Dylan Farrow's open letter goes Beast Mode at the end -- calling out Diane Keaton, Louis CK, Emma Stone.

Dylan has a great writing voice, I believe her 100%.

@1, the DA certainly didn't, and I'll bet he put a lot more research into it than you did.

Lynch is a total stud, probably a top 3 back in the league. No doubt about it.

Denver will win because they have the personnel to stretch out the Seahawk's nickel and dime packages, the weakness of the Seattle defense. Welker will have no problem getting open on shallow routes, taking advantage of the relatively poor footwork of Seattle's oversized DBs.

Adding to that is Seattle's defensive weakness in the power running game when in those packages, and Denver is set to have a good day running too. Denver's defense has solidified greatly in the last two months or so, and are able to stop Seattle's only offensive threat, which is Lynch.

Seattle will win because Manning will not have the ability to control their defense as much as he can with other defenses due to the way they play before the snap. They offer little to no movement, relying more on instinct and ability to stretch the field. Manning's quick release relies on his receivers winning at the line of scrimmage, a hard ask against Seattle's grabby defense.

Furthermore, Denver's below average pass defense will give Wilson the ample chance to find open guys on bootlegs and play action passes, greatly assisted by Lynch's ability to break open the run game against anyone. Denver's secondary may be too slow and not physical enough to beat Lynch in the trenches. If he average four yards a play, it may be too much.

This game is a pick-em, both teams are too good.

27-23 Denver

My favorite Woody Allen movie is actually Casino Royale.

@2 - According to the piece linked there, the DA didn't decline to file charges because he didn't believe the allegations were true:

After a custody hearing denied my father visitation rights, my mother declined to pursue criminal charges, despite findings of probable cause by the State of Connecticut – due to, in the words of the prosecutor, the fragility of the “child victim.”

speaking of doing research...

#5

See "The Hunt" first then comment.

Trailer: The Hunt (2013)

Her letter is believable. But I still have to wonder "why now?" Did her brother (whose had a hardon for Woody Allen for years, and is a lawyer) put her up to it? And has anyone else ever alleged abuse at his hands? It seems unlikely he would do that to just one child. Will anyone else come forward? Can anyone corroborate?

None of this is to put her story in doubt. But I do think we ought to be sure he actually did something. For example, I find it weird that Mia Farrow dropped the charges. If MY daughter were molested by someone, I certainly fucking wouldn't, no matter if that person were prohibited from seeing her. The idea that someone like that walking free would be unbearable to me. And as vindictive as she came across, I have to say that it seems unlikely she would let it go if the state had a good case.

Here's an interesting second read concerning Woody Allen:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/20…

Philip Seymour Hoffman: dead.

http://www.sfgate.com/academy_art/invest…

I didn't follow his career that closely, but did see him in some films. He was an interesting actor who played some fascinating characters. RIP.

Also, Phillip Seymour Hoffman died. :-(

@7
"Fragility of the child victim" certainly seems like a bad idea, especially in retrospect.

I think the open letter gives the "why now?" though I suppose we don't necessarily have to believe it. But she writes this now because of some achievement award that Allen is getting now.

The "why now" question is also addressed in the letter. She says, "Last week, Woody Allen was nominated for his latest Oscar. But this time, I refuse to fall apart." Sometimes you reach the point where being silent is no longer an option.

@ 11,12, understood.

I think the Weide piece linked by bradl @8 is persuasive. The reason charges were never made isn't because of "fragility" but because there was no evidence. Do I know what happened? Hell no. But I don't see any reason to.

I think I'm on Dory Previn's side on this one.

I thought of David Schmader when I heard about this because we've this game before with him. Do you still like X artist's works now that you know this?

Me? I like - liked? - Woody Allen's movies. But if the guy's a child-molesting monster - let's assume the allegations are true - it doesn't alter the quality of his movies. At the same time, though, most wouldn't argue that Jerry Sandusky was an excellent defensive coach, but we don't praise him or allow him to keep his career or even walk around free. And we don't sit around talking about his defensive strategy, because we can't look at his pictures and not think about what he did. Perhaps we should do the same for Woody. It's only fair. (Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that he did it. And I don't know why someone would lie about being sexually abused.) I don't blame Dylan for feeling bitter that this guy who nearly destroyed her still has his career and is winning awards.

And so I also guess I should never watch Chinatown or Rosemary's Baby again? (Such good movies!) Maybe there is a moral filter to apply to our appreciation of art after all. I was never abused, thank god. Someone who was damaged by this, and is appropriately ticked off, wouldn't have such a hard time drawing that line in the sand. It's refreshing for survivors to remind us of the essence of the argument.

The Central African Republic is not a part of Greater Israel & their envisioned sphere of influence. There is no coterie of billion-dollar lobby groups that speak for any African nation, let alone the CAR. There is no army of media geared towards creating a pro-CAR vision. That is the main difference between it & Syria.

Also, about Keystone - I'm so, so disheartened. It's one thing to talk about using your pen and your telephone...

My favorite Woody Allen movies are too numerous to name. I read Dylan's letter and I feel terrible for her, but it doesn't change how much I love his movies. A lot of celebrities are vile shitheads—some of whose nastiness we know of (Polanski, Gibson, 3/4 of the male 19th-century painters) but most of the assholes and their shit ideas and actions have yet to be outed, and for that I am grateful. I do view Allen's movies differently after the whole Soon-Yi thing, but I don't like his filmmaking any less. It's not a betrayal to the victims to still appreciate the art of the asshole.

Just some historical context, for those who have forgotten: childhood sexual abuse was still an uncertain area in the early 90's. This was the time of the witch hunts & hysteria. Washington's own Wenatchee case was a major part of that. Accusations were being seen w/ skepticism, and Mia Farrow's own past didn't speak well for her stability.

It wasn't until the latter half of the 80's that childhood sexual abuse was even mentioned in mainstream media. Before then, the "no one will believe you" line was true & molesters by and large lived untouched. Then there became a flood of revelations, and the backlash into hysteria occurred. Many cops, to my mind, were more interested in absolving their conscience for ignoring the problem for so long, rather than justice.

That all being said, the picture of Allen as painted by Dylan is a very typical modus operandi of the abuser.

@16: It has to with Africa's history for the past three centuries more than with your contorted conjecture. All of Africa, save South Africa and Mediterranean countries, has never been foremost on the world political stage.
The fact that help and focus from the world's powers are on Nation A instead of Nation B and are not evenly distributed is a result of economics, culture, and perhaps most importantly - geography.

C'mon Ansel, you're better than this. That article on cryptocurrencies doesn't tell you any of the interesting things, it's an article for handing to your old relatives who still have trouble understanding Twitter, and all they know about the internet is Facebook.

It is a very brief look, which doesn't look at all into the dangers of cryptocurrencies (why, for example, there are competitors claiming to be "better" than Bitcoin) or the possible political motives. There have been far better links on Slog.

I think living in the real world you have to grow up and learn that people who are greatly talented or do many good things can be seriously flawed. I like Woody Allen's films but I certainly wouldn't want to hang around him given the allegations past and present about him. And I liked Ted Kennedy's politics for the most part part but as Dennis Leary said, there's no way I'd get into a car with him driving.

Part of being rational is being able to say someone was a talented football coach or movie director and appreciated THAT aspect of their being and at the same time being capable of being disgusted with other aspects of their behavior that is really horrible.

This entire notion of making people either all "good" or all "evil" with no middle ground is a symptom of being incapable of seeing nuance in the real world. So the question of "What's your favorite Woody Allen movie? Now read this and ask again" is a question an 8th grader would ask in an effort to be clever.

Woody had a sexual relationship with his lover's daughter... his children's sister. How can that NOT erase all of his credibility?

He is clearly just as immoral as Mia, and her children, have claimed.

Hey, speaking of possible child molesters, Cardinal Timothy Dolan is on the Super Bowl pregame show right now telling us something inane about "MY stadium, St. Patrick's Cathedral". Dolan is of course the guy who moved all the church's money into a cemetery fund seconds before the abuse trials in Milwaukee, so the money couldn't be used to recompense victims, and has called abuse victims "phony".

@22: I like your choice of Denis Leary for a quote about Kennedy, given his controversies with plagiarism. And yet I still love watching him on The Daily Show, because those interviews are inevitably hilarious.

i'm with fnarf, y'all need to read that dailybeast article before you break out the pitchforks. especially if you were a kid 20 years ago and don't remember it at the time (i do). i don't know the truth of it, probably only allen does, but wow mia farrow lives in a glass house.

1. mia farrow's brother just got send to prison for 10 years - multiple counts of child molestation

2. allen's crime is alleged to have taken place during a short visit to farrow's connecticut house during their custody battle over their 3 children, after the soon-yi relationship began.

3. allen's son satchel uses the term "brainwashed" to describe the farrow household at that time.

4. he was cleared by a 6 month long connecticut/yale-new haven hospital investigation.

Before and after reading that article, my favourite Woody Allen film was and is Broadway Danny Rose.

not satchel, moses. satchel = ronin. i think.

@8
Thank you for posting that. I think it gives some very important perspective that has been missing in the discussion about Woody Allen. I'm with fnarf and Max Solomon on this one. I think he is innocent. Another side note, Allen passed a polygraph test on this during the investigation, but Farrow refused to take one about the veracity of her claims.

There's this:

The Texas woman who served 21 years in prison for allegedly molesting and abusing children as part of a series of Satanic rituals was released on Tuesday in Austin. The Austin American Statesman reported that Fran Keller, now 63, is being released as key components of the case that put her behind bars have unraveled.
. . .
In spite of the far-fetched nature of the charges, the Kellers were found guilty and sentenced to 48 years in prison each. Now it appears that the two child care workers were the victims of an investigation run amok, a fraudulent child psychologist, reckless fact-finding and an overall atmosphere of media hysteria.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/11/27/ow…

I'm supposed to believe Allen went to his ex-girlfriend's house, while they were in a custody battle, while he had to be on his best behavior, while the house was full of children and nannies, took his daughter for five minutes in the attic to molest her and then left?

Mia Farrow is still a good friend of Roman Polanski btw.

@ 26, 31: If you read Dylan Farrow's open letter, it doesn't sound like Allen's alleged sexual abuse of her was limited to a single incident at a Connecticut house during a custody battle. What about the part of her letter where she describes how Allen would regularly force her to suck his fingers? Or how he'd lay his head in her naked lap and breathe in deeply? Are you equally skeptical that any of this took place?

@33 yes I am.

That Daily Beast article is a bullshit takedown of Mia Farrow that has nothing to do with Dylan's accusations; because Mia's not the perfect girlfriend and mother then Dylan (the actual victim) isn't credible? Woody Allen and Roman Polanski get to be fucking gross and weird because? They made some movies? Fuck. No wonder more victims of abuse don't come forward.

Manhattan. Though in this light Decontructing Harry obviously comes to mind. Artists are frequently troubled yet we revere them because they represent a truism of the human experience: beauty is not the opposite of hideous, they coexist and are therefore the same. There is no love without heartbreak. One makes the other. Doy.

@34 -- Okay, I just find it strange that many people seem not to even acknowledge that part of the letter and focus solely on how "unlikely" it is that a single incident at a Connecticut house could take place because ... pedophiles always operate super rationally? I don't know ...

Roxane Gay recently expressed something I've felt about this story for a long time. When there's no way to know, I'd rather believe the person claiming to have been molested and be wrong about that than support a person who actually did molest someone and be wrong about that.

"There is no love without heartbreak."

@36 -- In this case, it seems like the "heartbreak" has largely been experienced by the woman claiming to have been molested. I wonder how philosophical you'd be about it if it were someone in your family making the same claim.

When there's no way to know, I'd rather believe the person claiming to have been molested and be wrong about that than support a person who actually did molest someone and be wrong about that.

That's just pants-on-the-head retarded.