394 replies to this topic

[jrcjohnny99]

So I'm halfway through THE GHOST and so far it's terrific stuff, an original and well-written thriller. I can certainly see why Polanski was drawn to this novel, with its slow-burning suspense and its atmosphere of gothic gloom (it's set during a bleak, grey winter in Martha's Vineyard, largely within the gilded cage of a billionaire's mansion) - easy to see why the director of THE TENANT was turned on by it.

Brosnan seems a terrific choice to play former British prime minister Tony Blair - sorry, Adam Lang, while Ewan McGregor also appears well-cast as the ghostwriter of his memoirs.

I've just got to the bit where Lang, about to be indicted as a warmonger by the International Criminal Court, is advised by his lawyer not to leave the United States and told that the only "safe" countries for him to visit are Iraq, China, North Korea, Indonesia, Israel "and some of the nastier regimes in Africa".

"Nevertheless, as your attorney, until this whole thing is resolved, I do strongly advise you not to travel to any country that recognises the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. All it would take is for two of these three judges to decide to grandstand to the human rights crowd, go ahead and issue a warrant, and you could be picked up."

Hmmm....

I'm sure you'll enjoy the rest of the book;
I loved it and thought the end was near perfect, tho I imagine they may well make it more cinematic...

As for this thread; maybe we could focus more on the art and less on the artist?
There are some vast differences of opinion on the moral/legal aspects of Polanski's life that folks are never going to agree on and it seems to be just getting folms more and more upset..

[Dekard77]

As for this thread; maybe we could focus more on the art and less on the artist?
There are some vast differences of opinion on the moral/legal aspects of Polanski's life that folks are never going to agree on and it seems to be just getting folms more and more upset..
[/quote]

Agreed, now am in the middle wondering how I should feel about the man and whether I should just watch his movies since all of it happened 30 years ago .........................................................

[Loomis]

I'm sure you'll enjoy the rest of the book

As it happens, I bought it on your recommendation.

As for this thread; maybe we could focus more on the art and less on the artist?
There are some vast differences of opinion on the moral/legal aspects of Polanski's life that folks are never going to agree on and it seems to be just getting folms more and more upset..

I think both the art and the artist are legitimate topics of discussion, providing that everyone's civil, which I think everyone has been (aside from Ambler).

What I will say, though (and have said all along in this thread), is that the artist should be separated from the art. I've never called for boycotts of Polanski's work or claimed that his arrest means that all of a sudden CHINATOWN is not a good film. When I discussed a couple of Polanski films the other day on the "What Movie Have You Seen Today?" thread, I did not mention The Controversy™, because it was irrelevant. Watching his films or reading THE GHOST, I do not think about "the moral/legal aspects of Polanski's life" (except when that passage in THE GHOST that I quoted unavoidably reminded me of his current situation - and I drew attention to it not as a cheap dig at Polanski, but because I was struck - as most people would be - by the coincidence).

[dee-bee-five]

I'm sure you'll enjoy the rest of the book

As it happens, I bought it on your recommendation.

As for this thread; maybe we could focus more on the art and less on the artist?
There are some vast differences of opinion on the moral/legal aspects of Polanski's life that folks are never going to agree on and it seems to be just getting folms more and more upset..

I think both the art and the artist are legitimate topics of discussion, providing that everyone's civil, which I think everyone has been (aside from Ambler).

Which, let's face it, isn't exactly a first...

[Mr. Blofeld]

Hey, fellow; let's not forget that Ambler came over here from the MI6 forums -- perhaps they have a different set of manners, there.

[Zorin Industries]

Bye bye, morons.

And the pot called the kettle black as it slammed the door shut with a queeny tirade...

[Salomé]

what did Polanski have with France to keep him away from jail?

Is there an extradition treaty between France & America? I assumed Polanski chose France because it offered a relatively safe haven from the vagaries of U.S. justice.

By the way, it would seem that many journalists - and indeed some of the contributors to this thread - do not differentiate between rape and statutory rape.

Reading the details of this case, I do believe this was closer to actual rape than statutory rape though.

France as a rule does not extradite its citizens, and Polanski was already a French citizen at the time.

[Dekard77]

what did Polanski have with France to keep him away from jail?

Is there an extradition treaty between France & America? I assumed Polanski chose France because it offered a relatively safe haven from the vagaries of U.S. justice.

By the way, it would seem that many journalists - and indeed some of the contributors to this thread - do not differentiate between rape and statutory rape.

Reading the details of this case, I do believe this was closer to actual rape than statutory rape though.

France as a rule does not extradite its citizens, and Polanski was already a French citizen at the time.

In the eyes of the law I believe it doesn't make a difference if he raped her forcefully or consensually as she was a minor at that time.

[Safari Suit]

The law may say there's no difference, the real question is do you agree? I don't.

[Dekard77]

The law may say there's no difference, the real question is do you agree? I don't.

I am sorry I don't follow you.............

[Safari Suit]

What I am saying is that the law may say there is no difference, but we might disagree with that. Personally, I think there is a considerable difference, not to trivialise statutory rape.

[Dekard77]

What I am saying is that the law may say there is no difference, but we might disagree with that. Personally, I think there is a considerable difference, not to trivialise statutory rape.

Agreed. I also think where he forced her into sex was completely wrong. That shows a complete disregard of her feelings.

[Trident]

Gravity, I don't exactly feel this kind of cynism is helping along the discussion in any way. As you are well aware of, nobody here suggested any of the aforementioned actions. It probably cannot be helped that you won't be able to impose your personal view of the matter on those who already voiced their diverging opinion of it (and not, clearly not advocated any kind of rape, drug taking, child abuse or sexual violence, to forestall any such suggestions, as you are also quite aware of).

Ditto it's, as far as I can see, most probably a waste of time to try and make you understand what it is exactly this diverging opinion is about, and I won't try to do so any more.

Let's just agree to disagree on the matter and be done with it.

[Tybre]

Re-read The Ghost on Sun & Mon. Better than I remember, but I realized something. There are a fair number of points where the face will come up. Still, I think Brosnan is a very good choice for Lang. He certainly seems to meet the description of the fellow.

[B. Brown]

Hey, fellow; let's not forget that Ambler came over here from the MI6 forums -- perhaps they have a different set of manners, there.

No. Our manners are quite in line over there.


Anyway... Ambler's description of some of the people in this thread was quite accurate, judging by what I read.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Anyway... Ambler's description of some of the people in this thread was quite accurate, judging by what I read.

Well, all that furor had died down; did you really have to try and spark it back to life, again?

[Zorin Industries]

Quite.

[Jim]

Some of you seem to have less of a problem with the act of child rape than with the act of judging Polanski adversely because of his own actions.

How about "both are crap"?

[Trident]

Gravity, I'm slowly getting sick of you suggesting people on this thread or this board were advocating child abuse, or any form of abuse at all. As I suppose you are able of reading, I suggest you reread this thread, as it would seem you clearly misinterpreted what you perceive here. Should you be able to come up with any such posting by any fellow member (I wasn't) then I'll gladly beg your pardon for taking you for something you may perhaps not be. But until then I would suggest you hold your fire.

[Trident]

...But there's not sufficient outrage from his defenders either;...

This may be the problem. You are looking for what you perceive as 'sufficient' outrage, but I feel sure nothing you are going to find here will meet that personal criteria, will be 'sufficient' or 'enough' in your opinion. And fellows failing to provide this measure of, in your perception appropriate, outrage are labeled by you as 'having no problem with child abuse, rape, ecetera'. Sorry, but this is a deeply denouncing statement towards fellow members. I don't suppose you'd welcome a similar denouncing and unfair suggestion regarding your apparent/perceived/actual attitude towards any topical matter of similarly sensitive nature. Please respect that not everybody shares a black/white view on this matter. If you are content with it, ok, that's your personal decision.

[Zorin Industries]

...But there's not sufficient outrage from his defenders either;...

This may be the problem. You are looking for what you perceive as 'sufficient' outrage, but I feel sure nothing you are going to find here will meet that personal criteria, will be 'sufficient' or 'enough' in your opinion. And fellows failing to provide this measure of, in your perception appropriate, outrage are labeled by you as 'having no problem with child abuse, rape, ecetera'. Sorry, but this is a deeply denouncing statement towards fellow members. I don't suppose you'd welcome a similar denouncing and unfair suggestion regarding your apparent/perceived/actual attitude towards any topical matter of similarly sensitive nature. Please respect that not everybody shares a black/white view on this matter. If you are content with it, ok, that's your personal decision.

I would leave this one alone Trident. You are arguing with rude ignorance here and reason will not win. Not where this one is concerned.

[Jim]

I do have a problem with anyone who has a problem with me having a problem with Polanski.

You appear to have a lot of problems.

Just be glad there are no Tiger Woods threads in existence at CBN.

Ah, the morals of famous people to whom our existence is of no more significance than the last flush - our frustration and envy played out as some sort of utterly uncalled-for and impotent typy-typy keyboard mashtime.

[Mr_Wint]

44 year old man + 13 year old girl + sodomy + liquor + drugs should = prison time.

No,
evidence + court = prison time

Since none of us here knows what really happened (I doubt she is a CBn member...) it is pointless to speculate about it.

But even if it turns out that Polanski has been abusing every single individual from all biological species in this universe and all other parallel universes, he still remains a talented film director.

[MrKidd]

I do have a problem with anyone who has a problem with me having a problem with Polanski.

You appear to have a lot of problems.

Just be glad there are no Tiger Woods threads in existence at CBN.

Ah, the morals of famous people to whom our existence is of no more significance than the last flush - our frustration and envy played out as some sort of utterly uncalled-for and impotent typy-typy keyboard mashtime.

Yes exactly. That's a clever thing to say.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Ah, the morals of famous people to whom our existence is of no more significance than the last flush - our frustration and envy played out as some sort of utterly uncalled-for and impotent typy-typy keyboard mashtime.

Yes, exactly; that's a clever thing to say.

In the meantime, I'm not sure whether you're approving or condemning Jim's statement; that's the peril of attempting sarcasm over an Internet connection, I guess...

[MrKidd]

Ah, the morals of famous people to whom our existence is of no more significance than the last flush - our frustration and envy played out as some sort of utterly uncalled-for and impotent typy-typy keyboard mashtime.

Yes, exactly; that's a clever thing to say.

In the meantime, I'm not sure whether you're approving or condemning Jim's statement; that's the peril of attempting sarcasm over an Internet connection, I guess...

Sarcasm is petty and petty minds see it everywhere. Best just to read the words I wrote.

Edited by MrKidd, 05 December 2009 - 09:44 PM.

[Tybre]

So according to that link Qwery posted and links to two articles on IMDB (I know, not the best of sources, and somehow I doubt THR is exactly the most reputable website/paper/what have you out there) the film has been retitled "The Ghost Writer". Personally I find the addition of the word Writer to the title not only pointless, but damaging. The Ghost Writer is a dull, pedestrian title that evokes images of, well, a faceless man making a politician look good. The Ghost not only evokes images of something invisible, something not there, i.e. a literal ghost, but for those familiar with the story it could also be applied to things beyond our unnamed narrator. The Ghost has a sense of intrigue and, dare I say it, fun. The Ghost Writer sounds like a 1950s television serial. I'm sure the film will still be very good, but I just don't like the addition of the word Writer to the title.

[Trident]

Absolutely agree here; adding 'Writer' really is an entirely unnecessary move. Beyond me why ever this was decided.

[SecretAgentFan]

Protesting the movie. Yeah, that will make sense.

[Jim]

...the film has been retitled "The Ghost Writer". Personally I find the addition of the word Writer to the title not only pointless, but damaging. The Ghost Writer is a dull, pedestrian title that evokes images of, well, a faceless man making a politician look good.

Perhaps the studio wanted to refine their marketing campaign; perhaps research indicated that people who saw the title THE GHOST would think it was a supernatural/horror film. THE GHOST WRITER is a more appropriate title, but you're right that the title loses some of the mystery by being almost too specific.

Kind of reminds me of when the studio changed LICENSE REVOKED to LICENSE TO KILL. I just like the way "REVOKED" rolls off the tongue with a sharp sound. It's an angry, active word. By contrast, calling the film LICENSE TO KILL was equivalent to calling a movie SNAKES ON A PLANE....or MARTINI TO DRINK...or ASTON MARTIN TO DRIVE.

Either way, I plan on protesting the movie. I'm hoping there will be a sizable protest movement going on when the film comes out and that the furor over Polanski will not have died down by then.

What a jolly good use of life.