The HBO-Dick-Ziering-Farrow production: Propaganda, Slander, Omission, Shame, Lies, Melodrama, and Racism

Today I’m going to write my last post regarding this shameful false accusation against icon writer and cinema director Woody Allen. My post will not appear in The New York Times, Los Angeles Times, The Washington Post, not even The Guardian, but I’m a huge Woody Allen fan, a woman, a mother of three wonderful children, a musician and a PhD candidate (Philosophy), and I also have something to say. I’m sick and tired of seeing a wonderful and innocent man like Woody being insulted, wrongly judged and slandered. I’m furious at the herd, the bullies and the stupidity of the majority. Furthermore, I’m so tired of the fact that the name of Woody Allen is now almost always linked to the Farrow clan. On one side we have a wonderful genius who creates beauty and masterpieces, and, on the other side, we have a pitiful-non-talented clan that destroys and slanders. Enough with that.

Woody is a genius who has written the most beautiful roles for women, has brought to the world the most brilliant movies filled with poetry, philosophy, laughter, sadness, and beauty, and has given to millions of fans all around the world joy with his art: his amazing masterpieces, his terrific books, and his wonderful New Orleans Jazz. But Woody is not only a genius, he’s also a human being with feelings, a loving husband to his wife Soon-Yi (29 years together, 24 years married, and still going strong), and a loving father (Soon-Yi and Woody have two adopted beautiful and bright daughters: Bechet, 22, and Manzie, 21, who adore their parents). Woody is made of blood and flesh, like you and me, has never committed any crime and has been slandered heavily since 2018, and for many years before. So, this insanity stops now.

Of course, the fact that the world has become crazy and that legal justice seems to be irrelevant today, and that personal affairs are now “solved” on Twitter, one-sided magazines and shameful garbage productions instead of in court, doesn’t help. The last spit on sanity, common sense, justice and human dignity is the recent HBO-Dick-Ziering-Farrow garbage production that turns a vengeful insane woman (Mia Farrow) into a saint and an innocent and brilliant man (Woody) into the devil. This HBO-Dick-Ziering-Farrow production should win a Guinness World of Records award for the most manipulated, untruthful, racist, slamming and shameful “documentary” ever. Goebbels would probably have loved it.

The world has gone nuts (again), and the Dreyfus affair, the lynchings of African Americans in the late 19th and early 20th century, even the Holocaust, and the McCarthyism inevitably come to my mind when TV shows like the HBO-Dick-Ziering-Farrow production are being aired. How is it possible to even make a TV show on a false accusation that was proven false almost 30 years ago? Is that possible thanks to the general stupidity of the American public? Or to the stupidity of the majority of the human population? Woody says in Hollywood Ending: “You mean why the country got so stupid suddenly? My theory is fast food”.

What strikes me is the huge fear that (good) journalists seem to have to openly declare that the whole “case” against Woody is a prefabricated lie meticulously prepared by the Farrow clan. At best, you get some articles denouncing the one-sided approach that the HBO-Dick-Ziering-Farrow production has, but that’s not it. The whole production is based on a non-event. And that should be said out loud. Why are people in the US so afraid of saying out loud that Woody has been falsely accused? Woody is a victim of a false accusation. And that’s a crime. If you believe a false victim, you are accusing an innocent man. And to accuse an innocent man is a crime. Period.

One of the very few brave (American) people who have openly defended Woody is the great Bob Weide (Woody Allen’s fans new hero). You can read here his brilliant posts The Truth About Woody Allen, Part I (April 8, 2019), and The Truth About Woody Allen, Part II (April 8, 2019), and his article The Woody Allen Allegations: Not So Fast (from 2014, updated 2017). Bob has also written about the HBO-Dick-Ziering-Farrow production in his great post The Mia/Woody HBO Documentary–What to Watch for (February 7, 2021) and about the case of the mysterious train in his brilliant post Farrow v. Farrow: The Case of the Magical, Disappearing Electric Toy Train Set (February 28, 2021). Other famous voices that have supported Woody (American and non-American) have been, so far, Alec Baldwin, Diane Keaton, Javier Bardem, Scarlet Johansson, Anjelica Huston, Dianne Wiest, Léa Seydoux, Wallace Shawn, Larry David, Cherry Jones, Joy Behar, Gina Gershon, Elena Anaya, Jeff Goldblum, Antonio Banderas, Alan Alda, Cate Blanchett, Alessandra Mastronardi, Blake Lively, Emily Mortimer, Charlotte Rampling, Caroline Aaron, Isabelle Huppert. Lots of women. Still, the voices are timid, not loud. Everybody fears being lynched. I wonder why.

Coming back to the HBO-Dick-Ziering-Farrow production, I think that, if you decide to go with the charade, then at least make it balanced. Open the theater, but for everybody. Talk about everything. Don’t condemn Woody’s love for Soon-Yi (a true love that has defeated all the criticisms of the puritan minds: almost three decades together and still going strong), and leave out Mia Farrow’s affairs with Sinatra and Previn. Don’t talk about “inappropriate” behavior (Americans love that word: “inappropriate”) from Woody and leave out the fact that Mia Farrow slept with her biological (Sinatra’s?) son Ronan until he was 11 years old (ahem, ahem). Don’t talk about the great mommy that Mia Farrow was and leave out the tragedies of many of her adopted children. Let’s not forget that Mia Farrow has/had 4 biological children and 10 adopted children. From the 10 adopted children, it’s important to remember that two of them (Tam and Thaddeus Farrow) sadly committed suicide (Tam died from a pill overdose and Thaddeus shot himself in the torso). Another of Mia Farrow’s adoptive daughters (Lark Previn) sadly died of AIDS alone and in poverty at age 35. These are three tragedies that neither the Farrow clan nor the HBO-Dick-Ziering-Farrow production have mentioned. Then, don’t use 4 episodes inflating a false accusation against Woody and leave out Mia Farrow’s own brother’s pedophilia. Yes, you are reading it correctly: Mia Farrow’s own brother (John Villers-Farrow) was sentenced in 2013 to 25 years in prison for sexually abusing two boys over a period of 8 years. That’s explosive news, and, nevertheless, very few people know about this. Again, neither the Farrow clan nor the HBO-Dick-Ziering-Farrow production have condemned John Villers-Farrow’s pedophilia.

Then, do you want to talk about child abuse, HBO-Dick-Ziering-Farrow production? Great. Let’s talk about child abuse. Let’s talk about the abuse that Moses, Soon-Yi and other adopted children suffered at the hands of Mia Farrow. Did you know that Mia Farrow used to beat, lock and drag down a flight of stairs some of her adopted children? These abuses have been completely silenced by the HBO-Dick-Ziering-Farrow production. Let’s now hear Soon-Yi and Moses:

Soon-Yi said in 1992 (in 1992! But nobody, absolutely nobody, cared):

“Mia was always very hot-tempered and given to rages which terrified all the kids. They can’t speak freely because they’re still dependent on her. But they could really tell stories and I’m sure one day will. It’s true Mia was violent with me and I have conclusive proof”. (Soon-Yi Speaks: ‘Let’s Not Get Hysterical’, 1992)

In 2018, Soon-Yi said: “Mia was never kind to me, never civil”. (Introducing Soon-Yi Previn)

In Moses’ famous post of May 23, 2018, A Son Speaks Out (conveniently omitted in the HBO-Dick-Ziering-Farrow production), Moses writes:

“I’m a very private person and not at all interested in public attention. But, given the incredibly inaccurate and misleading attacks on my father, Woody Allen, I feel that I can no longer stay silent as he continues to be condemned for a crime he did not commit“.

“Mia had adopted me, her seventh child, as a single parent in 1980. In 1992 she successfully petitioned to allow Woody to co-adopt both Dylan and me, writing to the adoption agency, detailing what an excellent father he was (…) I never once saw anything that indicated inappropriate behavior at any time“.

“It was important to my mother to project to the world a picture of a happy blended household of both biological and adopted children, but this was far from the truth”.

“It pains me to recall instances in which I witnessed siblings, some blind or physically disabled, dragged down a flight of stairs to be thrown into a bedroom or a closet, then having the door locked from the outside. She even shut my brother Thaddeus, paraplegic from polio, in an outdoor shed overnight as punishment for a minor transgression.”

“Soon-Yi was her most frequent scapegoat (…) When Soon-Yi was young, Mia once threw a large porcelain centerpiece at her head. Luckily it missed, but the shattered pieces hit her legs. Years later, Mia beat her with a telephone receiver. Soon-Yi’s made it clear that her desire was simply to be left alone, which increasingly became the case. Even if her relationship with Woody was unconventional, it allowed her to escape. Others weren’t so lucky.”

“The summer between first and second grades… my mother came over to my bed and found a tape measure. She gave me a piercing look that stopped me in my tracks and asked if I had taken it, as she had been looking for it all day. I stood in front of her, frozen. She asked why it was on my bed. I told her I didn’t know, that perhaps a workman had left it there. She asked again and again and again. When I didn’t give the answer she wanted, she slapped my face, knocking off my glasses. She told me I was lying and directed me to tell my brothers and sisters that I had taken the tape measure. Through my tears I listened to her as she explained that we would rehearse what should have happened. She would walk into the room and I would tell her I was sorry for taking the tape measure, that I had taken it to play with and that I would never do it again. She made me rehearse it at least a half-dozen times. That was the start of her coaching, drilling, scripting, and rehearsing – in essence, brainwashing. I became anxious and fearful“.

“Once, when I was given a new pair of jeans, I thought they would look cool if I cut off a couple of the belt loops. When Mia saw what I had done, she spanked me repeatedly and had me remove all my clothing, saying, “You’re not deserving of any clothes” and making me stand naked in the corner of her room, in front of my older siblings (…) In short, it was not a happy home – or a healthy one“. (Moses Farrow, A Son Speaks Out).

In these two videos Moses recalls being humiliated and abused by Mia Farrow:

Moses has reconnected with Woody Allen, and is estranged by the whole Farrow clan. In 2014 Dylan Farrow said (or tweeted?): “My brother is dead to me”. How nice.

Woody’s “case” is more clear than water. Woody was cleared in 1993 by two investigation teams. After a 14-month-old investigation, the New York State child welfare investigators dropped their inquiry saying they considered the accusation against him unfounded stating: “No credible evidence was found that the child named in this report has been abused or maltreated”. The doctor who headed the Connecticut investigation in 1993, Dr. John M. Leventhal, saw strong inconsistencies in Dylan Farrow’s statement and concluded that Dylan either invented the story or that this fantasy was planted in Dylan’s mind by her mother: “We had two hypotheses: one, that these were statements that were made by an emotionally disturbed child and then became fixed in her mind. And the other hypothesis was that she was coached or influenced by her mother. We did not come to a firm conclusion. We think that it was probably a combination.” The Yale-New Haven Hospital’s Child Sexual Abuse Clinic Evaluation of Dylan Farrow concluded that Dylan was not sexually abused: “It is our expert opinion that Dylan was not sexually abused by Mr. Allen”. Also, another fact that the HBO-Dick-Ziering-Farrow production “forgets” to mention is that Woody voluntary took and passed a lie detector proof in 1992, while Mia Farrow declined to have one. Case closed!

But the show goes on. The lie goes on. Why? Because when the investigations cleared Woody and stated that no abuse has ever occurred, Mia Farrow, instead of being happy for her adoptive daughter’s mental health, continued her eternal crusade against Woody (until today!). A crusade that has been happily taken over by the now-adult-Dylan Farrow (who clearly enjoys the publicity, desperately needs the approval of Twitter and is delighted with the mistreatment of Woody), and by the now-adult-Ronan Farrow (Sinatra’s son?), who clearly takes enormous pleasure and effort in making Woody sink.

But, what’s the real reason behind this false accusation? One of the strongest love stories ever. One of the bravest women on Earth: Soon-Yi. Woody’s biological daughter? Nope. Woody’s adopted daughter? Nope. Woody’s step-daughter? Nope. Soon-Yi is Woody’s wife for almost 3 decades. Who is Soon-Yi? Soon-Yi was born c. 1970 in Korea. She was adopted in 1977 by André Previn and Mia Farrow and brought to the United States. She’s, of course, American. In spite of the eternal denigration she suffered at the hands of Mia Farrow when she was little (Farrow used to call her retarded and stupid), she’s a highly intelligent and cultivated woman, speaks several languages, majored in Art from Drew University and earned a Master’s Degree in Special Education from Columbia University.

“I’m a psychology major at college who fell for a man who happens to be the ex-boyfriend of Mia. I admit it’s offbeat, but let’s not get hysterical. The tragedy here is that, because of Mia’s vindictiveness, the children must suffer.” (Soon-Yi Speaks: ‘Let’s Not Get Hysterical’, 1992)

You can read her story in this explosive interview by Daphne Merkin: Introducing Soon-Yi Previn. This honest and powerful interview was completely ignored by the media and the supporters of the Farrow clan when it appeared two and a half years ago, and has been completely silenced by the HBO-Dick-Ziering-Farrow production.

So, Mia Farrow can help make thousands of melodramatic garbage productions, she can invent thousands of false accusations, she can decide to destroy her adoptive children’s lives, but she will never be able to change the fact that Woody and Soon-Yi fell in love, love each other for 29 years, formed a beautiful family and are super happy together. In your face, Mia!

Now, there is another thing that the HBO-Dick-Ziering-Farrow production has shown. A terrible thing: racism. I personally hate to make distinctions by “race” or “ethnicity”, two words that inevitably remind me of the extermination of millions of Jewish men, women and children –ghettos, Einsatzgruppen and gas chambers (let’s not forget that the Holocaust happened only 80 years ago). There is nothing lower than racism and antisemitism. So, coming back to the Farrows: all the adopted children of Mia Farrow are/were (three are sadly dead) American, of course, in spite of where they were born. But some were born in the US and others outside the US. And now, a small parenthesis: I have three children (a 14-year-old daughter, a 12-year-old son, and a 7-year-old daughter –all huge Woody Allen fans) and I have always educated them against racism. When my youngest daughter saw the movie Il a déjà tes yeux (a French comedy where a Black-French couple adopts a White-French baby), she couldn’t see that there was something different with the baby (and my youngest daughter is gifted –so is my son and my oldest daughter). So, I smiled and felt very proud of myself as a mother for the education I gave my children against racism. The point of this parenthesis is that I don’t care at all where the adopted children of Mia Farrow were born, or from where their biological parents were. I don’t like to play the racism card, but apparently the Farrow clan and the HBO-Dick-Ziering-Farrow production give importance to the origin of these kids. Because, if not, how could such a scandalous unequal treatment (by both Mia Farrow and the HBO-Dick-Ziering-Farrow production) of Mia Farrow’s adopted children be possible? Some are heard; others silenced. Some enjoy privileges; others commit suicide. Some stay in the clan; others are estranged. Some are welcomed; others died alone in poverty. This horrid inequality has only one name: racism. Have you heard, Dick? Have you heard, Ziering? Have you heard, HBO? Have you heard, Farrow clan? You are racists. But I’m happy that all the world can see that now.

Then, to the phrase that I hear a lot lately: “Believe all survivors”. Yes: Believe them. As long as they are true survivors. To the other phrase: “Believe all victims”. Well, the HBO-Dick-Ziering-Farrow production carefully decided to believe only some of the victims. But that’s not it. The real problem is that the victims they picked to believe are the wrong victims.

Well, I’m going to wrap up, because only a few people will read this. I didn’t see the HBO-Dick-Ziering-Farrow production nor do I plan to ever see it. I also never saw The Birth of a Nation (Oh, Americans really seem to miss the myth of the Lost Cause, don’t they?), and I never watch “documentaries” that glorify Holocaust denial. All that garbage belongs in the garbage. And that’s where it lays. I’m very happy to have read that the HBO-Dick-Ziering-Farrow production has terrible ratings and that the critical reviews are absolutely sinking it. That’s what happens when you create a shameful pile of crap.

By the way, IMDb is declining most of the critical reviews. I know that because mine has been declined 5 times, and my husband’s too. In 2018, after those crocodile tears on TV, I created the Facebook group I Believe Woody. Today it has more than 11,200 members, and many members have written against the HBO-Dick-Ziering-Farrow production, but only a few critical reviews have been approved on IMDb. Also, I’m an administrator and moderator of other Woody Allen Facebook groups: Woody Allen Quotes (more than 28,000 members), Woody Allen Appreciation Society (more than 4,600 members), and Woody Allen Fans (more than 2,600 members), and I can say that all Woody Allen fans are furious at the propaganda, slander, omission, shame, lies, melodrama, and racism of the HBO-Dick-Ziering-Farrow production. Their voices too are being silenced, because their reviews on IMDb are being declined (or approved and, after 3 days, deleted). So, our hero can be slandered but we are not allowed to say anything? Well, the good news is that an imminent lawsuit will destroy the HBO-Dick-Ziering-Farrow production and all the people involved in it. That’s a delicious thought.

Woody Allen’s Official Facebook Page (with more than 2.2 MILLION of followers) posted an official statement from Woody and Soon-Yi some days ago:

So, this shameful HBO-Dick-Ziering-Farrow production is the same old lie. The same old story. The same false accusation. Everything, everything points to Woody’s innocence and Mia Farrow’s diabolical vengeful pathology. The Farrow clan have spent their lives accusing an innocent man. That must be tiring! Poor them. How pathetic. Such a waste of a life. They will be so easily forgotten. But millions of fans from all around the world will continue loving, adoring and praising Woody’s work until the end of times.

One of the coolest photos that describe the feelings that Woody Allen’s family, friends, supporters and fans have towards this disgusting campaign against Woody is the following photo, posted on Woody Allen’s Official Facebook Page, right before the HBO-Dick-Ziering-Farrow production aired. Here you go, that’s for all of you: HBO, Dick, Ziering, Farrow clan, and supporters of the lie!

Woody will always be remembered as the genius who created the most powerful, beautiful and brilliant roles for women, the genius who drew poetry with his films, the genius who poured philosophy in his films, the genius who made us cry and laugh, and the genius who made us think about love, life and death. On the contrary, the three vengeful Farrows, the HBO-Dick-Ziering-Farrow garbage production, and all the opportunists who felt good slandering Woody and tweeting against Woody will be remembered by their ugliness, injustice and cowardice for some years and finally will be forgotten for ever.

Antonia Tejeda Barros, 
Madrid, March 5, 2021 

I love, admire, and support Woody!

Antonia Tejeda Barros, Madrid, February 20, 2021

Rifkin’s Festival: A homage to cinema and existentialism. Nobody makes movies like Woody any more!

Rifkin’s Festival is a masterpiece!

A homage to cinema and existentialism. So so so beautiful! And meaningful! (even if Woody wouldn’t agree). Nobody makes movies like Woody any more.

This movie really touched my heart: it moved me, it made me laugh and it made me think about life, love, and death. I got my dosis of philosophy and art for a year!

Rifkin’s Festival is a real gem. One of Woody’s best films! Poetic, philosophical, magical, funny, sad, delightful, entertaining, and magnificent. A marvellous script, a spectacular cast, an exquisite cinematography, and wonderful music. Delicious and indispensable!

The movie is so incredibly good and it says so much that I really hope it is not Woody’s last film.

Bravo, Woody! Thank you so much for your art! Please, keep creating!

10 / 10

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

Antonia Tejeda Barros, Madrid, October 2, 2020

The Irishman: A Masterpiece About Men Made For Men

Yep. You’ve read the title correctly. Let me start by saying that I love Scorsese, I love De Niro, I love Al Pacino, and I love Joe Pesci. The performances in The Irishman are all stunning. The Irishman is a masterpiece, yes, but a masterpiece with a big moustache and a big beard.

Let me clarify that I really dislike those women who preach hate towards men. I am a mother of three wonderful children (two girls and a boy) and I don’t like those women who treat men like enemies. I also find it absurd to talk about female directors and male directors instead of just directors, or about female nominees and male nominees instead of just nominees (any way, who cares about the nominee thing: cinema is an art, not a competition!). I’ve always loved that touching and breathtaking scene in Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner where John Prentice (Sidney Poitier) says to his father (Roy Glenn):

“Dad, you’re my father. I’m your son. I love you. I always have and I always will. But you think of yourself as a colored man. I think of myself as a man.”

I, too, think of myself as a human being, not as a female human being. But this inability of the vast majority of cinema directors of embracing the women universe bothers me, bores me and saddens me.

So, what happened to Scorsese? Why The Irishman, being a cinematic masterpiece as it is, left me indifferent and impassible? Because in my opinion it’s a film about men made for men, where women are left in a corner, almost transparent, like ghosts.

I understand that Scorsese wanted to focus on the lives of Frank Sheeran, Jimmy Hoffa, and Russell Bufalino (rough characters masterly played by De Niro, Al Pacino, and Joe Pesci). But those men didn’t grow up on trees like apples. They had mothers, daughters, and wives who influenced them, supported them, embraced them, loved them, and hated them.

Frank Sheeran had two wives: Mary Sheeran (Aleksa Palladino in The Irishman -does she speak even once?) and Irene Sheeran (Stephanie Kurtzuba in the film), and four daughters: MatyAnne (Tess Price and Jennifer Mudge in the film), Dolores (India Ennenga and Marin Ireland), Peggy (Lucy Gallina and Anna Paquin), and Connie (Jordyn DiNatale and Kate Arrington) -which may mumble all together 10 words at most during the whole movie.

Jimmy Hoffa’s wife was Josephine Pozyswak (Welker White in the film). They were married 39 years (until Hoffa’s disappearance) and had a daughter: Barbara Ann (Rebecca Faulkenberry) -and a son: James Phillip (Ken Wulf Clark).

Bufalino’s wife was Carrie Sciandra (Kathrine Narducci in the film), who belonged to the Sciandra mafia family. Russell Bufalino and Carrie Sciandra were married more than 70 years (70 years!) and had no children.

But all those women hardly have a voice in the film. The only interesting female character in The Irishman is Peggy. All the other women in the film are almost superfluous: they remain almost silent and their bonds with the male characters are hardly drawn.

I must say that the music in The Irishman (Robbie Robertson) and the cinematography (Rodrigo Prieto) are absolutely stunning. 

I understand that The Irishman is a film about the mob. And the mob is mainly male. But in The Godfather trilogy Coppola manages to deliver three films with truly interesting and strong female characters played by stunning actresses (Keaton, Talia Shire, Morgana King, Simonetta Stefanelli, Francesca De Sapio, and Sofia Coppola) while its male characters and brilliant actors shine enormously (Brando, Al Pacino, John Cazale, James Caan, Robert Duvall, De Niro, Lee Strasberg, Michael V. Gazzo, Gastone Moschin, Bruno Kirby, Dominic Chianese, Andy Garcia, Joe Mantegna, Eli Wallach, Donal Donnelly, and Franc D’Ambrosio). The Godfather trilogy is also a movie that revolves around men but there you have many female voices that make the story much more attractive and real. 

Most of the films of today (and in cinema history) revolve around men and leave women in the corner. Some brilliant exceptions to this rule are Woody Allen’s films, Bergman’s films, Almodóvar’s films, and… who else’s films?

Woody’s films have always had women’s thoughts and feelings in their core. Woody is probably the director who has written the best and most interesting roles for women. I’m a huge fan of Woody’s and I love all his films. He carves the women of his films brilliantly and shows them with all their anxieties, fears, doubts, complexities, aspirations, and dreams. Woody is an amazing writer and his female characters don’t need capes or superpowers: they are women made from flesh and bones, full of love and hate. Some of the most iconic female characters in the history of cinema appear in Woody’s films. Annie Hall (1977), Interiors (1978), Manhattan (1979), Hannah And Her Sisters (1986), September (1987), Another Woman (1988), Alice (1990), Husbands and Wives (1992), Manhattan Murder Mystery (1993), Mighty Aphrodite (1995), Celebrity (1998), Small Time Crooks (2000), The Curse of the Jade Scorpion (2001), Anything Else (2003), Melinda and Melinda (2004), Match Point (2005), Vicky Cristina Barcelona (2008), Blue Jasmine (2013), Wonder Wheel (2017), and A Rainy Day in New York (2019) are all films with fascinating, deep, funny, complex, and real women. Woody said that it was Keaton who inspired him to start writing about women. So, thank you so much, Diane!

Bergman was one of the first cinema directors who created a powerful yet anguishing women universe. Bergman’s female characters are mostly dark: they suffer and agonize, but they also dream and long for love, peace and communication. Bergman also wrote super interesting male characters (Victor Sjöström, Max von Sydow, Gunnar Björnstrand, Erland Josephson, and Jarl Kulle all incarnated fascinating men). I used to love Bergman. Now I only enjoy his comedies. His dramas are too depressing and torturous for me now. Some of the deepest female characters ever written in cinema are the heroines in Sommaren med Monika (1953), Sommarnattens leende (Smiles of a Summer Night) –my favorite! (1955), Såsom i en spegel (Through a Glass Darkly, 1961), Persona (1966), Viskningar och rop (Cries & Whispers, 1972), Scener ur ett äktenskap (Scenes from a Marriage, 1974), Ansikte mot ansikte (Face to Face, 1976), and Höstsonaten (Autumn Sonata, 1978).

Almost all of Almodóvar’s films revolve around women. Almodóvar’s writing is funny, sad, deep and very real. I always think that you have to be Spanish to fully understand Almodóvar’s characters and jokes. He didn’t invent anything. He just copies the hysteria, poetry, strength and anger of the Spanish women. Mujeres al borde de un ataque de nervios (1988), Átame (1989), Tacones lejanos (1991), La flor de mi secreto (1995), Todo sobre mi madre (1999), Hable con ella (2002), Volver (2006), Los abrazos rotos (2009), and Julieta (2016) all show real women struggling, enjoying, and suffering.

Woody, Bergman and Almodóvar all have/had their muses. Woody’s muses include Keaton (the best! 9 films), Mia Fucker (sorry, I’m afraid she earned that name after her shameful vengeful persistent campaign against Woody: sadly, 13 films), Dianne Wiest (5 films), Julie Kavner (8 films), Judy Davis (5 films), Caroline Aaron (4 films), Louise Lasser (4 films), Stephanie Roth Haberle (4 films), Blythe Danner (3 films), Frances Conroy (3 films), Scarlett Johansson (3 films), Erica Leerhsen (3 films), Claire Bloom (2 films), Mariel Hemingway (2 films), Anjelica Huston (2 films), Joanna Gleason (2 films), Jessica Harper (2 films), Elaine Stritch (2 films), Janet Margolin (2 films), Debra Messing (2 films), Alison Pill (2 films), Sally Hawkins (2 films), Penélope Cruz (2 films), Parker Posey (2 films), Charlize Theron (2 films), Tracey Ullman (2 films), and Emma Stone (2 films).

Bergman’s muses were Liv Ullmann, Bibi Andersson, Ingrid Thulin, Harriet Andersson, and Eva Dahlbeck. Some critics argue that Bergman didn’t make stars of his own actresses, but that these stunning actresses made Bergman’s films so great.

Almodóvar’s muses include Victoria Abril, Carmen Maura, Cecilia Roth, Julieta Serrano, Marisa Paredes, Rossy de Palma, Penélope Cruz, Lola Dueñas, Kiti Mánver, Loles León, and Chus Lampreave. Almodóvar’s universe is unthinkable without all these delightful actresses.

Scorsese, on the contrary, only had male muses (funny, that word –male muse– doesn’t even exist!): Harvey Keitel, De Niro, Joe Pesci, and Leo. This is great, good for him, I don’t have any problem with that, I actually love it, but, in my opinion, this often makes his films lack that necessary women’s breath. And that’s, again, the problem with The Irishman. Scorsese’s universe is clearly masculine. I don’t mean that there are no women in his films, there are, yes, of course, but those women hardly speak, hardly exist. The women in Scorsese’s films are (as Sartre would say) contingent and not necessary. Iris (Jodie Foster), Betsy (Cybill Shepherd), Ginger (Sharon Stone), Karen (Lorraine Bracco), Danielle (Juliette Lewis), Jenny (Cameron Diaz), Isabelle (Chloë Grace Moretz), and Naomi Lapaglia (Margot Robbie) are all attached to male characters. They mostly represent men’s desires and fantasies and hardly exist in a world or their own.

CASINO, Robert De Niro, Joe Pesci, 1995, in the casino

Gangs of New York (2003) by Martin Scorsese

Scorsese’s most famous films revolve around men. Mean Streets (1973), Taxi Driver (1976), Raging Bull (1980), The Color of Money (1986), The Last Temptation of Christ (1988), Goodfellas (1990), Cape Fear (1991), Casino (1995), Gangs of New York (2002), The Aviator (2004), The Departed (2006), Hugo (2011), The Wolf of Wall Street (2013), Silence (2016) and, now, The Irishman (2019) are almost all masterpieces about men made for men. Some few exceptions are Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore (1974), New York, New York (1977), and maybe The Age of Innocence (1990). Scorsese is one of the titans of cinema but he always leaves women behind men. His art becomes, ultimately, an art about men made for men that sadly doesn’t succeed to resonate universally. 

We, women, constitute half of the population of our planet. Please, do not forget us. We also exist!

Antonia Tejeda Barros, Madrid, February 7, 2020

A Rainy Day in New York (finally!)

A Rainy Day in New York (2019). Dir. the great Woody Allen

Thanks to a shameful and horrifying lynching campaign against Woody I was robbed last year of my yearly Woody Allen film (me and millions of fans around the world). So, I had to wait until today (August 24th) to see the film. I was very lucky to be with my family in the Netherlands this month and this afternoon I went with my oldest daughter (she’s 13 and loves Woody’s films) to the national Dutch preview of A Rainy Day in New York at the Film Hallen (Hannie Dankbaarpassage 12, Amsterdam). We live in Madrid and in Spain the film will only arrive in October.

I don’t want to give ANY SPOILERS here, but I just will say: Wow, such a film: funny, poetic, beautiful, clever and so entertaining. We enjoyed it so much. Such a gem! Woody is so brilliant, Vittorio is the king of light, and the writing is so cool and funny. The only problem: the film felt too short! I wish it would have gone on for two more hours… (Woody should always make films that are over two hours long, one hour and a half simply feels too short).

I have to confess that I was very angry with Timothée Chalamet because of his cowardice and opportunism, but I must say that his performance in the film is very beautiful. Selena Gomez is also really good and Diego Luna is very funny. Elle Fanning is probably the weakest actress here (to play comedy isn’t that easy after all) but it doesn’t bother so much because her lines are hilarious. Cherry Jones’ performance is absolutely spectacular. Liev Schreiber, Jude Law, Will Rogers and Kelly Rohrbach are fantastic in the film but I wish they’d appear more.

The music of A Rainy Day in New York is wonderful as in all Woody Allen films, you can feel the rain’s perfume and there are plenty of quotes that will make you laugh and enjoy.

I feel really sad for the millions of Woody Allen fans around the world who still cannot watch this film. I’m furious at the stupidity and witch-hunting that goes on in the States and don’t have words to express my anger and disappointment. The world is upside down. How is it possible that Woody’s art has suffered because of a shameful prefabricated accusation? Woody has worked with hundreds and hundreds of actresses in the past half century and nobody, NOBODY, has ever complaint of wrong conduct. If you believe that prefabricated story made by three vengeful psychos you are either ignorant, stupid, antisemite, or just part of the lynch mob. Sexual predators always abuse several victims and this false absurd accusation smelled of nonsense and vengeance from the beginning. (For the ones who feel uncomfortable with the fact that Woody fell in love with Soon-Yi Previn, just have in mind that Woody and Soon-Yi love each other and are together for more than 26 years, have two wonderful healthy beautiful daughters and don’t care about what you, me or the psychos think about their love. Their relationship and their love is what triggers the stupid people, not the shameful false accusation). Everybody deserves Woody’s art (well, not everybody, the psychos and the brainless herd who follow the psychos don’t) and it’s absolutely horrific that we live in times like this, in which innocent men are tried and hung by the social media. And, by the way, go to hell, stupid Amazon.

I’ve read some bad reviews about this film. As a musician, teacher and PhD candidate (Philosophy) I know how difficult is to create, so, I have a huge respect for the artists who do create. Because to think about creating is pretty easy, to trash the art of others is the easiest thing in the world, but to create and actually finish a project is very difficult. Woody is a wonderful director and a stunning writer. He’s 83 and he’s still a creating machine and I admire that a lot and thank him a lot for that.

Woody’s films talk about love, death, dreams, art, passions and desires, and are poetic, brilliant, real, magnificent, stunning and wonderful. No superheroes here, no bombs, no explosions, just real people with normal problems, like you and me. Woody’s films make life better. Thank you for your art, Woody, and, please, keep on creating.

10 / 10

 Antonia Tejeda Barros, Amsterdam, August 24, 2019

www.ibelievewoody.com

Happy 83rd birthday, Woody!

Happy 83rd birthday, Woody!

With love, respect, and admiration.

Thank you so much for your amazing art!

Many birthday wishes to you, dear Woody, from some of your fans from Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Croatia, Cuba, Egypt, France, Germany, Greece, Israel, Iran, Italy, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Romania, Russia, Spain, Tunisia, Turkey, UK, Uruguay, and USA.

These are the wonderful people who participated in this amazing collage:

Maryam Amiribehzadi. Accountant, mountaineer, ping pong player, Woody Allen movies lover. Tehran, Iran.

Octavio Barros Vicuña. Uncle and great-uncle, smoker, bird and butterfly lover, stamp collector. Santiago de Chile, Chile.

Flavia Bellu. Writer, cinephile, singer, baker, native New Yorker. Berkeley, CA, USA.

Khashayar Boroomand. Philosophy PhD, Woody’s fan, fond of music, cinema, and chess. Tehran, Iran.

Souha Boughanmi. Woman, passionate for love, grateful to Woody Allen. Tunis, Tunisia.

Dennis Brian. Screenwriter, completist, friend, Philosophy graduate. Green Valley, AZ, USA.

Javier Camacho Cruz. Fine Arts teacher in Tokio, Japanese translator and modern Japanese literature lover. Jaén, Spain.

Tindaro Capuano. Father of Ludovico, clarinet player as our friend Woody, swimmer (or at least I like to swim). Palermo, Italy.

Patricia Casal Rodríguez. Passionate, curious, Foodle and nature lover. Vigo, Spain.

Beto Caserio. Oboe player, uncle of three, music teacher, cinephile. São Paulo, Brazil.

David Cerdá. Philosopher and writer who has seen all of Woody’s films. Seville, Spain.

Robert Chastain. Poet, artist, photographer, novelist. Longmont, CO, USA.

Vasilis Chatzigeorgiou. Student, theater-goer, cinephile, book-lover, dreamer. Thessaloniki, Greece.

Mireille Clees. “Mom” of two dogs, cinema, book, Woody and nature lover. Theux, Belgium.

Victoria Corral Blázquez. Woman, mother, wife, consultant, passionate about the future. Madrid, Spain.

Nadia Edwards. Emigrée, divorcée, Woody Allen passionée. Miami, FL, USA.

Sophie Girardin. English teacher, 45, I watch Woody’s movies again and again. Saint Étienne, France.

Nina Gleize. Writer. Montréal, Canada.

Anna Grau. Writer, reader, journalist, I interviewed Woody once! Madrid, Spain.

Tussah Heera. Pianist, composer, writer, dreamer, and philosopher queen. Las Vegas, NV, USA.

Marc Heller. Married, father, bi-polar, witty, under-achiever. London, UK.

Sébastien Jacques. IT engineer and Woody Allen fan since the 80s. Paris, France.

Michael Joseph. Poet, Robert Graves scholar, failed clarinetist, New Yorker, resist/persist! New York City, USA.

Andrey V. Kalashnikov. Huge Woody Allen fan over a period of 25 years. Moscow, Russia.

Danae Kardara. Philologist, writer, dreamer, romantic, and sarcastic. Karditsa, Greece.

Hesham Khaled. Software developer, Woody movies addict, jazz junkie. Alexandria, Egypt.

Polina Kiou. Fashion, movies and animal lover. Athens, Greece.

Tempe Laver. Curious, stubborn, shy, middle aged. Brisbane, Australia.

Scott Linker. Musician, father of Sabrina and two Yorkies. Las Vegas, NV, USA.

Andrea Lukomski. Mom of two girls, teacher, dreamer, Woody Allen admirer, nature and animal lover. Vukovar, Croatia.

Tom MacCammon. Musician, writer, supporter of Woody. Toronto, Canada.

Hannes Minkema. Teacher, learner, father, son, musician, audience. Amsterdam,  The Netherlands.

Hesam Mohamadi. Engineer, philosopher, dreamer, writer, sleeper. Tehran, Iran.

Mariana E. Montes. Psychiatrist and artist. There is more truth in poetry than in history. Montevideo, Uruguay.

Pavlina Nelson. Mom, wife, cinephile, bookworm, nature lover. Prague, Czech Republic.

Monica Nicolau. Book-movie-music-junkie, mathematician. San Francisco, USA.

Kostas Papazafeiropoulos. Musician, composer, art lover, father of two. Athens, Greece.

Adrian Pasarica. Software engineer by profession, Woody’s fan by nature. Timisoara, Romania.

Mar Pastor González. Book-eater, The Beatles, jazz and dog lover, Woody’s fan. I love the films of the 40s, 50s, 60s, and 70s. Madrid, Spain.

Olga Radulovic. Animal, music, and nature lover, vegan and cinephile. Woody’s fan. Vukovar, Croatia.

Hana Radulovic. Artist, caring, animal lover, sensitive and modest. Woody’s fan. Vukovar, Croatia.

Odalys Rey. Cuban, family, love, peace, happiness. Havana, Cuba..

Jacquelyn Roberts. Artist who serves Art. Tehachapi, CA, USA.
 
Stéphan Sante. Musician, piano teacher, cinephile, Woody’s fan. Verviers, Belgium.

Billie Shankar. Woody Allen fan. Brussels, France.

Carol Space. I love Café Society, Blue Jasmine, Midnight in Paris and Vicky, Cristina, Barcelona. Brewster, MA, USA.

Ruth Streett. Mother and grandmother living in Jerusalem. Jerusalem, Israel.

Eyal Streett. Father, musician, curious, cook, creative. Jerusalem. Israel.

Yael Streett Tejeda. Musician, ballet and hip hop dancer, tae kwon do brown belt, painter, trilingual. Madrid, Spain.

Itay Streett Tejeda. Writer, book-eater, chocolate lover, hip hop dancer, basketball player. Madrid, Spain.

​Dalit Streett Tejeda. Ballerina, violinist, recorder player, swimmer, ice cream lover. Madrid, Spain.

Michael Taft. Book and music lover. Loves anything to do with Woody Allen. Christchurch, New Zealand.

Ulrich Tangl. Basketball player, basketball coach, basketball organizer, ex-sports editor, single. Kirchheim unter Teck, Germany.

Antonia Tejeda Barros. Mother of Yael, Itay and Dalit, musician, Philosophy MA, teacher, cinephile. Madrid, Spain.

Moiz Terem. Woody’s fan, book, film, and jazz lover, father of two. Tel Aviv, Israel.

Marise Thomspson. Music, movies, history, animals, and Woody Allen lover. I love to laugh. Ohoka, New Zealand.

María del Pilar Trujillo. Life lover, meat lover, wine lover, salsa music lover, Woody Allen art lover. Bogotá, Colombia.

Elisabeth T. Walker. Inspirational artist-writer-performer-activist-mystic. New Haven, CT, USA.

Gizem Yenikler. Writer, art, theatre and music lover, cinephile, traveller. Izmir, Turkey.

Kiana Zanetti. Musician, poet, cinephile, Woody’s fan. Montréal, Canada.

Yulia Zharkaya. Founder of vk and Woody Allen fan. Saint Petersburg, Russia.

Evelyne de Zilah. Student, cinephile, book-eater, discreet, thankful for Woody Allen’s Art. Creuë, France.

CC 2018 I Believe Woody

www.ibelievewoody.com 

See the original birthday card for Woody here

To Rome With Love

To Rome With Love (2012). Dir. Woody Allen

Jerry (Woody Allen): “Don’t analyze me, Phyllis, okay? You know, many have tried and all have failed. My brain doesn’t fit the usual id-ego-superego model!”

Phyllis (Judy Davis): “No, you have the only brain with three ids.”

Yesterday I watched with my kids To Rome With Love, by the genius Woody Allen, for the 100th time. Such a great movie! Hilarious, amusing, and cool: full of jokes and funny moments.

Woody manages (as always) to tell his story with humour, deep, jokes and more. This time he tells 4 stories, all amusing and imaginative.

I love that Woody is in the movie, accompanied by the great and beautiful Judy Davis. When they first appear, in the plane, we already get Woody’s philosophical humour. He says to Judy: “I can’t unclench when there’s turbulence. You know, I am an atheist.”

My favorite character is Leopoldo Pisanello, played brilliantly by the hilarious Roberto Benigni. We laugh every second that he’s in the movie. The Italian actors Alessandro Tiberi (Antonio, Milly’s husband), Alessandra Mastronardi (Milly), Antonio Albanese (the famous actor Luca Salta), and Riccardo Scamarcio (the hotel burglar) are all hilarious. The legendary Ornella Muti appears 10 seconds in the film. 

Fabio Armiliato is a very well-known opera tenor singer who plays the role of Giancarlo beautifully and sings amazing (in the shower). Armiliato has had leading roles and sung in the most prestigious opera houses of the world (Metropolitan Opera House of New York, La Scala in Milan, and L’Opéra de Paris). 

Alec Baldwin is great as always. Jesse Eisenberg plays to the perfection the role of a shy and confused young man. Penélope Cruz is wonderful and beautiful as always. Alison Pill (Hayley)’s performance is very fresh, and Flavio Parenti (who is Michelangelo, Hayley’s fiancé) is great in his role as an angry ultra left-wing young man. Monica Nappo plays amazingly Pisanello’s humble wife. 

Since Page and Gerwig opportunistically stabbed Woody right after the world saw Dylan Farrow’s crocodile’s tears in January 2018 (she’s been trying to destroy Woody with her prefabricated story for ages), I can’t stand watching them onscreen. Their treason, hypocrisy and opportunism will be always remembered (unlike their acting). Nevertheless, the lines that Woody wrote for them are really good.

The cinematography of the film is really beautiful. Cinematographer Darius Khondji (born in Iran but majored in Film at New York University) worked previously with Woody in Anything Else (2003) and Midnight in Paris (2011) and would go on working with Woody in two other films: Magic in the Moonlight (2014) and the masterpiece Irrational Man (2015). Other great works of Khondji include Delicatessen (1991), La cité des enfants perdus (1995), Alien: Resurrection (1997), and Amour (2012). He also worked as a cinematographer in many videos of Madonna. 

To Rome With Love is rated in IMDB  “restricted”. I really don’t know why. Maybe because Penélope plays a prostitute? Well, as we all know in the States it’s OK to watch movies with thousands of bombs, guns, and killers, but love and sex are more dangerous and always restricted. Funny country…

To Rome With Love is another Woody Allen gem. A fresh and funny film, packed with jokes, beautiful long shots, great writing and a wonderful cast. 10/10

The worst: that Page and Gerwig contaminate the film (two ungrateful hypocrites who opportunistically stabbed Woody) .

The best: all the funny moments, Woody, the great Judy Davis, Roberto Benigni, and the cinematography.

We love you, Woody!

 Antonia Tejeda Barros, Madrid, August 27, 2018

Irrational Man

Irrational Man (2015). Dir. Woody Allen

Abe (Joaquin Phoenix): “Anxiety is the dizziness of freedom”.

Irrational Man. Wow. Such a movie. A delight for anyone who loves philosophy, especially existentialist philosophy, my favorite!

The beginning of the movie is amazing. You can only hear a car and, right after the opening credits, Ramsey Lewis’ amazing funky jazz. The first word, pronounced by Joaquin Phoenix, is “Kant”. Woody Allen seems to have made Irrational Man for philosophy lovers: Kierkegaard, Heidegger, Sartre, Dostoevsky, and Hannah Arendt’s thesis dance in this film. Anxiety, despair, the meaning of our existence, choice, morality, suicide, and murder are the film’s main themes.

Joaquin Phoenix’s performance is stunning. Really brilliant. Phoenix gained 33 pounds for the role of Abe, a controversial philosophy professor, anguished, depressed and a nihilist who talks to his students about how cruel and frustrating human existence is. Phoenix appears like a man made of blood and flesh, vulnerable and tormented, who prefers to live philosophy than to talk about.

I must admit that I am not a big fan of Emma Stone. I find all her performances basically the same. Nevertheless, her performance in Irrational Man is convincing thanks to Woody’s amazing writing. Still, she could have bothered herself and take some piano lessons if she was going to play the role of a piano student. Oh, well, those young divas…

The other woman is Rita, performed by Parker Posey, an awesome actress. Her performance is fresh, elegant and very real.

Ethan Phillips (who played the nasty IRS agent Gorsky in the 90’s comedy Green Card) has a small role in the movie and plays Jill’s father. I read some negative reviews about Jamie Blackey’s performance, who plays Jill’s boyfriend, Roy, but truthfully I think that he plays his role to perfection (a simple guy in love, plain and zero exciting).

Irrational Man has a bit of Match Point and a lot of Cassandra’s Dream, being at the same time original, genuine, and surprising. The end is unpredictable and has a taste of Hitchcock. Woody had already used Crime and Punishment in Crimes and Misdemeanors, Match Point and Cassandra’s Dream. Ramsey Lewis (who, I must admit, I didn’t know –I have already bought several CDs of his) accompanies us with his amazing funky jazz during all the film. Woody’s taste in music is definitely the best.

The Adair University (fictitious), where Abe taught before, is the same University that honours Harry Block in Deconstructing Harry and where Sondra Pransky studied journalism in Scoop (how funny).

Irrational Man is the last movie produced by Jack Rollins (Woody’s producer for over 45 years). Rollins died in 2015, age 100.

Abe brings to the extreme the first principle of existentialism: human beings are what we make of ourselves (“l’homme n’est rien d’autre que ce qu’il se fait”, argues Sartre in L’existentialisme est un humanisme). Man is what he decides to be, in complete freedom. Sartre argues that we don’t have freedom, but that we are freedom. Our freedom can never be renounced. Even if we decide not to be free, we are deciding in complete freedom not to be free. That’s what reflects Sartre’s explosive sentence “l’homme est condamné à être libre“[1]. We are free and we are completely responsible of what and who we are. There is no God. We are alone in the Universe. We are the solely owners of our own existence and the only responsible ones for our own choices.

Sartrean existentialism is a philosophy of freedom and action. To think about doing something, to hope, to wish, does not count at all for Sartre. Only to act has real value, and Abe knows it. If we wish for somebody to be dead, the only coherent action is murder. But what about morality? Well, are all men worth living? Really cruel people are parasites, are they not? Wouldn’t the world be a better place with less parasites?

When Abe decides to kill the corrupted judge, his life makes sense again. He starts enjoying life: he has big breakfasts (not only back coffee), is able to make love again, writes poetry again, and feels strong and alive. Suicide is not an option for Abe any more. His life has meaning. His murder plans are what give meaning to his existence.

Man is a being in search for meaning. That was brilliantly said by Viktor Frankl in 1946 in his heartbreaking book Man’s Search for Meaning (originally written in German and untitled …trotzdem Ja zum Leben sagen. Ein Psychologe erlebt das Konzentrationslager). Frankl’s thesis is a yes to life with capital letters. His message: an unconditional faith in the meaning of existence: “meaning is available under any conditions, even the worst conceivable ones“[2]. Life has always meaning, until the end (“life has a meaning to the last breath“[3]) and it’s our duty to look for this meaning. Our main task is to have to give a meaning to our own existence.

Frankl argues that a person who has found the meaning of his life is able to give his life for that meaning, and a person who has not found the meaning of his life can easily commit suicide. At the beginning of the film, Abe suffers from existential vacuum and does not mind at all to die when he demonstrates to his students how to play the Russian roulette. But when he starts planning the murder and finds a meaning for his existence, he rejects suicide and embraces life.

Frankl argues that life has always meaning. Sartre, on the contrary, argues that nothing has real meaning: everything is absurd (like Camus). We are alone, without God and without excuses, and we have to carry courageously the emptiness of our human existence.

Frankl defines man as freedom, responsibility and meaning. Sartre defines man as freedom, responsibility and anguish. In the first half of  Irrational Man, Abe follows Sartre, and, afterwards, follows Frankl. Frankl’s thesis is less dark than Sartre’s. Nevertheless, I have always found an answer (even if a hard and depressing one) in Sartre’s philosophy, and, for what I’ve read, I think that Woody too.

In an interview from 2010, Woody was asked about his vision on life, and said: “I have a very grim pessimistic view of it. I always had. Since I was a little boy. It hasn’t gotten worse with age or anything. I do feel that it’s a grim, painful, nightmarish, meaningless experience and that the only way you can be happy is if you tell yourself some lies and deceive yourself (…) One must have one’s illusions to live. If you look at life too honestly life does become unbearable because it is a pretty grim enterprise“[4]. I agree completely. I think that neither life nor death have real meaning, so we have to create, love and grow as much as we can in order to not to succumb to despair.

Irrational Man is an absolutely brilliant film. A delightful masterpiece. 10 / 10

The best: the huge dosis of existential philosophy, Joaquin Phoenix’s stunning performance, Parker Posey, and Ramsey Lewis’ funky jazz.

The worst: Emma Stone’s perfectly combed hair.

Antonia Tejeda Barros, Madrid, August 16, 2018

NOTES

[1] Sartre, Jean-Paul. L’existentialisme est un humanisme, p. 39

[2] Frankl, Viktor E. The Unheard Cry for Meaning, p. 41

[3] Frankl, Viktor E. “Introduction”, The Doctor and the Soul, p. xix

[4] Allen, Woody. Press conference You Will Meet A Tall Dark Stranger, Cannes, May 2010

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Frankl, Viktor E. … trotzdem Ja zum Leben sagen. Ein Psychologe erlebt das Konzentrationslager. München: Kösel, 2014 (2009), pp. 7–191

Frankl, Viktor E. Man’s Search for Meaning (trad. Ilse Lasch). Boston: Beacon, 2006, pp. ix–165

Frankl, Viktor E. The Doctor and the Soul. From Psychotherapy to Logotherapy (trad. Richard y Clara Winston). New York: Vintage Books, 1986, pp. ix–318

Frankl, Viktor E. The Unheard Cry for Meaning. New York: Touchstone, 1978, pp. 13–191

Frankl, Viktor E. TV interview, Toronto, 1972. THE WILL TO MEANING.

Sartre, Jean-Paul. L’être et le néant. Essai d’ontologie phénoménologique. France: Gallimard, 2010 (1943), pp. 11–676

Sartre, Jean-Paul. L’existentialisme est un humanisme. France: Gallimard, 2003 (1945), pp. 9– 109

The Shape of Water (The Shape of Violence?)

The Shape of Water (2017). (The Shape of Violence?). Dir. Guillermo del Toro

Sex and violence really sell, don’t they? A bit of porn, lots and lots of violence and you have a multi Academy Award nomination movie!

I went to see yesterday The Shape of Water and I was highly disappointed. While the music, the cinematography and the performances are amazing, the love story is really not convincing and a bit creepy, and the unnecessary sex scenes (masturbation and coitus) and, specially, the monstruos violence killed all the poetry of the movie. In the same way that I don’t think a director needs to show the actors shitting, pissing or picking their noses I find graphic sex a very poor choice for a director to illustrate a point. But, more than that, I find violence onscreen really disturbing and I think that such a high degree of violence is a very poor tool for a director. An exception to that would probably be Tarantino, who uses violence in such a crude way that it ends out being funny (nevertheless, Tarantino’s violence is sometimes too much for me, even when he uses it for something great, like killing Nazis). I think that there are greater cinematic ways of showing violence than graphic torture, flying fingers, and litres of blood. If you don’t agree with me, go and see Doctor Zhivago: you will be amazed by the power of the scene where the Imperial Army is massacring the people next to the Winter Palace and all you can see is the horrifying face of Doctor Zhivago, who, from a safe window, watches men, women, and children being slaughtered by the Imperial Army. Now, that’s art. The rest is only good special effects and a big lack of imagination. The same goes for sex. There are many ways of showing the act of love (also the act of fucking –that’s it: making love without love) with sensuality, strength, and poetry, but Guillermo del Toro chose here graphic sex. Why? I guess it sells better.

Frankly, I don’t get the hype around this film. 13 Academy Award nominations? Come on! Guillermo del Toro looks like a really nice guy, and I actually hate to write negative reviews. If I spend a bit of time in writing this negative review it’s because, as with La La Land (an annoying and cheesy torture filled with cliches), I’m amazed at how bad or not so good Hollywood movies can get such a hype, while other movies, like Woody Allen’s masterpieces, get shut out and don’t get any important nominations (yes, I am a huge fan of Woody: I love his art, his philosophy and his genius, and I’m very angry at this wave of hypocrisy, opportunism and lies around him that mixes false accusations from two crazy and resentful women with the most beautiful art).

The characters of The Shape of Water are all either black or white, there are no greys here: the bad ones are really bad and the good ones are really good. Well, life isn’t neither black nor white. It’s full of greys. While the performances of the movie are all amazing (Sally Hawkins is great, Octavia Spencer is amazing as always, Richard Jenkins is really good too and Michael Shannon is stunning: he really steals the movie and, surprisingly, didn’t get any Golden Globe or Academy Award nomination), the souls of the characters are painted only in one color, and that’s very Hollywood-ish and commercial. 

Also, I wonder, for which age is The Shape of Water? You would first think that a fantasy movie is suitable for children, but this one is not. Or, you would think that a love story with so much violence and a bit of porn is suitable for adults, but then, why put this stupid fish-creature? I’m used to seeing lots of fantasy and children movies with my kids (ages 11, 9 and 4, so, imagine: I’ve seen them all: since The Dark Cristal from 1982 until the last superhero movie). But this movie, for who is it?

I understand why this movie can arrive to people, especially people who feel very lonely. I feel a great deal of empathy for all the people who feel alone in the world and seek love and company wherever they can, but I think that the black and white characters and the huge degree of violence kill the depth of this movie. Maybe the majority of the people of  today are so used to see violence (on TV and on the internet) that they don’t even notice it any more. I am very sensible to violence and it disturbs me a lot when I see it (here at home we don’t have a TV for many many years, so I really don’t know what’s going on with TV violence these days –we only choose what we want to watch and watch it with our cinema projector). I understand that there are movies where violence is necessary (for instance, if you watch a movie about the Holocaust it may contain some graphic violence) but what really bothers me, artistically speaking, is superfluos violence: violence for selling, for entertaining a bit more and keep the audience amused. That  kind of violence is repulsive.

I don’t like to put a qualification for a movie. I always found it pretentious to qualify the huge work of a director with a number (I’m aware of the fact that to create art is difficult and to criticize is easy). But this time, since there is such a hype around this film, I feel obliged to qualify this movie. So, 1 point for the music (Alexandre Desplat), 1 point for the cinematography (Dan Laustsen), 1 point for Michael Shannon, 1 point for Sally Hawkins, 1 point for the amazing Octavia Spencer, and 1 point for Richard Jenkins. 6/10

If you want to listen to good music, be amazed by a beautiful cinematography, see Sally Hawkins’s tits, vagina and ass, enjoy your popcorn while a fish-creature is being tortured in a brutal way, blood is running, and a cats loses her heads, go and see The Shape of Water.

 Antonia Tejeda Barros, Madrid, February 20, 2018