Anyone else seen Woodie Allen's movie "Magic In The Moonlight"?

[Whateverist]

Just saw it tonight and liked it. Well crafted, well acted, interesting ideas - relevant to some of our discussions here. Particularly, for those of us who prize our intelligence and rationality, just how far should our reason dictate how we live and what we pursue? I didn't think I got any extra insights into these questions but I did think it put them out there well.

So I guess I'd give it one less than my maximum number of stars, but no regrets at all about choosing to see it. Very enjoyable.

[Tiberius]

I've decided not to watch another Woody Allen movie until he is properly tried for the accusations of child abuse against him. Same with Roman Polanski (well, he was tried, pled guilty, and then ran off).

Celebrity doesn't mean immunity in my eyes.

[Whateverist]

I'm not convinced Dylan Farrow's accusations weren't created by a spiteful and hysterical mother. I don't know that for a fact but it strikes me as equally likely from what I've read. Whatever we choose to believe about this I think we can agree that the evidence is far from conclusive.

Be that as it may, if you ever do decide to watch another Allen movie, you could do worse than this one.

---

Looked online to see if I could find anything that seemed evenhanded. This was the best I could do, but I admit I'm not familiar with the source.

http://www.chicagonow.com/interesting-ch...ody-allen/

This is how the article wraps up:

We can choose to believe Dylan Farrow. We can choose to believe Woody Allen. We can choose to disbelieve either one or both.

What we should not do is cause or burden them with anymore grief and pain than they already carry.

Until the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth comes out.

Seems like good advice to me. Celebrity should not be a factor either way.

[Dystopia]

Is it about what? And is it interesting? I didn't even know Woody Allen had accusations against him, but I couldn't care less, even a criminal can produce a good work of art.

[Whateverist]

Is it about what? And is it interesting? I didn't even know Woody Allen had accusations against him, but I couldn't care less, even a criminal can produce a good work of art.

I thought it was interesting with out being enlightening. The movie is set in the south of France in the 20's or 30's, but all community seems mainly to consist of wealthy people from England. The main character is a stage magician with an impressive reputation. He is a perfectionist, seemingly critical of most people, a skeptic and certainly an atheist. Without giving away too much, he takes up an offer from a friend to debunk a beautfiul, young American medium. Our hero magician ends up baffled and convinced that she -somehow- is the real deal. You could say it is mostly about his struggles to maintain or integrate his skepticism given his reaction to her. On a broader level, it might be about how much reason should influence what we allow ourselves to feel/experience .. especially for those of us who consider ourselves not to be easy marks for the irrational.

[Dystopia]

I sure miss doing some magic tricks with card, I should go back to it

[Tiberius]

I'm not convinced Dylan Farrow's accusations weren't created by a spiteful and hysterical mother. I don't know that for a fact but it strikes me as equally likely from what I've read. Whatever we choose to believe about this I think we can agree that the evidence is far from conclusive.

It's not up to you or I though; we have courts which decide these cases.

Maybe a little bit of context: I'm from the UK. We recently have a large number of court cases against celebrities regarding child abuse; several people been convicted, including popular entertainers. A lot of them were very old (some died before the allegations even emerged) and these crimes happened decades ago.

It seems to me that back when these crimes took place, lots of people got away with it, even if they were questioned by police (the investigations were flawed at the time). There are probably hundreds more cases which won't even get to see a court room; it's a scandal of epic proportions.

In my view, it shouldn't matter if the case has already been investigated, or whether the family situation at the time was hostile. I'm not convinced that the police had the right attitude back then, and if an adult has stuck to their story, there should be a proper investigation. That investigation may find Allen not guilty, or may not turn up any evidence other than an accusation, but it should happen.

As for criminals creating art, or course they can, and some of it might be enjoyable. However I can't in good conscience pay money (part of which ultimately ends up in the hands of the artist) to see art created by someone who has had accusations of child abuse placed on them and has not been properly investigated / tried for them.

It's a personal thing. If you can do it, I've got nothing against you.

[Whateverist]

I'm not convinced Dylan Farrow's accusations weren't created by a spiteful and hysterical mother. I don't know that for a fact but it strikes me as equally likely from what I've read. Whatever we choose to believe about this I think we can agree that the evidence is far from conclusive.

It's not up to you or I though; we have courts which decide these cases.

That's true but it did come to the attention of the judicial system at the time and they chose not to prosecute. I'm not sure what you make of that. I'm not sure why that was either.

Maybe a little bit of context: I'm from the UK. We recently have a large number of court cases against celebrities regarding child abuse; several people been convicted, including popular entertainers. A lot of them were very old (some died before the allegations even emerged) and these crimes happened decades ago.

It seems to me that back when these crimes took place, lots of people got away with it, even if they were questioned by police (the investigations were flawed at the time). There are probably hundreds more cases which won't even get to see a court room; it's a scandal of epic proportions.

In my view, it shouldn't matter if the case has already been investigated, or whether the family situation at the time was hostile. I'm not convinced that the police had the right attitude back then, and if an adult has stuck to their story, there should be a proper investigation. That investigation may find Allen not guilty, or may not turn up any evidence other than an accusation, but it should happen.

As for criminals creating art, or course they can, and some of it might be enjoyable. However I can't in good conscience pay money (part of which ultimately ends up in the hands of the artist) to see art created by someone who has had accusations of child abuse placed on them and has not been properly investigated / tried for them.

It's a personal thing. If you can do it, I've got nothing against you.

And vice versa. You're far from alone in your reaction to Woodie Allen and his work on account of all this. Reasonable people can disagree.

But I confess I do have a dog in this fight. Have you ever heard of Recovered Memory Syndrome? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_memory_syndrome

False memory syndrome (FMS) describes a condition in which a person's identity and relationships are affected by memories that are factually incorrect but that they strongly believe.[1] Peter J. Freyd originated the term,[2] which the False Memory Syndrome Foundation (FMSF) subsequently popularized. The term is not recognized as a mental disorder[3] in any of the medical manuals, such as the ICD-10[4] or the DSM-5;[5] however, the principle that memories can be altered by outside influences is overwhelmingly accepted by scientists.[6][7][8][9]

False memories may be the result of recovered memory therapy, a term also defined by the FMSF in the early 1990s,[10] which describes a range of therapy methods that are prone to creating confabulations. Some of the influential figures in the genesis of the theory are forensic psychologist Ralph Underwager, psychologist Elizabeth Loftus and sociologist Richard Ofshe.

The reason this came to my attention is that two my wife's sisters accused their father of sexual abuse as the result of undergoing therapy which utilized hypnosis among other techniques to recover lost memories. When the first one made the announcement we assumed there must be something to it since this phenomenon was all the rage here twenty years ago. Plus my father in law, the only one in his family of Italian immigrants born in this country was always flamboyantly flirtatious with waitresses .. something we wrote off to his old world ways. So we were receptive to the charge when we first heard it.

But no details were forthcoming. We were concerned because, as the only family living near my wife's parents, we assumed we'd need to support her father in coping with the fall out. Not only didn't we get anything to work from but our requests were met with suspicion, hostility and ultimately rejection. That sister wrote my wife, her son and myself off too. The youngest sister went on to do the same.

As a result we became involved with the False Memory Syndrome Foundation, following their newsletters and the research. I found it enlightening and as a result came to the conclusion that it was far more likely that this had befallen my sister-in-law than that she had been abused by her father.

So having seen the way shoddy psychotherapy can harm both those it seeks to help as well as their families, I am very sensitive to the possibility that the daughter and the mother could have been duped and not even be aware of it. As a result, even without a ruling from the judicial system, I am sympathetic toward Allen but also recognize that even if he is innocent, the mother and daughter are also victims.

[c172]

Assumed innocent until proven guilty, I suppose. That's how 'murica's supposed to be, for better or worse. I don't follow W. Allen like some do, so I'm not overly familiar, nor concerned, with the situation.

As for the movie, it was my intention to go today, but I'm a bit ill, so I'll likely try again tomorrow. But the trailer looked great! Charming young actress, lovely scenery, potentially interesting plot. It's showing down the street at the indie/foreign theater.

[Whateverist]

I'll be interested in your take on it.

Interestingly, my wife was the one most affected by the recovered memories thing with her sisters, but she is also miffed at Woody Allen. To her, it simply icky that he would get into a romantic situation with a girl he'd helped parent, even if she was adopted. Sort of like dating someone who is subordinate to you, undo influence and all that.