So far it’s heavily slanted towards the Farrow clan
ALLEN V FARROW
|by Anonymous||reply 204||Yesterday at 4:21 AM|
They flashed an old photo of Mia with Tony Perkins and a woman identified as Mia’s sister when it’s actually Tony’s wife Berry Berenson. Sloppy.
|by Anonymous||reply 1||Last Sunday at 4:39 PM|
Who. Fuckin'. CARES? They're all dreadful and freakish in their own ways.
|by Anonymous||reply 2||Last Sunday at 4:40 PM|
I love the way MIA is filmed in [bold]very soft focus[/bold]...I've never seen that in a "documentary" before.
She's old. Accept it! Ridiculous.
|by Anonymous||reply 3||Last Sunday at 4:43 PM|
she is 75 and is botoxxed to hell.
wasnt this investigated yrs ago at length and he found not guilty?
mia went off when woody left her for soon yi...understandable.
terribly one sided show tho..
|by Anonymous||reply 4||Last Sunday at 4:51 PM|
Mia Beat The Crap out of Soon-Yi with a telephone after she found out about the affair
|by Anonymous||reply 5||Last Sunday at 4:54 PM|
What sane woman wants 9 kids?
Dylan has crazy eyes..
|by Anonymous||reply 6||Last Sunday at 4:56 PM|
Mia still wanted to star in Manhattan Murder Mystery after she'd accused Woody of molesting Dylan.
|by Anonymous||reply 7||Last Sunday at 5:00 PM|
I’m sorry but I don’t find Mia or Dylan credible. If Mia saw red flags with Woodys alleged behavior and did nothing then she’s a shit parent.
|by Anonymous||reply 8||Last Sunday at 5:01 PM|
What do these women want from Allen?
He was exonerated in the courts long ago of this.
This is their lifes cause..
|by Anonymous||reply 9||Last Sunday at 5:07 PM|
R9 don’t forget me!!!!!
|by Anonymous||reply 10||Last Sunday at 5:22 PM|
Oh Mia looks so young and pretty and innocent when filmed thru 2 inches of gauze.
|by Anonymous||reply 11||Last Sunday at 5:29 PM|
How does mia support herself? thru donations cause she pitiful pearlina?
|by Anonymous||reply 12||Last Sunday at 5:38 PM|
Mia is shot through so much gook you would think she’s auditioning for the remake of MAME.
|by Anonymous||reply 13||Last Sunday at 5:38 PM|
^^^ no shit!
|by Anonymous||reply 14||Last Sunday at 5:40 PM|
I’m guessing Mia lives on Sinatra and Previn dollars. She certainly isn’t feeding a family of 20 on residual checks from Peyton Place.
|by Anonymous||reply 15||Last Sunday at 5:42 PM|
"He was exonerated in the courts long ago of this."
He was never "exonerated." No charges were brought up against him in order to spare Dylan from having to go through even more hell.
|by Anonymous||reply 16||Last Sunday at 5:42 PM|
From the comments and reviews ive read on entertainment sites, this one sided crap is causing serious backlash against the Farrows... as being, uh, nuts.
|by Anonymous||reply 17||Last Sunday at 5:43 PM|
[quote] He was never "exonerated." No charges were brought up against him "in order to spare Dylan from having to go through even more hell. "
|by Anonymous||reply 18||Last Sunday at 5:45 PM|
Dylan is her own worst enemy here, she comes across as.....unwell.
|by Anonymous||reply 19||Last Sunday at 5:46 PM|
Mia Farrow is a freak
|by Anonymous||reply 20||Last Sunday at 5:52 PM|
One way or the other Dylan is a victim. I don’t believe Woody molested her but I do think Mia and Ronan have caused serious damage but not letting this go. It’s unhealthy for everyone. There’s never going to be closure. They won’t be happy until Woody is 6 feet under.
|by Anonymous||reply 21||Last Sunday at 6:23 PM|
She sold her mother’s apartment a long time ago, did she get money for that? And did she get child support for Ronan, Moses and Dylan ?
|by Anonymous||reply 22||Last Sunday at 6:25 PM|
"Dylan is her own worst enemy here, she comes across as.....unwell."
You'd be "unwell" too if Woody Allen made you suck his thumb and put his face in your lap and vigorously rubbed lotion in the crack of your buttocks.
|by Anonymous||reply 23||Last Sunday at 6:46 PM|
Woody Allen is freak. A freak who took split beaver photos of his longtime companion's daughter. And fucked her daughter. And molested his own adopted daughter. What.A.Freak.
|by Anonymous||reply 24||Last Sunday at 6:47 PM|
"From the comments and reviews ive read on entertainment sites, this one sided crap is causing serious backlash against the Farrows... as being, uh, nuts."
Nothing "one-sided' about it. It told what happened. Only deranged Woody lovers think the Farrows are "nuts."
|by Anonymous||reply 25||Last Sunday at 6:49 PM|
take a nap ronan...
|by Anonymous||reply 26||Last Sunday at 7:14 PM|
It's interesting that Woody wasn't charged to "spare Dylan pain" but I would imagine dragging this into the court of public opinion every 2-3 years would be pretty damn painful.
|by Anonymous||reply 27||Last Sunday at 7:46 PM|
The responses in the media so far have been that this series makes mia/dylan look like shit.
|by Anonymous||reply 28||Last Sunday at 7:48 PM|
R25 This account is horrifying, yes, but also one-sided. Woody (and those who support his side) never get to explain, deny, anything, and therefore he does end up looking like a pedophile. But I have some questions. There were at least three instances of utterly inappropriate behavior described in this account. If these things happened, any caring mother would have immediately cut off communication with the man endangering her child. So why didn’t Mia? And why were these appalling events never mentioned prior to this documentary? The suntan lotion thing was absolutely foul. And the thumb sucking thing? WTF?? Red flags all over the place. I just can’t see how Mia didn’t toss Allen to the curb then and there. It’s inexplicable and odd that she didn’t and so I’m still left to wonder: What is the truth?
|by Anonymous||reply 29||Last Sunday at 7:51 PM|
I love all the anti-Mia jokes. I thought the dreary molestation trolls would take over this thread.
|by Anonymous||reply 30||Last Sunday at 7:52 PM|
Dylan is a dissociative schizo. Ronan is demented. Mia had his legs stretched so he could be taller, slept naked with him until he was a teenager, etc.
Woody and Soon-Yi are actually the sane ones. Both on the spectrum, i think.
|by Anonymous||reply 31||Last Sunday at 7:54 PM|
She didn’t sell her mother’s apartment, she was just a renter and was forced to move to CT full time when the city started going after rich people abusing rent control. I think she was paying around $2800 a month for her 11-room apt by the time she left in ‘93/‘94. Her neighbor Carly Simon was also paying very little but agreed to the rent increase. Mia also did not get spousal support from Frank or Andre and only paltry child support from Andre. For somebody so cunning she did not plan well for the long term.
|by Anonymous||reply 32||Last Sunday at 8:12 PM|
I read an interview with the documentarians. Even though the interviewer was sympathetic towards them, they still weren't clear about what they want done about Dylan's case. Woody Allen cannot be prosecuted for any of this because the statute of limitations passed long ago. They suggested they don't want people to see his movies anymore, but Allen basically can't get anyone to release his movies anymore anyway, and everyone recognizes they've not been good in years.
I also don't see what the Farrows want from all this at this point, except even more attention. I am sick to death of them.
|by Anonymous||reply 33||Last Sunday at 8:20 PM|
MIA IS BITCH
|by Anonymous||reply 34||Last Sunday at 8:23 PM|
Sinatra was generous with Mia in later years and may have left her some money. She’s still close with Tina and Nancy.
|by Anonymous||reply 35||Last Sunday at 8:32 PM|
mia wants $$$$. bitch is fukin broke, she be doin autograph shows, but this movie offer came up.
|by Anonymous||reply 36||Last Sunday at 8:38 PM|
[quote]But I have some questions. There were at least three instances of utterly inappropriate behavior described in this account. If these things happened, any caring mother would have immediately cut off communication with the man endangering her child. So why didn’t Mia?
This is a great question. Here's another one:
There's plenty of evidence that Woody romanticized, if not actualized, older man-and-teenage girl relationships. But nowhere have I ever seen any evidence that he sought out the company of prepubescent girls. Even Mia said he had little interest in the kids until Dylan came along.
There's no greater paradise for pedos than being in charge of advancing Hollywood kids' careers. Parents are unscrupulous and desperate enough to let their kids be molested for a part. But NONE of Woody's movies evince any interest in anything but adult topics. If he was into the seriously young stuff, wouldn't he be writing parts where he had access to 7-year-old girls?
I think he's a creep for what he did with Soon-Yi, but creep does not equal molesting second-graders.
|by Anonymous||reply 37||Last Sunday at 8:47 PM|
The greatest crime is the way Farrow has made the allegations the organizing principle of her daughter's life.
|by Anonymous||reply 38||Last Sunday at 9:24 PM|
Does the documentary discuss Woody's relationship with Soon-yi? and when Mia found the Polaroids in Woody's apartment? It was always believed that Woody carelessly left them out, but someone posted the theory that Soon-yi deliberately left them for Mia to find. She not so dim.
|by Anonymous||reply 39||Last Sunday at 9:49 PM|
[quote]Does the documentary discuss Woody's relationship with Soon-yi? and when Mia found the Polaroids in Woody's apartment? It was always believed that Woody carelessly left them out, but someone posted the theory that Soon-yi deliberately left them for Mia to find. She not so dim.
They don't go into that (so far) — just saying that Mia let herself into his apartment in search of one of the children's coats, and found the Polaroids on his desk.
|by Anonymous||reply 40||Last Sunday at 9:57 PM|
The statute of limitations for criminal charges may have passed but Dylan can still sue Woody.
|by Anonymous||reply 41||Last Sunday at 10:22 PM|
R41 pretty sure the statute has passed on a civil suit as well.
|by Anonymous||reply 42||Last Sunday at 10:50 PM|
[quote]I just can’t see how Mia didn’t toss Allen to the curb then and there. It’s inexplicable and odd that she didn’t and so I’m still left to wonder: What is the truth?
she was SO dependent on him. her whole income had come from him for years. I think she was terrified of facing the real world and how she'd manage without him. he gave her a dream career...unfortunately he was attached.
Also her father was apparently a very creepy movie director who had endless affairs and treated the family like shit, so on some level this abusive weirdness was normal to her.
|by Anonymous||reply 43||Last Sunday at 11:04 PM|
[quote]wasnt this investigated yrs ago at length and he found not guilty?
If the Woody defenders really cared about the truth, they'd stop lying and saying Woody Allen was subject to a criminal trial and proven not guilty.
There was no criminal trial. There was no finding of "not guilty."
|by Anonymous||reply 44||Last Sunday at 11:12 PM|
the soft focus filming of Mia looks totally bizarre.
|by Anonymous||reply 45||Last Sunday at 11:13 PM|
[quote]someone posted the theory that Soon-yi deliberately left them for Mia to find
We heard that back in the 1990s, too, though I don't remember the origin of that theory. Since then both Mia and Soon-Yi have said they were found accidentally.
|by Anonymous||reply 46||Last Sunday at 11:14 PM|
[quote] If these things happened, any caring mother would have immediately cut off communication with the man endangering her child. So why didn’t Mia?
My theory has always been that none of the Farrow kids knew what proper parenting was, because they were severely abused as children themselves. One brother committed suicide, another is in jail for molesting his own daughter, Prudence has been involved with sketchy situations including her role in the Robert Durst murders, and Mia didn't recognize the problems in her family as being problems. She just kept saying "oh, go to therapy" and glossing over it, because she didn't know better.
Not that it's an excuse, of course. I think it's an explanation, not an excuse. The court during the divorce case makes a few comments in the final filings about Mia ignoring signs she shouldn't have, so clearly it was a problem.
|by Anonymous||reply 47||Last Sunday at 11:16 PM|
[quote]Woody (and those who support his side) never get to explain, deny, anything, and therefore he does end up looking like a pedophile.
Woody has explained his side numerous times, as has Soon-Yi and Moses, plus Dick Cavett and Wallace Shawn, among others. His side has been told many times.
|by Anonymous||reply 48||Last Sunday at 11:17 PM|
[quote]We heard that back in the 1990s, too, though I don't remember the origin of that theory. Since then both Mia and Soon-Yi have said they were found accidentally.
NO. Woody left the photos out on the mantle when he knew Mia was turning up to collect one of her kids from a therapy session that was being conducted at his place. He wanted her to find them. That's how he wanted her to find out.
|by Anonymous||reply 49||Last Sunday at 11:18 PM|
[quote]MIA IS BITCH —I'm here all week...try the veal!
If that's the quality of your "comedy", I ain't touching your veal.
|by Anonymous||reply 50||Last Sunday at 11:25 PM|
[quote]NO. Woody left the photos out on the mantle when he knew Mia was turning up to collect one of her kids from a therapy session conducted at his place. He wanted her to find them. That's how he wanted her to find out.
I heard the mantle story, too. I don't believe Allen left the nude Polaroids there; he's not stupid. But, Soon-Yi had everything to gain by having Mia find them.
- Allen could no longer keep the affair secret, which he stated had been his intention.
- Mia would be devastated. Given her actions, Soon-Yi probably harbored deep anger toward her mother. After shocking and hurting her, Soon-Yi could be sure the sordid affair became public. The volatile Mia immediately called Andre Previn.
- It tied Allen to Soon-Yi; he could never discard her in the light of such a scandal. His only face-saving measure was to claim true love.
- When asked to comment, Andre Previn stated Soon-Yi was "dead to us." To some extent, her father recognized her agency in the matter; Soon-Yi is not innocent in this affair.
The person who benefited from those photos being found was Soon-Yi. Since we first heard of the scandal, we have thought this. We assumed Allen said he put them there as a face-saving measure. I bet he was surprised!
As for Mia, well...she ignored red flags because she was tied to him professionally and financially. We don't know what else happened in that rambling household. There were too many kids, many with disabilities to care for adequately, IMO. There was no full-time father. Mia collected children like dolls, creating a problematic, loosely supervised family that made easy prey for someone with those proclivities.
|by Anonymous||reply 51||Last Sunday at 11:53 PM|
Imagine being on a jury if this did go to trial.
The accused is a creepy unsympathetic man who had an affair with his partner's adopted daughter when she was 17.
The victim's mother has been accused by 2 of her adopted children being cruel and abusive and giving preferential treatment to her fair haired blue eyed white children. The victim's mother is a lifelong friend and supporter of a convicted child rapist and a fugitive of justice. The victim's mother supported the child rapist to an extent that she flew to London to give a character reference for him during a libel trial when the film director sued a magazine for reporting that a he had tried to seduce a woman in a restaurant on the day of his wife's funeral.
One of the victims's older siblings alleges the mother was abusive and manipulative and contradicts many of the victim's statements on the circumstances of the abuse, e.g. there was no train set in the attic where the abuse took place, something stated by the victim.
The victim, who was 7 at the time, was believed by some professionals to spoke to her to have been coached about what to say regarding the abuse.
It's a total mess.
|by Anonymous||reply 52||Last Sunday at 11:56 PM|
Why were all the film critics young women?
|by Anonymous||reply 53||Last Sunday at 11:57 PM|
The Yale doctors said Dylan sounded coached, but the doctor that both Mia and Woody agreed to as a neutral expert in the trial, Dr. Stephen Herman, said the Yale report was seriously flawed because they never interviewed Dylan, and they clearly developed a theory before looking at taped interviews with Dylan, then used that evidence to support the theory they'd already come up with.
|by Anonymous||reply 54||Last Monday at 12:02 AM|
So many things about the first episode didn’t add up for me.
First - Mia collecting those kids was truly pathological. 7 kids. That’s batshit fucking CRAZY. Many of them with special needs. And then she decides she wants to be pregnant again (with 7 kids) and so she and woody try and try to conceive and she ends up adopting ANOTHER kid and then she gets pregnant and has Ronan. 9 kids. It makes Angelina and Madonna seem normal in comparison. It just took away any credibility whatsoever for me when no one in the “documentary” addresses the mental illness inherent in someone who would collect 9 children. And parent them so poorly that 3 are dead (essentially by suicide), one ran off with Mia’s boyfriend as a teenager, one got allegedly molested by Mia’s boyfriend, etc etc etc. You can’t adopt 9 dogs but this woman is amassing this collection of human beings in some NYC apartment? I can’t.
And then Mia claims the kids were her whole life and acts like she was with them all the time and some sort of Saint when in reality she was also working and dating Woody. Like she kept living her life.
Dylan having such intact vivid memories of her life until 7. I don’t remember shit before age 7. The way she was talking you would think she was describing things from when she was a preteen on. Seemed as though she was reciting “memories” that has been drilled in her head. Same with Ronan who was even younger at the time.
A lot of the things Mia and her frau biased best friend were complaining about actually just made him seem like a devoted father - playing on the playground with her, buying her toys, wanting to hold her all the time when she was a baby, etc. The frau friend describing how he got up on the slide and jungle gym to play with Dylan was ridiculous. Her tone was like she was describing a rape.
A famous psychiatrist in Mia’s building just happened to see him “greet” the kid once and called Mia and they needed therapy?
Dylan just seems extremely damaged. And it feels like the damage of someone with a narcissistic monster of a mother and not the damage of someone who was s molested when they were 7.
The most sincere part in the episode is as the footage of Moses as a kid and how much he loved woody. And then woody adopted him too because Moses was so attached to him.
It’s really did not feel like a documentary. It’s propaganda.
|by Anonymous||reply 55||Last Monday at 12:04 AM|
Ugh this shit pisses me off. Team Woody all the way. Look I grew up loving Woody Allen movies and Michael Jackson songs. After looking at all the evidence, I'll still watch "The Purple Rose of Cairo" tomorrow but I refuse to listen to "Man in the Mirror" again. Woody innocent. MJ a monster. My opinion.
|by Anonymous||reply 56||Last Monday at 12:04 AM|
[quote]I heard the mantle story, too. I don't believe Allen left the nude Polaroids there; he's not stupid. But, Soon-Yi had everything to gain by having Mia find them.
He admitted it when confronted in an interview he gave when trying to clear his name. It's online.
|by Anonymous||reply 57||Last Monday at 12:21 AM|
[quote]After looking at all the evidence, I'll still watch "The Purple Rose of Cairo" tomorrow
It helps that he's not actually in it.
I was a BIG fan too...but I find myself being somewhat turned off by him even in his best films now. When I look at Annie Hall now it's all about "how cute he is" - it's called Annie Hall but it really should have been called "Woody Allen".
|by Anonymous||reply 58||Last Monday at 12:25 AM|
The polaroids were discussed in part 1. Three more parts to go.
|by Anonymous||reply 59||Last Monday at 3:43 AM|
|by Anonymous||reply 60||Last Monday at 4:25 AM|
Allen v Farrow? More like Farrow v Allen
|by Anonymous||reply 61||Last Monday at 4:26 AM|
Woody and soon yi’s response is valid. The first episode was ridiculous. At this point soon yi is in her 50s, they’ve been together for decades and they have two daughters. Mia and Dylan and Ronan are fucking crazy. Move on.
And unlike Mia, I think soon yi would leave him if he ever tried to molest their girls. Which he seemingly hasn’t. Or molested any other little girls. But he chose to molest just Dylan? Sorry. I don’t buy it.
He has major issues and is/was a pervert re: teenage girls, but he’s no pedophile.
I hope this documentary creates a backlash against the Farrows. Probably won’t in this #metoo climate. But it should.
|by Anonymous||reply 62||Last Monday at 5:32 AM|
[quote]no one in the “documentary” addresses the mental illness inherent in someone who would collect 9 children
There is no DSM-V diagnosis based on this criterion. You think it's crazy but that doesn't mean it's an actual mental illness.
[quote]And parent them so poorly that 3 are dead (essentially by suicide)
This shows you're one of those conspiracy loons who reads stupid blogs that makes things up.
Thaddeus died by suicide. Lark's cause of death was never released, but she had health problems including HIV.
Tam had health problems since before she was adopted, including a heart condition that killed her. Moses's story about Tam committing suicide is entirely without substance and comes as third-hand information he supposedly got from Thaddeus, who was dead by the time Moses made the claim.
Part of Moses's claim was that Mia refused to let Tam see a therapist, but does that make sense? She sent all her kids to therapy except just one?
He also said Mia told everyone that Tam had accidentally overdosed; if that's true, why hasn't anyone come forward to confirm?
If Lark was "essentially killed" by Mia, as Moses claims, by being forced into AIDS-ridden poverty, why hasn't her husband or anyone come forward to confirm?
|by Anonymous||reply 63||Last Monday at 5:50 AM|
[quote]Dylan just seems extremely damaged. And it feels like the damage of someone with a narcissistic monster of a mother and not the damage of someone who was s molested when they were 7.
Yes, well, what it feels like to some anonymous conspiracist on Datalounge is certainly relevant, isn't it?
|by Anonymous||reply 64||Last Monday at 5:52 AM|
This isn't a documentary; it's propaganda. There's only one side forcefully presented, with no opposing side whatsoever.
|by Anonymous||reply 65||Last Monday at 5:55 AM|
thank you RONAN at r63 and r64.
i didn't mean it was an actual mental illness per the DSM to collect children r63. why are you so literal? i said mental illness inherent in someone - very poorly worded - SUE ME - but i maintain only someone with mental illness (probably a personality disorder per your DSM) would collect 9 children. think about that. 9 kids. many with special needs. and she's up here adopting them and breeding like no one's business.
it's not a conspiracy to point out that mia farrow is fucking crazy and a shitty parent.
|by Anonymous||reply 66||Last Monday at 6:00 AM|
[quote]i didn't mean it was an actual mental illness per the DSM to collect children [R63]. why are you so literal?
Er, what? You said there was "mental illness inherent in someone who would collect 9 children." Then you said "i maintain only someone with mental illness (probably a personality disorder per your DSM) would collect 9 children." I don't know why you're so upset about me quoting back to you exactly what you said.
|by Anonymous||reply 67||Last Monday at 6:07 AM|
R63 Of course it makes sense that only Satchel and Dylan had therapists because Mia favored her white children. The Farrows frequently note that Mia selflessly drove Ronan to Bard Early College every day, 90 minutes each way. Did she spend this much one-on-one time with any of her adopted kids? Moses, who was 14 when the trial started, also needed therapy but instead Mia sent him away to boarding school at 15. It may not be possible to prove Moses' claim that Tam died by suicide, but Mia's claim that Tam died of "heart failure" also doesn't hold water; Kristie Groteke wrote extensively about Tam in her tell-all book sanctioned by Mia and not once did she mention any sort of cardiac condition, just the fact that she was blind and emotionally immature. Lark was in nursing school at NYU when the custody trial started but then dropped out and at some point started using drugs and died from AIDS-related complications on Christmas Day. She clearly could have used therapy and the love of parents who weren't raging narcissists like Mia and Andre Previn. Previn said about Soon-Yi in the 2013 Vanity Fair article that "she does not exist." Some father...
R42 Dylan can file a civil suit against Allen in CT until she's 48. She wouldn't win, of course, because she has no evidence.
R54 Yale interviewed Dylan nine times--on one occasion, 10/30/1992, she recanted her allegations and said "Woody didn't do anything." They also interviewed her babysitter, Kristi Groteke, and their final interview with Mia entailed reviewing the tape she made. Dylan's pediatrician had already examined her in August (though nearly a week after Mia first leveled the accusation) and found no physical evidence of abuse, and both of the child psychologists who had treated her--Susan Coates, Nancy Schultz--believed the abuse didn't happen. Two detectives from CT state police, John Mucherino and Bea Farlekas, came to Mia's house almost every weekend and interviewed Dylan on their own despite their lack of training in this field, and they couldn't turn up anything to use against Allen except a false recollection on Dylan's part that she and Satchel had witnessed Woody and Soon-Yi having sex in summer 1991. In light of these meetings and evaluations, Stephen Herman's suggestion that one could have just as easily concluded from Yale's report that Dylan was abused simply cannot be substantiated.
|by Anonymous||reply 68||Last Monday at 6:07 AM|
[quote]only Satchel and Dylan had therapists
That's not true, the other kids had therapists as well.
That's why it doesn't make sense that she would have a family therapist that all the kids saw but yet refuse to allow Tam to go.
|by Anonymous||reply 69||Last Monday at 6:09 AM|
Who was the family therapist that saw all the kids?
|by Anonymous||reply 70||Last Monday at 6:10 AM|
r67... mia farrow is mentally ill. that should be covered in any documentary about this whole debacle.
that's my point. i'm not "so upset" - it's monday morning and day 100420 of covid. get off my dick.
if you're a mia farrow fan who believes dylan - more power to you.
|by Anonymous||reply 71||Last Monday at 6:14 AM|
The Farrow-Allen family had eight therapists for themselves and all the children, and Soon-Yi was sent to a school run by psychiatrists to help her as she was having difficulties in other schools. The therapists were considered "surrogate family members" and spoke to the whole family as well as to each other.
I don't know where you got the idea that only the white kids got therapists, but you're completely wrong.
|by Anonymous||reply 72||Last Monday at 6:17 AM|
[quote]mia farrow is mentally ill
According to you, an incoherent, bitchy little troll who can't handle it when someone shows up with hard questions they can't answer.
[quote]i'm not "so upset" - it's monday morning and day 100420 of covid. get off my dick.
If you can't handle someone replying to you with logic and facts, then get the fuck out of here. This is not your safe space to blather on about your widdle frauish conspiracies. Go to some pro-Woody blog with a stupid name or Twitter or something if you want people to just blindly agree with you.
[quote]if you're a mia farrow fan
I'm not. I've said worse stuff about Mia than you have. But Mia being a shitty mom doesn't exonerate Woody, you dunce.
|by Anonymous||reply 73||Last Monday at 6:20 AM|
For those wondering where Mia gets money - I wouldn't be surprised if Ronan supports her.
|by Anonymous||reply 74||Last Monday at 6:22 AM|
oh r73 come on.... NOW who is so upset? thank you for that response. it made me lol. fine. you win. (but i really do think she's mentally ill).
|by Anonymous||reply 75||Last Monday at 6:24 AM|
r73 is tired and emotional, and needs a little space.
|by Anonymous||reply 76||Last Monday at 6:26 AM|
[quote]it's monday morning and day 100420 of covid. get off my dick.
I don't understand the people who come to Datalounge to be assholes and then start whining when they get it in return.
They all seem to say some variant of "get off my dick" too, the last one who got snippy with me told me to get off her clit. I suspect it's a popular turn of phrase from whatever kinder, gentler board they're originally from.
DL is spicy, if you can't handle it, don't whine about it.
|by Anonymous||reply 77||Last Monday at 6:34 AM|
She doesn't seem to have much money R74.
|by Anonymous||reply 78||Last Monday at 6:34 AM|
An expert said the Yale interviews were flawed and the court also said they weren't compelling when it wrote its final judgment.
[quote]A child psychiatrist testified yesterday that experts at Yale-New Haven Hospital had mishandled interviews and used faulty methodology to conclude that Woody Allen had not molested his 7-year-old daughter, Dylan.
[quote]Testifying at the custody trial of Mr. Allen and Mia Farrow, the psychiatrist, Dr. Stephen Herman, called the Yale report "seriously flawed." He said the investigators had developed questionable interpretations of many of Dylan's statements to them, inappropriately destroyed original notes of the meetings and leaped to unsubstantiated conclusions about people whom they had not even interviewed.
[quote]In fact, Dr. Herman testified, the report's findings were so unreliable that he could have used the data to arrive at a totally opposite conclusion. "It's just as easy to conclude from this report that Dylan was abused," he said in his testimony in State Supreme Court in Manhattan.
|by Anonymous||reply 79||Last Monday at 6:38 AM|
The Yale-New Haven report
[quote]concluded that Allen was "overly intense in his relationship with his daughter" and that his behavior "had a sexualized overtone."
|by Anonymous||reply 80||Last Monday at 6:42 AM|
Is Woody shooting blanks? Why did he and Soon-Yi adopt their kids?
|by Anonymous||reply 81||Last Monday at 6:44 AM|
This lady also claims Woody Allen abused her. Of course, some have referred to her as an "unreliable narrator".
|by Anonymous||reply 82||Last Monday at 6:45 AM|
r80, you realize that the evidence you just posted with disqualified three minutes earlier by the previous post.
|by Anonymous||reply 83||Last Monday at 6:46 AM|
Right, someone mentioned earlier that something I said in r54 was wrong, and that's true, I just read some of the links posted and realized that the Yale team DID interview Dylan. Because only Dr Leventhal wrote the report I thought he was the only one who interviewed her and the rest simply watched the interviews or read his notes. Apparently though the other therapists attended in person.
Everyone destroyed their notes after he filed the report though, that was weird.
|by Anonymous||reply 84||Last Monday at 6:48 AM|
R78: Jon Lovett, Ronan’s partner, was telling an anecdote about Mia lending him and Ronan her car while they were in L.A., and I think he described it as an older model Ford Taurus. That really stood out to me because I was like, “Ohhhhhh, she’s broke!”
|by Anonymous||reply 85||Last Monday at 6:50 AM|
[quote][R78]: Jon Lovett, Ronan’s partner, was telling an anecdote about Mia lending him and Ronan her car while they were in L.A., and I think he described it as an older model Ford Taurus. That really stood out to me because I was like, “Ohhhhhh, she’s broke!”
Why would Mia keep a car in LA if she lives full time in CT.
& she's clearly NOT flash and wouldn't care about her car.
|by Anonymous||reply 86||Last Monday at 6:54 AM|
Interesting r80, in the documentary Mia says a psychologist called her and said she felt something was off with Woody's behavior with Dylan, so he agreed to go to a therapist. That therapist (whoever it was, I only read the Rolling Stone article about it) apparently said Woody's behavior WAS off and it might SEEM sexual, but it really wasn't, so Mia felt at ease after that.
Later, apparently different psychologists said his attentions WERE sexual.
|by Anonymous||reply 87||Last Monday at 6:56 AM|
* Interesting AT R80, I mean, I am r80!
|by Anonymous||reply 88||Last Monday at 6:57 AM|
R86: Unfortunately, Jon’s co-host did in press him on why his MIL had a car in L.A. when she lives in CT. They should’ve pressed him on the issue...did she personally drive it out there, or hire someone?
|by Anonymous||reply 89||Last Monday at 6:59 AM|
i don't believe woody allen would ever step foot in an attic.
|by Anonymous||reply 90||Last Monday at 7:01 AM|
I love Mia Farrow as an actress. I can watch Rosemary's Baby again and again because of her. I even loved her in The Great Gatsby (which many people seem to hate). I think Ronan Farrow has done incredibly valuable and courageous work in exposing Harvey Weinstein.
I have always disliked Woody Allen and most of his movies (though I really like "Bullets Over Broadway"). I think the relationship with Soon-Yi was perverse and just wrong.
But I don't believe that Woody abused Dylan.
|by Anonymous||reply 91||Last Monday at 7:01 AM|
I'll bet she got a great check from HBO - over a million.
|by Anonymous||reply 92||Last Monday at 7:02 AM|
[quote]you realize that the evidence you just posted with disqualified three minutes earlier by the previous post
I kind of don't know what that means. Are there some wrong words in there?
If you're going to hold up the Yale-New Haven report as exonerating Woody Allen then you should probably mention that it says his attention to Dylan WAS inappropriate and sexual in nature.
I agree with the expert who said the Yale-New Haven report could go either way and that's why it was flawed. The quote from Washington Post makes that pretty clear, because it supposedly clears Woody Allen while still saying he was acting sexually toward his 7-year-old daughter.
|by Anonymous||reply 93||Last Monday at 7:02 AM|
In what universe would a psychiatrist not acquainted with any of these people call Mia and tell her that she'd just observed suspicious behavior in the lobby? In any case, the psychiatrist is long dead and can't refute or explain this claim.
as to the attic, according to most reports it was a crawl space and there was no electric train set there.
As to Ronan's claims last night that he noticed that Dylan became withdrawn and frightened, around the time of the alleged abuse, he would have been somewhere between two and five years old during that period. I doubt if he observed anything of the kind.
|by Anonymous||reply 94||Last Monday at 7:04 AM|
r94 - yes to all of that. i thought the same thing.
|by Anonymous||reply 95||Last Monday at 7:06 AM|
|by Anonymous||reply 96||Last Monday at 7:07 AM|
What do you mean r94, someone she wasn't acquainted with? The psychologist who called Mia was Dr. Ethel Person, a NEIGHBOR of hers who she was friends with!
|by Anonymous||reply 97||Last Monday at 7:08 AM|
Only on Central Park West would you have a building full of yenta child psychologists!
|by Anonymous||reply 98||Last Monday at 7:13 AM|
Who the fuck cares? I will tune in when they do one on Melania's Einstein visa.
|by Anonymous||reply 99||Last Monday at 7:14 AM|
Cancel that fucking racist homophobic bitchcunt Mia Farrow. She should’ve been blacklisted from Hollywood just for accusing Woody of being gay.
By the way, Woody Allen is innocent and anybody who says otherwise is a racist piece of shit.
|by Anonymous||reply 100||Last Monday at 7:18 AM|
Ethel Jane Spector Person Sherman Diamond was an American psychiatrist and psychoanalyst. Her work investigated sexual fantasy via an epidemiologic disease model
|by Anonymous||reply 101||Last Monday at 7:18 AM|
The more they whine and wail about this publicly, the less I believe that Woody did anything with Dylan.
If she's got a civil case, let Dylan take Woody to court. Otherwise, they need to STFU.
|by Anonymous||reply 102||Last Monday at 7:18 AM|
r99 I would love a huge expose on Melania but I don't think that'll happen.
|by Anonymous||reply 103||Last Monday at 7:19 AM|
Damn damn. My husband canceled HBO a while ago. Why is this not on Netflix???
A lot of evidence of molestation is iffy. But if there is enough of it, you should, at some point, assume something happened. Now, I don't know exactly what was alleged because I don't have HBO, but it might be just that there was iffy behavior that was headed in the wrong direction. Maybe this was the first kid he molested. There are some things that some parents do that other parents think is creepy as hell, but it's not exactly abuse. Like spanking a kid on a bare butt, didn't that used to be a thing? I think that's creepy as hell. I'm sure there are tons of examples. I don't know what I'm saying but it really is hard to tell as a therapist. And then having a pediatrician check the kid for physical signs needs to be done, but that is abusive to the kid too (unintentionally).
Isn't Ronan a true genius? Maybe he can remember stuff from that long ago.
And as others have said, if Mia was raised in an iffy family, she wouldn't recognize a lot of the stuff as iffy. It's weird but true. That's why a lot of women who were abused end up with abusive creepy husbands. Stuff that would turn off a normal woman doesn't bother them. They think it's normal.
I think Mia is probably like a crazy cat lady. She has good intentions and starts adopting all these cats, especially the ones that no one else seems to want. Very similar.
I really want to know who Ronan's father is!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|by Anonymous||reply 104||Last Monday at 7:22 AM|
Well only one we know about r98 but I suppose that just one could FEEL like a building full of them! She's described as a "Freudian" too, it's a hoot.
But it's not true to say she was a stranger just randomly calling Mia, she'd seen Woody and Dylan in person in their condo building apparently.
|by Anonymous||reply 105||Last Monday at 7:23 AM|
Both Woody and Soon-Yi have clear-cut cases against the bitchcunt for slander and for targeted harassment.
This is a lynching by a depraved racist white woman.
|by Anonymous||reply 106||Last Monday at 7:23 AM|
Racist pedo-enabling bitch cunt whore Mia defended that child rapist Roman Polanski up until the moment #MeToo began. Not to mention how she trusted her kids with that pedo brother of hers while attacking Woody. She should be in jail for reckless endangerment and kidnapping.
This underscores the irony of Woody putting Conrad Bain and Charlotte Rae in [italic]Bananas[/italic] (albeit not together) before they were both on [italic]Diff'rent Strokes[/italic]: he spent a decade dating a woman who single-handedly proved that whites cannot be trusted with either their own children or other people's children.
And Timmay should also go to jail for making that fascist pedo movie then acting uppity about Woody when he took money knowing damn well about a smear campaign that had been going on for decades.
|by Anonymous||reply 107||Last Monday at 7:32 AM|
Katharine Hepburn was once quoted as saying that Mia grew up in a 'depraved household'.
|by Anonymous||reply 108||Last Monday at 7:36 AM|
who says Mia and Persons were friends, r97? You? They lived in the same building.
And I don't think reputable shrinks do things like that. In any event, we'll never know as the woman is long dead.
|by Anonymous||reply 109||Last Monday at 7:38 AM|
The Sinatra family will not claim Ronan as Frank's son.
Is it because he's gay or because he's a pathological liar?
|by Anonymous||reply 110||Last Monday at 7:38 AM|
You said it was a stranger who called R109, but it was their neighbor who knew the family and had seen Woody interacting with Dylan in person.
Now you're saying Dr. Ethel Person wasn't reputable?
|by Anonymous||reply 111||Last Monday at 7:50 AM|
When some schlub on YouTube can succeed in being objective where HBO failed, that says a lot.
|by Anonymous||reply 112||Last Monday at 8:00 AM|
This documentary made me realize that, truly, the only way to mitigate stress as much as possible in life in a way that you can control is to not have children. My God they are nothing but problems.
|by Anonymous||reply 113||Last Monday at 8:00 AM|
r111, I don't think I said Person was a "stranger." But there was no suggestion that she knew the family beyond living in the same very large apartment building. You, or someone with your p.o.v., claimed that they were friends as well as neighbors. Back that up, please.
And if Person made that call, it wasn't reputable behavior.
|by Anonymous||reply 114||Last Monday at 8:10 AM|
Mia never defended Roman Polanski. She was called as a witness in a defamation lawsuit, but not as a character witness. She was called to verify if Polanski was at an event the article claimed he was at.
Mia is tight with Robert Wagner and his family and was in the documentary about Natalie Wood her daughter made last year. She does back Wagner in that one.
|by Anonymous||reply 115||Last Monday at 8:11 AM|
[quote]When some schlub on YouTube can succeed in being objective where HBO failed, that says a lot.
The HBO people are busy defending themselves. I became bored very quickly watching them. Which says a lot about what they say. They're cashing in on an old tragedy. It was enough already 30 years ago.
|by Anonymous||reply 116||Last Monday at 8:17 AM|
I believe Mia was a signatory to an open letter of support for Polanski sometime in the last couple of years.
|by Anonymous||reply 117||Last Monday at 8:18 AM|
[quote] If Lark was "essentially killed" by Mia, as Moses claims, by being forced into AIDS-ridden poverty, why hasn't her husband or anyone come forward to confirm?
I guess their publicists and media friends and contacts haven't gotten around to it yet.
|by Anonymous||reply 118||Last Monday at 8:21 AM|
Dylan Farrow wrote an article a few years ago in which she said she remembers the abuse in the attic. I think this pretty much ends the debate. I have clear memories of being seven (that's a second grader, not an infant). If I can remember my teacher's face and first trip to Disneyland, surely Dylan can remember the time an authority figure touched her vagina.
|by Anonymous||reply 119||Last Monday at 8:22 AM|
I think that Dylan believes every word she's saying. I think that was Mia's goal and she accomplished it.
We are never going to know the truth.
|by Anonymous||reply 120||Last Monday at 8:24 AM|
She didn’t sign either letter R117.
I remember when Dylan went after Diane Keaton and Scarlett Johansson a few years back for supporting him or speaking of him in positive terms. I remember Dylan said to Diane “DO YOU REMEMBER ME”
|by Anonymous||reply 121||Last Monday at 8:29 AM|
Did you notice the credits......over 30 people listed under "Hair & Makeup."
|by Anonymous||reply 122||Last Monday at 8:37 AM|
R119 has never heard of the McMartin preschool trial
|by Anonymous||reply 123||Last Monday at 8:39 AM|
I thought Disney was the studio that made [italic]Pinocchio[/italic]. Turns out HBO is an even bigger bunch of liars. [italic]Sesame Street[/italic] must have really been hard-up for cash to go with them.
|by Anonymous||reply 124||Last Monday at 8:42 AM|
Very true r115, she was at lunch with Polanski not long after the Manson murders, when a woman came up to him and hit on him, later apparently the woman said HE hit on HER, which was used in a magazine article as a bullet point toward his character, that he was trying to get laid just a couple days after his wife was slaughtered.
If I recall Mia only said she was there and that the woman hit on Polanski, not the other way around. That was it. She really didn't sign that letter, I don't know why people say she did.
|by Anonymous||reply 125||Last Monday at 8:46 AM|
R121 I'd say "Your mother had 20 children. Which one were you?"
|by Anonymous||reply 126||Last Monday at 8:47 AM|
[quote] Dylan Farrow wrote an article a few years ago in which she said she remembers the abuse in the attic. I think this pretty much ends the debate.
If that were true, then people would have to be locked up the second someone made na accusation of molestation against them. But it's not true, and that's a very dangerous (and even ignorant) claim for you or anyone to make.
There's a phenomenon called "false-memory syndrome" where people (especially suggestible children eager to please authority figures) who have been primed by therapists or family members or social workers to remember things that didn't actually happen do just that. There were legions of cases in the 1980s, from the McMartin School trial to the Cermak family case in Minnesota to the whole Thurston County case in Washington state. in the latter, children were encouraged by a local sheriff to claim sexual abuse from a supposed Satanic cult that just became wider and wider until almost the entire town was implicated in it--until finally federal prosecutors started casting a suspicious eye when the supposed "victims" started claiming supernatural events happened during their molestations, and the whole thing collapsed.
There was a famous New Yorker article on it that was turned into a good book, "Remembering Satan." But the whole thing underlines that you [bold]CANNOT[/bold] just take children's word for it when they claim sexual abuse--indeed, that was literally the mistake of the Salem witch trials. The girls were claiming sexual abuse by Satan instigated by "witches" in the town, and the judges believed them because it was in their own interests of power to do so.
|by Anonymous||reply 127||Last Monday at 8:49 AM|
Do you think Ronan and Jon Lovett have ever sucked each other's toes?
|by Anonymous||reply 128||Last Monday at 8:59 AM|
Absolutely untrue, R117. I know you guys think smearing Mia will make Woody look innocent, but it does not work that way.
|by Anonymous||reply 129||Last Monday at 9:01 AM|
You can think woody is a pervert and an asshole and not believe Dylan.
I believe Dylan believes she was abused in the attic. I also think Mia coached her and she was a little kid and vulnerable.
Wasn’t there a Mia quote where she told woody you took my daughter now I’ll take yours. Or something along those lines?
|by Anonymous||reply 130||Last Monday at 9:07 AM|
[quote]I don't think reputable shrinks do things like that
Yet you guys have no problem with Moses Farrow, a family therapist, speaking out of turn about someone else's abuse, and claiming Mia Farrow "brainwashed" her children, when brainwashing is merely a concept and there's no actual proof it even exists.
Very odd what you guys consider "reputable" behavior from therapists and what you don't.
|by Anonymous||reply 131||Last Monday at 9:07 AM|
R131 it is not someone else’s abuse. He’s not speaking out of turn. It’s his own family and directly impacted his life. It’s his parents and his sister. And he waited years to say anything. How is what he’s doing any different from Ronan defending his mother and saying he believes Dylan?
|by Anonymous||reply 132||Last Monday at 9:12 AM|
Watching now. Mia's Connecticut home is fantastic, what a property with the pond and the extensive lawn. And the house is cluttered but quite cozy.
|by Anonymous||reply 133||Last Monday at 9:16 AM|
[quote]. That therapist . . . apparently said Woody's behavior WAS off and it might SEEM sexual, but it really wasn't, . . . Later, apparently different psychologists said his attentions WERE sexual.
You'll have to bring the quotes from those later "dlifferent psychologists" then.
There are many situations that some people, especially people who are hyoersexualized , misinterpret as being sexual. Siblings taking a bath together when they are young, for example. Even parents take showers with their kids up to certain ages. Those could also "seem" sexual.
Saying something "could seem" sexual is describing to the inexperienced or uneducated person that it's not sexual. It is not saying it could be sexual.
You can always find some expert to hire who will sell your POV and make your argument for you. The Yale-New Haven team was highly respected and weren't there to find excuses for or cover up sexual abuse. They didn't get hired by the Connecticut or other prosecutors' offcies because they were known for ignoring child sex abuse.
I don't think I ever ehard before that Dylan claimed she saw Woody and Soon-Yi having sex in the summer of 1991. Of course this is long after Mia went on her tirades in front of the kids about Woody and Soon-Yi having sex. Wow! Just wow! If anyone had any doubts how easy it was to taint a child's mind and fill it with fantasies and believe they are real then there it is. This fantasy about Woody and Soon-Yi coupled with her father's missing attention coupled with Dylan's long history of a previously diagnosed inability to distinguish fantasy from reality gives you this false accusation. No one should believe Dylan. She has proven she cannot be believed based on this alone. When you add in all the other facts like the inaccurate attic memories, the fact Woody was never alone with Dylan that summer, the history of Mia horribly manipulating her children and even others to lie under oath and fabricate, including Mia's threats to Woody to take his daughter away from him BEFORE the time period this allegedly happened, then you have to be a blind fool to believe any of this.
I am astounded by the willigness of people to believe such things when there is proof the accuser is a fantasist.
|by Anonymous||reply 134||Last Monday at 9:18 AM|
Gee, Andre Previn walked out on quite a large family.
|by Anonymous||reply 135||Last Monday at 9:22 AM|
Does anyone recall why Mia and Previn divorced? I though they were each involved with other people....
|by Anonymous||reply 136||Last Monday at 9:25 AM|
[quote] Yet you guys have no problem with Moses Farrow, a family therapist, speaking out of turn about someone else's abuse, and claiming Mia Farrow "brainwashed" her children, when brainwashing is merely a concept and there's no actual proof it even exists.
Moses is discussing facts. Actual things he witnessed or knew first hand existed or didn't exist.
Ronan is talkng out of his ass about things that allegedly happened when he was a very young child and matters he was not witness to after he was also coincidentally conveniently a witness to his mother's tirades against Woody and Soon-Yi having sex. Tainting the minds and memories of children absolutely exists. Where do you get the crazy idea that there is no proof it exists? There are innumerable studies that show it absolutely does exist and it can cause great harm. In this case it has harmed not only the accused but also the accuser.
|by Anonymous||reply 137||Last Monday at 9:27 AM|
Am I the only one who thinks Ronan does resemble Woody, especially the younger Woody?
|by Anonymous||reply 138||Last Monday at 9:37 AM|
not to be petty but ronan is not aging well. he used to be so fresh-faced and pretty and now he starting to look embalmed. so many makeup and hair artists on this faux-doc but they couldn't get his twink glow back, could they?
that's the REAL tragedy of this all.
|by Anonymous||reply 139||Last Monday at 9:47 AM|
|by Anonymous||reply 140||Last Monday at 9:49 AM|
Director: More cheesecloth. STAT!
Crew: But Mia already has 5 layers.
Director: Not for Mia, you fool. For Ronan!
|by Anonymous||reply 141||Last Monday at 9:54 AM|
It’s just odd to me that everyone was in therapy! That right there is troublesome. It’s like Mia wanted them to have issues so she could put them in therapy.
During the intro there is a voice-over in the background that says the abuse was allegedly caught on tape. If so, just show the damn footage, let Woody get crucified and Mia, Dylan and Ronan can her have their desperately needed “win”.
And why do these people think we care this much about THEIR problems. Most people don’t like to air their dirty laundry, but this cabal thrives on it.
|by Anonymous||reply 142||Last Monday at 9:55 AM|
[quote] Dylan's long history of a previously diagnosed inability to distinguish fantasy from reality
This is the first time I've heard this. Where was this written about or mentioned? I don't have HBO so haven't seen this documentary.
|by Anonymous||reply 143||Last Monday at 10:01 AM|
After watching that first episode, it struck me that Ronan is clearly Mia's favorite because he'll never ever leave Mommy for another woman. And that's creepy and sad.
|by Anonymous||reply 144||Last Monday at 10:05 AM|
R143, I have no idea if it's in the HBO doc. This came out ages ago - maybe in the beginning. Dylan was in therapy from the eraliest day of her adoption. You ca probably google it and get some info about it.
Do you think these fimmakers would have included that in their doc? They would just have needed to hire some "expert" to take that diagnosis apart. 'LOL!
|by Anonymous||reply 145||Last Monday at 10:07 AM|
[quote] After watching that first episode, it struck me that Ronan is clearly Mia's favorite
Didn't Mia used to seclude herself with Satchel/Ronan when he was a baby and ignore the others for extended periods of time? Actually it was Mia's behavior with Satchel that was really kooky and obsessive.
|by Anonymous||reply 146||Last Monday at 10:10 AM|
[quote] Tainting the minds and memories of children absolutely exists
It’s called going to church.
|by Anonymous||reply 147||Last Monday at 10:20 AM|
All the reviews have noted this is weighted in favour of the Farrow clan. It’s a shame because Kirby Dick used to be such a reputable filmmaker.
|by Anonymous||reply 148||Last Monday at 10:21 AM|
This is an informative article about the kids and eye opening (for me) about Soon-Yi:
|by Anonymous||reply 149||Last Monday at 10:23 AM|
Just one more fact no one here has mentioned: Allen wanted this to go to trial in order to clear his name, but the case was dismissed in order to protect Dylan. Therefore, the witnesses (that we see in the documentary) were never cross-examined. That would have been helpful in establishing what actually happened at that house. Instead, the documentarians present the testimony of Farrow's friend and the former girlfriend of her son as the unassailable truth. Allen also took a lie detector test and passed. Mia Farrow did not. I think it would be helpful if she did so now in order to clear up the issue of whether she coached Dylan in her testimony or not.
|by Anonymous||reply 150||Last Monday at 10:23 AM|
i thought it was strange that mia, having her concerns over woody's sexually inappropriate behavior toward dylan, still allowed her to run around in just her underwear. there was a home movie footage of dylan (where she was old enough to be wearing clothes) and she is just sitting there outside in her underwear next to woody and putting her hand on his thigh.
given all the commentary by mia and her friend about how bad his boundaries were - and how terribly worried they were - you think she would have told the kid to put on a shirt and pants if she's going to sit next to a grown man pervert.
|by Anonymous||reply 151||Last Monday at 10:24 AM|
R127, that was not the mistake of the Salem witch trials. The judges in Salem had been warned at the time that they should not take accept allegations of *witchcraft* without addition evidence. The supernatural aspect of the claims made them suspect and required further verification.
|by Anonymous||reply 152||Last Monday at 10:27 AM|
Mia Farrow is crazy. We’re talking about someone who chopped off her hair because her boyfriend didn’t take her to a party. She stole her best friend’s husband. I think she’s a liar, I think she taught her kids to lie.
|by Anonymous||reply 153||Last Monday at 10:31 AM|
The thing that is so tiresome about Dylan Farrow is that she acts like she’s some Tutsi woman who was gang-raped by an army of Hutu soldiers during the Rwandan genocide when in reality she’s someone whose father put his head in her lap when she was a child. It’s like, no matter what happened - GET OVER IT. Show the world what it means to SURVIVE.
And now with that Promising Young Woman movie you have all these perpetual victims on social media saying “I feel like I WANT TO DIE!” I mean, there are obviously legitimate victims of child sex abuse but there’s also a wannabe cult of victim hood and Dylan Farrow is the QUEEN of it.
|by Anonymous||reply 154||Last Monday at 10:50 AM|
Isn’t the Mia/Dylan thing Munchausen by proxy?
|by Anonymous||reply 155||Last Monday at 10:55 AM|
R150, thanks for more common sense. Of course statements not subject to cross examination are often useless or worse the opposite of what they seem at first glance. Even when people aren't trying to lie, you can often uncover misinterpretations, mistaken observations, mis-remembered "facts", etc.
HBO should be ashamed of itself as should those filmmakers. This is about financial avarice or fame hunger. How is this any better than Trump and his sycophants? Because the "cause" is popular and trendy? First principles - always first principles. No matter what the subject or who the people are.
We are so fast losing our principles.
|by Anonymous||reply 156||Last Monday at 11:04 AM|
André Previn couldn't keep it in his pants. He went through five wives in his lifetime; Mia was the third among them.
|by Anonymous||reply 157||Last Monday at 11:08 AM|
[quote]And did she get child support for Ronan, Moses and Dylan ?
IIRC, Woody was taken to court and had to pay child support for Ronan.
|by Anonymous||reply 158||Last Monday at 11:28 AM|
R158, you make it sound like Woody wasn't willing to pay child support for Ronan and you know that's not true. Having a court decide the amount of child support when it is in contention or it's just a normal part of a child custody dispute does not mean one or the other parent is resisting child support.
|by Anonymous||reply 159||Last Monday at 11:33 AM|
[quote]This is an informative article about the kids and eye opening (for me) about Soon-Yi:
The Jezebel article is an eye opener.
Mia adopted another 5 kids after finding out about Woody and Soon-Yi's affair, with 2 of them adopted within a month her finding out? This is not a sane person.
[quote]Tam, a blind girl from Vietnam, was adopted by Mia in February 1992, just one month after learning about the affair between Woody and Soon-Yi. Mia and Woody initially planned on raising the girl together, but their relationship was on shaky ground due to the affair. Woody was still a presence in Mia's household—up until August 1992—as the former couple attempted to co-parent and hammer out a custody agreement. However, it was by all accounts an acrimonious and emotionally-charged time, which apparently affected Tam. She was rumored to chant, "Woody no goody!" when he was around. Tam evidently had a heart condition and passed away in March 2000 of heart failure.
[quote]Isaiah was a crack-addicted infant adopted by Mia the same week that she adopted Tam. He is a senior at the University of Connecticut.
|by Anonymous||reply 160||Last Monday at 11:45 AM|
no shit r160 but this morning i was called out by the DSM police for calling mia mentally ill. the queen keeper of the DSM would not hop off my dick about my conspiracy theories.
so just watch your cock because that DSM queen will be cumming for you calling mia insane.
and yes - mia is batshit mentally ill.
|by Anonymous||reply 161||Last Monday at 12:16 PM|
You are not on DSM here.
|by Anonymous||reply 162||Last Monday at 12:19 PM|
I'm just like...what is the goal here?
Allen isn't going to jail.
His best films are behind him.
He'll most likely be dead in 5 years.
What's to be gained from bringing all this up AGAIN
|by Anonymous||reply 163||Last Monday at 1:41 PM|
Sting, Demi, Soon-Yi, soon me!
|by Anonymous||reply 164||Last Monday at 2:28 PM|
R163 the point is that Mia is one crazy, vengeful bitch.
|by Anonymous||reply 165||Last Monday at 2:32 PM|
Satchel/Ronan was evil looking baby in the pic at R111
|by Anonymous||reply 166||Last Monday at 4:15 PM|
|by Anonymous||reply 167||Last Monday at 4:19 PM|
|by Anonymous||reply 168||Last Monday at 5:14 PM|
R168 = Ronan
|by Anonymous||reply 169||Last Tuesday at 4:53 AM|
Just finished episode 1. I'm 28, missed all of the Allen/Soon-Yi/Farrow fallout when it was happening/happened.
So I'm objective.
Allen looks guilty and creepy as shit after ep 1. Looking forward to the other installments.
|by Anonymous||reply 170||Last Tuesday at 10:48 AM|
I'm on Team They're Both Assholes!
Team Allen keeps calling Mia crazy and evil, as if proving her crazy and evil proved Allen innocent. It doesn't. Both sides of an argument can be wrong, both parties in a feud can be guilty, the accusations thrown by both sides in a fight can be perfectly true.
The evidence clearly shows that Mia IS evil, and that Woody IS interested in very young women.
|by Anonymous||reply 171||Last Tuesday at 11:44 AM|
R170 - yes exactly... that’s the problem. The “documentary” doesn’t allow you to be objective because it’s completely one-sided. Your reaction is the intended response.
Also I love that a 28 year old is on datalounge! I thought we only attracted the over-40 crowd these days!
|by Anonymous||reply 172||Last Tuesday at 11:44 AM|
The movie made me sympathize with woody, i had not before, it seems so jaded toward mia and dylan/ronan.....buncha crap. SO OBVIOUSLY PROPAGANDA
|by Anonymous||reply 173||Last Tuesday at 4:47 PM|
The suntan lotion is an old allegation. I remember reading a defense from Allen in '92-'93 where he claimed he was putting sunscreen on Dylan normally, that there was nothing inappropriate. I agree with you, though, that if the claim is true, Farrow is an idiot for not cutting ties with him at the time.
Whether Allen is guilty or not, Farrow doesn't come out of this looking good. She really must be mental to dredge this up every few years. Either Dylan was molested, and her mother continually makes her relive that trauma, or she wasn't molested, but believes herself to have been, and her mother keeps making her relive that trauma. I'm actually not sure which is worse, probably the former since an actual abuse victim needs support and privacy, not whatever the hell this is.
|by Anonymous||reply 174||Last Tuesday at 6:41 PM|
Dylan looks insane in the membrane....
|by Anonymous||reply 175||Last Tuesday at 6:49 PM|
i respect ronan, but why he on mia's side????
|by Anonymous||reply 176||Last Tuesday at 7:29 PM|
[quote]Both Woody and Soon-Yi have clear-cut cases against the bitchcunt for slander and for targeted harassment.
And THEY SHOULD! For defamation, slander, libel, and intentional causing of emotional distress. They should name Ronan and Dylan as co-defendants. Of course, there one small little matter...
...discovery. Bet neither Allen nor the pliant Soon-Yi wants that.
|by Anonymous||reply 177||Last Tuesday at 7:46 PM|
[quote]Either Dylan was molested, and her mother continually makes her relive that trauma, or she wasn't molested, but believes herself to have been, and her mother keeps making her relive that trauma. I'm actually not sure which is worse, probably the former since an actual abuse victim needs support and privacy, not whatever the hell this is.
Dylan is a grown woman now. No one's forcing her to DO anything.
I'd like to know what [bold]she & Mia got paid to do this.[/bold]
|by Anonymous||reply 178||Last Tuesday at 7:49 PM|
no shit, they broke as fuk and prob only got a few grande....
|by Anonymous||reply 179||Last Tuesday at 8:08 PM|
I don't respect Ronan at all. He's manipulative and unethical.
|by Anonymous||reply 180||Last Tuesday at 9:03 PM|
Encouraging her then, and participating alongside Dylan's younger brother. Either way, Mia's a terrible mother.
|by Anonymous||reply 181||Last Wednesday at 1:13 PM|
Dylan looked like the demon child from The Omen but with extreme heroin eyes.
|by Anonymous||reply 182||Last Wednesday at 1:25 PM|
This is basically trailer park drama that some artistic wannabes have foisted on us with nicer packaging because they live in a hippy house in Connecticut. Woody is the only one with any talent. Mia is a psycho cunt who used her oozing slit to get what she wanted in life.
|by Anonymous||reply 183||Last Wednesday at 1:28 PM|
[quote]This is basically trailer park drama that some artistic wannabes have foisted on us with nicer packaging because they live in a hippy house in Connecticut. Woody is the only one with any talent. Mia is a psycho cunt who used her oozing slit to get what she wanted in life.
Absolutely. That's the guilty pleasure of it. Unfortunately, because the main players in this little household drama are not in a trailer park, we don't have an exciting third act. In fact, it's a story in search of violent denouement. Let's face it - LONG AGO - someone would set another's trailer on fire to cover up dead bodies.
|by Anonymous||reply 184||Last Wednesday at 3:52 PM|
You’re all meanies. I think Mia was wonderful onscreen. And she has the most beautiful name: Maria de Lourdes Villiers Farrow. Sure beats Alan Konigsberg.
|by Anonymous||reply 185||Last Wednesday at 3:54 PM|
Well, I thought the first episode was hilarious. This tired shit being trotted out AGAIN for the #metoo crowd? Get the popcorn! You have "Keeping Up With The Farrows"--septugenarian Mama Mia shot in soft focus with the Doris Day lens, reliving her memories and playing to the camera a little too obviously, gimlet-eyed snake Ronan, and at the center of it all (when scene-stealing Mia isn't)--the raven-haired muse of misery, Dylan. The filmmakers should have known, though, that quoting from Woody Allen's memoir at such length was a legal no-no. Anyway--can't wait for the next episode!
|by Anonymous||reply 186||Last Wednesday at 5:31 PM|
They were supposed to do a sexual harassment expose on Russell Simmons with Oprah footing the bill. She saw the rough copy and withdrew her support. That wacky bitch Mia needs to get over the breakup. It's been over 30 years now.
|by Anonymous||reply 187||Last Wednesday at 6:01 PM|
[R110] Sinatra's biographer says he was in Hawaii with his then wife, recovering from major bowel surgery during the time period when Ronan would have been conceived, not ruling out but reducing the chances that he is Sinatra's son -- despite the physical likeness, which he explains by a comparable resemblance to Mia's father.
|by Anonymous||reply 188||Last Wednesday at 7:02 PM|
[[R188]] newbie, busted.
|by Anonymous||reply 189||Last Wednesday at 7:13 PM|
If I was Ronan I would have had my DNA done by now, Settle this thing once and for all.
Why does that make him a "newbie", R188?
It's odd - Mia Farrow is probably one of the most talked about people in the history of DL. There was always at least one thread about her on the front page, back in the days of pages and suddenly she went out of favor. I think that happened when the Chinese son wrote about her. People backed away. People on DL are quite perceptive about these sorts of things. They sense when things are true. Bit like Shirley Maclaine's daughter's book. None of that "I don't believe her" bullshit you get from other sorts of people. What she wrote was obviously true. And VERY unpleasant.
|by Anonymous||reply 190||Last Thursday at 5:42 AM|
Ronan knows he's not Sinatra's kid, but he wants others to think he is.
The thing is, I don't think he's Woody's, either. I think Mia used a sperm bank. Thus, to her mind she wasn't lying when she said "maybe" to the Sinatra question.
|by Anonymous||reply 191||Last Thursday at 5:45 AM|
[quote]I think Mia used a sperm bank.
She is pretty devious, clearly. And Woody shoots blanks.
...and she wanted to capture him.
She even considered marrying Woody AFTER she'd found the Soon-Yi pics, when he suggested it.
|by Anonymous||reply 192||Last Thursday at 5:51 AM|
mia and dylan need psychiatric help ASAP
|by Anonymous||reply 193||Last Thursday at 9:26 AM|
How are the ratings for this?
|by Anonymous||reply 194||Last Thursday at 11:53 AM|
I'm enjoying the scenes of Mia's lovely country home. Can't help but imagine how careful they've had to be around that pond, with all those kids running around.
|by Anonymous||reply 195||Last Thursday at 2:11 PM|
Maybe she and dylan made enuf off this to keep their lying traps shut for a bit.
|by Anonymous||reply 196||Last Thursday at 2:35 PM|
I went to look at that Youtube video someone posted and landed on a poor-quality upload of "Love and Betrayal: The Mia Farrow Story," a TV movie from 1995 that I sort of remember. Watching now, knowing full well it will be cheesy. Mia is portrayed by Patsy Kensit, who played Mia's daughter in Gatsby. Must say Dennis Boutsikaris is perfect as Woody.
|by Anonymous||reply 197||Last Thursday at 3:00 PM|
the series makes mia/dylan look really bad. did they view this fore they released this fibbing sack of shit movie?
|by Anonymous||reply 198||Last Thursday at 3:34 PM|
Mia so fug they gotta photograph her thru a foot of gauze or wtf?
|by Anonymous||reply 199||Last Thursday at 5:11 PM|
I'm on team "they're both crazy", yet I still like them both. I guess that's weird.
|by Anonymous||reply 200||Last Thursday at 5:52 PM|
Big 50 point gap between critical and audience response on RT. Critics seem to have overwhelmingly bought what the filmmakers are selling.
|by Anonymous||reply 201||Last Thursday at 10:49 PM|
R201 an alternate explanation is that some of these critics might not be buying it either but don't have the anonymity of online reviewers. No one wants to lose their job.
|by Anonymous||reply 202||Last Thursday at 10:57 PM|
Critics are also more likely to have seen all 4 episodes. Not that I'm not expecting to be swayed.
|by Anonymous||reply 203||Last Thursday at 11:20 PM|
I think in this #metoo climate critics have to say they believe Dylan and liked the series. God forbid anyone question a woman’s accusations of sexual assault. You would get cancelled on twitter so fast. So actually these cunty grifters picked the perfect time to make their “documentary.” One has to respect the 30 year hustle they have going on.
|by Anonymous||reply 204||Yesterday at 4:21 AM|