Un aperçu des années où les gros titres à scandales révélèrent les allégations d'abus sexuels de Woody Allen sur sa fille Mia Farrow de 7 ans.Un aperçu des années où les gros titres à scandales révélèrent les allégations d'abus sexuels de Woody Allen sur sa fille Mia Farrow de 7 ans.Un aperçu des années où les gros titres à scandales révélèrent les allégations d'abus sexuels de Woody Allen sur sa fille Mia Farrow de 7 ans.
- Nommé pour 7 Primetime Emmys
- 16 nominations au total
Parcourir les épisodes
Histoire
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesAlthough Woody Allen did not respond to requests for interviews, his voice can be heard in the excerpts from the audio version of his autobiography, which he read. The publisher, Skyhorse Publishing, took exception to the inclusion of portions of the audio book and threatened to sue; the producers claimed the use of the book fell under "fair use" guidelines. Allen is also seen and heard, of course, through archive material, including home movies, his own films, and tape-recorded phone conversations.
- ConnexionsFeatured in Entertainment Tonight Canada: Épisode datant du 22 février 2021 (2021)
Commentaire à la une
I have watched every single bit of stuff that is around, I've read Woddy's book, I've watched this documentary, and watched many videos on YT.
There are several things that I disliked a lot in this documentary: Hiding very important details of pro-Allen people and stuff that happened, and is proven (like the letter she sent to Woody with nails on it and such weird stuff). Makes this documentary absolutely untrustworthy... it it wasn't before watching it.
Also, add to it the "movie like" sad moments, playing with the viewer feelings, make it look like a very subjective and very "sentimental" and not a serious documentary.
Adding some images that we have never seen and the taped conversations is really interesting. I didn't like that all of them are edited or cut right before an answer was heard or a part of it was needed! So when listening to the excerpts seems like the audio has been edited heavily and hidden important details.
I would suggest the viewers to now watch some other stuff not made by Allen or the Farrows. Now watch a documentary on YT made by somebody who spend a lot of time researching too, called "By the way, Woody Allen is inocent" for a deep dive on all the details and reasoning of both sides, independently of your opinion, forget the title. It comments the stuff seen in this documentary as well as Allen's book and much more.
It is way more objetive than any other thing, I think.
Anyway, I'm not convinced at all, nor by this or Woddy's version, but this one feels bad, really bad, really biased.
I still watch W. A. movies and enjoy them as a work of art the same way we can enjoy a painting by Picasso without knowing stuff he did in his private life, I can have an opinion, but that's all I can do. On the other side, I feel like Dylan, whatever is the real version, is really broken, so it's too late for her to really know if that was really what happened or not, things stick forever and they will.
There are several things that I disliked a lot in this documentary: Hiding very important details of pro-Allen people and stuff that happened, and is proven (like the letter she sent to Woody with nails on it and such weird stuff). Makes this documentary absolutely untrustworthy... it it wasn't before watching it.
Also, add to it the "movie like" sad moments, playing with the viewer feelings, make it look like a very subjective and very "sentimental" and not a serious documentary.
Adding some images that we have never seen and the taped conversations is really interesting. I didn't like that all of them are edited or cut right before an answer was heard or a part of it was needed! So when listening to the excerpts seems like the audio has been edited heavily and hidden important details.
I would suggest the viewers to now watch some other stuff not made by Allen or the Farrows. Now watch a documentary on YT made by somebody who spend a lot of time researching too, called "By the way, Woody Allen is inocent" for a deep dive on all the details and reasoning of both sides, independently of your opinion, forget the title. It comments the stuff seen in this documentary as well as Allen's book and much more.
It is way more objetive than any other thing, I think.
Anyway, I'm not convinced at all, nor by this or Woddy's version, but this one feels bad, really bad, really biased.
I still watch W. A. movies and enjoy them as a work of art the same way we can enjoy a painting by Picasso without knowing stuff he did in his private life, I can have an opinion, but that's all I can do. On the other side, I feel like Dylan, whatever is the real version, is really broken, so it's too late for her to really know if that was really what happened or not, things stick forever and they will.
- lidiamartinezprado
- 16 déc. 2021
- Permalien
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
Détails
- Durée1 heure 4 minutes
- Couleur
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
By what name was Allen v. Farrow (2021) officially released in India in English?
Répondre