Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired

Roman Polanski's life reads like a work of fiction. Tolstoi, Nabokov, Pasternak even Stephen King and Jackie Collins. The fact that it's not fiction but fact makes it overwhelming. He came from a world in which evil had taken away his parents in which he found his mission without any of the things that, most of us, would take for granted. That in itself is kind of admirable almost miraculous. This remarkable documentary puts things in perspective and it achieves that without rhetoric. How easy for a world consumed by gossip an innuendo to transform the man into a monster. I felt for Polanski, I could actually put myself in his shoes and weep. There is an element of innocence in his behavior that it's impossible to ignore. Hopefully, this film, will help justice to be done, real justice and real justice involves forgiveness and compassion.

When most people think of Roman Polanski, they immediately remember his legal troubles over a sexual encounter with a 13-year-old girl in 1977, when he was 44. To counterbalance this common instant reaction, Marina Zenovich's new HBO documentary, ROMAN POLANSKI: WANTED AND DESIRED, does as much as it can to remind you about the other great hardships of Polanski's life. There have been plenty, that's for sure. He lost his mother and father during the Second World War, his mother losing her life in Auschwitz. He survived somehow and eventually made his way to London, where he pursued a career in film-making, something he always knew he wanted to do. It was there that he met his future wife, actress, Sharon Tate. They made a life for themselves in Los Angeles and for a while, they were happy. Then Tate, eight months pregnant at the time with Polanski's child, was murdered in her home along with four others in a horrific fashion at the hands of Charles Manson and his "family". Still Polanski soldiered on and he did so by producing some of Hollywood's greatest classics, like ROSEMARY'S BABY and CHINATOWN. Polanski has had incredible highs and horrendous lows and while he should be both commended and consoled, he still slept with a minor and that can't be forgotten.

With so many dramatic experiences to choose from, it isn't difficult for Zenovich to string her piece together. Despite its straightforward approach, it is never quite clear where she stands on Polanski's behaviour. She does focus her documentary to show how no matter how many other things have happened in Polanski's life that this one particular mistake is the event that defines it all. However, she never questions his judgment and leaves the opinion forming to her audience. This would ordinarily be a respectable decision but Zenovich's intentions may not be as noble as they appear. She presents us with a very well balanced argument regarding whether Polanski received a fair trial or not. Lead legal counsel for both the defense and the prosecution are interviewed and, lending volumes of weight to the film, they both present relatively similar accounts of the trial and what went on behind the scenes. It is the behind the scenes material that puts the issue of fairness into question. The proceedings were overseen by Judge Lawrence Rittenband, a judge notorious for his attraction toward celebrity and the idea of being one himself. Rittenband essentially orchestrated the proceedings of his court as though he were directing a film and the intended audience was the press. Zenovich has shown us the charade and while this is all horribly unjust, it still does not negate what Polanski did.

The next question is whether what Polanski did thirty years ago even matters now. Samantha Geimer, the plaintiff in the case, who also appears in the film, has forgiven Polanski publicly. The judge now responsible for the case has stated for the record that Polanski would not serve any jail time if he were to reenter the United States. The man even won an Oscar for directing THE PIANIST in 2002. Clearly the world has moved on but Zenovich has brought us back. Her approach is well-rounded; her style is formulaic but solid. The only thing missing is a genuine satisfaction that her efforts have been fully realized. ROMAN POLANSKI: WANTED AND DESIRED alludes to Polanski being wanted in one country and desired in others but does nothing to suggest what the wants and desires mean about those feeling them. So all we're truly left with is another reminder of what he did.

The title of the show means: while he's currently "wanted" in America (for arrest) and he's also "desired" (revered) in France, where he lives. That's quite a disparity.

If you aren't familiar with the sex scandal involving (then) 44 year old Polanski and a 13 year old Los Angeles girl, this documentary tells the story. The film catches up with the attorneys and associated individuals to tell the story. Because there is so much archival footage and current commentary by principals involved, including the girl, this film is probably the best source of information for the event.

Missing, of course, is current-day commentary of Polanski. However, there is a fair bit of archival footage presented in which he discusses the event.

I didn't know much about Polanski, but was intrigued to learn about his background. Apparently he and his parents were sent to a concentration camp where his mother died. During his rise to fame, he married Sharon Tate, who was tortured and murdered by the Manson family (she was pregnant with his son at the time). And there is more - including some details of the event and the strange judge involved.

One gripe about the show is the use of small text: if you're watching it on a small TV, you'll have to squint to try and read some of the text presented throughout the program. It is quite irritating.

However, all in all, the show was pretty fascinating. It's kind of reminiscent of the OJ Simpson event in some says. In this case though, Polanski seems to have been able to carry on with his career.

Roman Polanski is what I would consider a genius filmmaker. He is the consummate "filmmaker's director", and has made many excellent films--some of the most important films ever created-- for over 40 years.I think he is a highly engaging, intelligent and gifted human being. And I would treasure the opportunity to sit with him over a glass of wine and hear ,what I'm sure would be an amazing, riveting life story.

Having said that,the recent motions to dismiss his guilt regarding the 1977 child-rape case HE PLEAD GUILTY TO to me are belittling of our criminal justice system.

It boils down to his GUILT, not wheather or not the judge is an a**hole--right? Haven't many convicted members of the MANSON family ,guilty of slaughtering his pregnant wife and unborn son, attempted similar motions, pleas and tactics to reduce or overthrow THEIR sentences. Do THEY also deserve to "walk" just because it's "been a long time and things change"?

This is a compelling film and very, very absorbing and it is recommended viewing,regardless of your personal opinion regarding Polanski's guilt--but to what end? I do not agree with it's perspective,purpose and viewpoint so in that sense, it is an inherently flawed project.

We wish you could return to the USA, Mr.Polanski--But you have done something that you must pay for, just as Tex Watson and Susan Atkins have to pay for the crimes they inflicted in your rented home on Cielo Drive on that tragic summer evening in 1969.

Ultimately, Roman Polanski--whose work I've enjoyed--drugged a 13 year old girl, raped her anally, and got away with it without punishment. The media frenzy is irrelevant. The eccentric judge is irrelevant. The only pertinent piece of data is that He got away with it. Scott free. If it wasn't so cynical, Polanski's gall in seeking to clear his reputation would be comical. Mr.Polanski should thank his luck that he avoided incarceration; his apologists should be ashamed of themselves.

That said, Ms. Zenovich is a talented filmmaker. Her execution is steady and workmanlike. However, she clearly has an agenda. This isn't a bad movie, but it's a disingenuous one. Don't take my word for it, but if you watch it try to look objectively at how the two sides of this case are presented, how the victim is trivialized and how her advocates are villainized, and make your own determination.