Showing posts with label Roman Polanski. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Roman Polanski. Show all posts

Sunday, February 14, 2010

And out of winter's dark night, there came a light . . .

It's no secret that the beginning of each new year is usually filled with many of what will become the year's worst films. After the usual surge in quality that occurs at year's end as studios rush to release their films in the Academy's extremely short memory span, the well seems to go dry and, come January 1st, we don't get anything that good for far too long.

So, it's with great surprise that this pessimist reports to you that 2010 looks like it might be an exception to that time honored tradition.

Shutter Island (3/19) - FilmNinja and I were talking the other day about just how long this one had been on the backburner, and, believe you me, it's been far too long. The mind-bending thriller formerly known as Ashecliffe has been delayed again and again, and it's TIME to put this one out! Scorsese. DiCaprio. De Niro. Enough said.

Alice In Wonderland (3/5) - I'm not normally a Tim Burton guy, but for some reason, this one is a must-see for me. The idea of making a sequel of sorts to the original story is a very interesting one that, perhaps, might be the best possible scenario. We all know the original story well enough that a re-imagining, complete with familiar characters in new situations, is a really exciting idea. I'm thinking of seeing it in 2D, and then, if it's good enough, maybe seeing it again in 3D. Who knows? I did that for Avatar, but that was AVATAR. Itty bitty difference.

The Ghost Writer (?/?) - Roman Polanski was working on this film at the time of his arrest, and continued to do so confined in his home. This certainly isn't the first time he's been compelled to be absent from his own set, and it'll be fascinating to see how well The Ghost Writer works, given the tenuous conditions surrounding its creation. I'm inclined to think that, if anyone can, Roman Polanski is that guy.

I may never have told you this before, but I just love the movies!!!

Sunday, September 27, 2009

Aren't the Swiss supposed to be neutral?

I'm kind of ticked off right now. Yesterday, Roman Polanski was arrested upon his arrival in Zurich. His intention was to attend the Zurich Film Festival and receive a lifetime achievement award. Unfortunately, that's now impossible.

Some of you might not know who Polanski is by name. If that's the case, I'm sure you're familiar with his films. They speak for themselves. Chinatown. Rosemary's Baby. The Pianist. Ironically, I watched his version of Macbeth only yesterday. You can imagine my surprise to wake up this morning and see what had transpired.

Polanski's 32 year exile from the United States had evolved into one of quiet predictability. After fleeing the country after his carefully negotiated plea bargain was reneged upon, he's spent most of his time in France. Up to this point, he's been especially careful to avoid traveling to countries that would extradite him back to the United States.

I'm not in any way dismissing his crime. What he did was wrong. I doubt that anyone will disagree with me on that front. However, the trial was conducted under somewhat dubious circumstances, and the fairness of that trial has, particularly in recent years, been severely called into question. Polanski has requested to have the case dismissed and what's more, his accuser has publicly stated that it is her desire that the case against him be dismissed.

Apparently, both the Polish and French governments are all over this already and are going to do everything that they can to keep him from being extradited to the United States. Under Swiss law, Polanski has the right to contest his imprisonment and any decision related to his extradition in a court of law. This looks to be a long, lengthy process by any stretch of the imagination.

Maybe this is just me and perhaps I'm colored by the fact that I have a tremendous amount of respect for his work, but what will be accomplished by imprisoning a 76 year old man for a crime he committed 32 years ago that even his accuser doesn't think he ought to be locked up for?