesting when you go off about twilight being this great triumph for women in hollywood & female moviegoers the series condones emotional & sexual abuse by portraying it as romantic and chivalrous.
So honestly, I’m not surprised Summit picked Polanski’s piece.
So before we go down a slippery slope here…
I never said New Moon was a) a good movie or b) a feminist triumph.
What I did say was that it was good for women that a movie with a female lead and a female audience was successful because that opens up more opportunities for women in Hollywood.
I hope that someday (soon) we will see more feminist characters, but the only way that will happen is if we actually have movies that star women.
But I still don’t see why it is surprising that Summit is releasing a film by “a man who is now under house arrest in his Swiss chalet for RAPE?”
Clearly despite Twilight’s primarily female audience & female lead, the film doesn’t feature “feminist characters.” So if Summit doesn’t see condoning sexual violence as a problem in one movie franchise, why would do you see it as outrageous that they bought a film by an alleged rapist
Generally, I admire your writing and think your criticism is sound, I just think in this case it is like a double standard.
I can see how it would be annoying at the very least if a film largely seen by underaged females were used to subsidize a film by a child rapist. One can only hope that his film can pay its own way and does not need a New Moon subsidy.
On the other hand, I’d really like it to bomb.
I, too, hope Polanski’s film bombs.
I am sick of the way Hollywood keeps supporting this child rapist.
Polanski got a standing ovation at the 2003 Oscars.
Steven Spielberg offered to let him direct Schindler’s List.
Harrison Ford (Frantic), Sigourney Weaver and Ben Kingsley (Death and the Maiden), Johnny Depp (The Ninth Gate), and Pierce Bronson and Ewan McGreggor (The Ghost) have all willingly worked with the child rapist.
Then you have people like Harvey Weinstein, Woody Allen, Wes Anderson, Peter Fonda, Debra Winger and Natalie Portman demanding the child rapist be set free.
And now this.
It’s disgusting.
Award winning cast in “Sweet Lorraine” (2010). Stars ars Tatum O’neal, Julianne Michelle and Steven Bauer
It will be very interesting to see what happens when this film is released. I’m hoping that audiences will be so disgusted with him that they refuse to see his movies and it would send a clear message to Hollywood and beyond, but I’m sure the powers that be would find a way to excuse a flop. “Important” men can fucking get away with anything.
You know, it’s some sort of behind the scenes man-crush arm twisting that got this distribution deal. It’s okay to cater to a sensitive, expensive, “difficult” old man because he has had the privileged life that is the wet dream of every douche in hollywood. While if you are just a “difficult” (not expensive or sensitive) woman director, you get replaced. If you are an actress who dares work two jobs in Hollywood, you get replaced in the Twilight series. “Uppity” women, not okay. Rapists, er – I should say, artist men that have aspirational sex lives to douchebags not only get supported by Summit, they get a blow job from Summit.
Really? You are surprised that distributors of a franchise glorifying the abusive relationship of a teenage girl would not have any problem doing business with a rapist?
From what I understand, Summit has a history of distributing Polanski’s films. I just want to see him face a judge and serve his time. If Summit wants to release the movie that’s fine, it’s up to the public if they want to pay money to see his film.
Here’s some thoughts to your statement “So unless Summit believes this is a huge money making deal … it is not clear what they get by getting into bed with a child rapist.” While some people act strictly pragmatically for profit, more people act out of their convictions, consciously or not. Summit is the latter. Summit may even like to think it’s doing this for profit. The truth is, Summit has a rapist mentality, so it is naturally sympathetic to a rapist. Birds of a feather flock together — even if the excuse is hope for business profit.