We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
ROMAN POLANSKI WON best director for “An Officer and a Spy” at a fractious ceremony for the French Oscars, the Césars, that ended in walkouts and recrimination in Paris.
The entire French academy had been forced to resign earlier this month amid fury that the veteran – wanted in the US for the statutory rape of a 13-year-old girl in 1977 – had topped the list of nominations.
Protesters chanting “Lock up Polanski!” tried to storm the theatre where the ceremony was being held before being pushed back by police firing tear gas.
And France’s Culture Minister Franck Riester had warned that giving the maker of “Rosemary’s Baby” a César would be “symbolically bad given the stance we must take against sexual and sexist violence”.
But Polanski won two awards, best adapted screenplay and best director – with the latter prompting Adele Haenel, who was nominated for best actress for “Portrait of a Lady on Fire”, to storm out, crying “Shame!”
CANAL+ / TwitterA l'annonce du César de la Meilleure Réalisation pour Roman Polanski ("J'accuse"), Adèle Haenel quitte la salle.
— CANAL+ (@canalplus) February 28, 2020
Le meilleur des #César2020 > https://t.co/ipnVwouBeV pic.twitter.com/7xa0CTbU3H
Haenel has become a hero of the #MeToo movement in France after accusing the director of her first film, Christophe Ruggia, of sexually harassing her when she was only 12.
She was followed out of the room by several others in the audience.
‘Public lynching’
“Distinguishing Polanski is spitting in the face of all victims,” Haenel had said in the run-up to the Césars.
“It means raping women isn’t that bad.”
Polanski, 86, and the entire team of his historical drama had boycotted the ceremony, fearing a “public lynching”.
“An Officer and a Spy” is based on the Dreyfus affair which divided France in the late 19th century when a Jewish army officer was wrongly prosecuted for spying.
“What place can there be in such deplorable conditions for a film about the defence of truth, the fight for justice, (against) blind hate and anti-Semitism?” the director told AFP.
Polanski’s film, which won two top prizes at the Venice film festival last year, was in the running in 12 categories at the Césars.
The big winner on the night was the Oscar-nominated “Les Miserables”, set in one of France’s deprived and restive suburbs.
It took best film and three other prizes including the audience award.
- © AFP 2020.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
The Oscars: Seems Like we’ve courted a bit of controversy on ourselves with our choices
The French: Hold my baguette
@Jake Kelly: Glass of red, more like
@Jake Kelly: You can’t call them baguettes anymore – it’s offensive. The correct term is breadrolls of length.
That woman who stormed off has much more of a backbone than Meryl Streep and her ilk
Another film about anti-semitism by a man who drugged & sodomised a 13 year old girl as she repeatedly begged him to stop. He hasn’t faced justice, and is still welcomed by the industry.
His quote is rather telling:
“What place can there be in such deplorable conditions for a film about the defence of truth, the fight for justice, (against) blind hate and anti-Semitism?”
Trying to play up the anti-semitism angle it seems.
She did? When?
@Krystian Brzezowski: what do you mean She did,when? Are you actually going to try argue this animals case ?
@Krystian Brzezowski:
As she was being raped. Lots of oh so smart “it was only statuatory” lads always out to defend this cockroach never read the court transcripts.
If I was that girls Dad or Uncle or Family Friend. He would not have made it to any decade past the 70s. He would have been the the victim of every cruel and unusual punishment in my version of the movie Death Wish. What a dirt of a man.
What a great movie it was to
@Liam Mc Meel: I think you are missing the point.
@Peter Cavey: That’s deliberate. He actually wants people to know that he cares more about entertainment than about women.
@Liam Mc Meel: was to what?
@Derek Walsh: that’s a considerable leap in logic..
@FecklessBear: I concede that it’s possible that he simply lacks the mental capacity to understand what’s going on, but I strongly suspect that it’s empathy he lacks.
@Derek Walsh: Like, let’s be honest. Someone who has genuinely gone to the considerable effort required to see this French language film is not incapable of understanding what this article is about. He came here and commented (ineptly) on a film he probably hasn’t seen, because he wanted people to know how little he values the welfare of women and girls.
@Peter Cavey: I think people missed the point on when was he convicted?
@Krystian Brzezowski: 1978. He pled guilty but absconded while awaiting sentencing. He has been on the lam in Europe ever since.
@Derek Walsh: and you responded with somewhat hysterical hyperbolic nonsense.
@FecklessBear: perhaps the OP can recognise the value of the cinematic endeavour for what it is? Just because Polanski escaped justice for his crimes in the 70s, should all subsequent work of his, regardless of quality, be dismissed?
What purpose does that serve?
@FecklessBear: The Pianist is probably one of my favourite films, but Polanski should have served his time. And I don’t blame that woman for walking out seeing as she was sexually harassed at 12 by another film director. I’m sure awarding a man that was convicted for anally raping a 13 year old is triggering.
@FecklessBear: Yes, as I said it’s possible that he travelled or made other efforts to see this film, and then was so lacking in any sort of emotional intelligence that he decided that this article was an appropriate place to post his brief and poorly written review. But I maintain that it is several orders of magnitude more likely that he has not actually seem the film and merely came here to essentially announce that he does not care one whit that Polanski raped a child.
I’m not saying Polanski’s work should be dismissed. I’m saying that no decent person should work with him or praise him while he remains an unrepentant and unpunished child rap!st.
Clearly you disagree, and you think that a film can be so good that it makes up for drugging and raping a thirteen-year-old girl.
@Derek Walsh: another huge leap of logic there. I don’t believe the crime and the film are in any way related.
Apart from exactly what I write here, you don’t know anything about what I think. Don’t claim to.
@FecklessBear: You’re here defending someone who raped a child. I don’t need to know anything else about what you think.
@Liam Mc Meel: You look like the type who would support a child raping pervert.
Is this the same fella Meryl Streep and all the rest of them gave regular standing ovations to, knowing what he had done???? The hypocrisy of it is what’s disturbing.
Well, on the one hand, he anally raped a child. But on the other, he’s quite good at telling actors where to stand.
J’accuse (An Officer and a Spy): Roman Polanski’s masterpiece on the Dreyfus Affair
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/11/19/jacc-n19.html
The MeToo brigade are not demanding universal equality.
After all, that would be socialism! God forbid!
Rather, they are demanding ‘equal access’ at the top table.
They want their share of the fruits available to the privileged layer in society.
@PV Nevin: who are the #metoo “brigade”? I know many people who have used that hashtag and there not part of any brigade – just have experienced some level of sexual harassment or assault.
The disgust at his receiving this award nothing to do with the topic of the film or how good it is. Nobody disputes the man has talent but he has not been willing to face the justice system for criminal allegations and that’s wrong.
The child he raped who is now a woman in her 50s has publically forgiven him. That should be the end of the matter as far as i am concerned..
He was facing a 3 year sentence back in 1977 , he escaped justice, he was protected by powerful friends. If he had gone to prison would this have been forgotten? Probably not .
He resumed his career in the 80/90s with some good films he was given an honorary Oscar for his achievement in film. He has married and has raised a family .
It’s now cool to attack him because of #MeToo same industry has been plauding him for decades.
@Paul O’Sullivan: she hasn’t publicly forgiven him, she has stated that she doesn’t want another trial as the media scrutiny into her life is already so bad. He drugged and raped a 13 year old child several times, pled guilty and then absconded the court. It’s far from the end of the matter. But you go ahead keep defending nonces, you absolute dirt.
@Paul O’Sullivan: You’re using phrases like “the child he raped” and “escaped justice” and you’re wondering why he is vilified? Would you be so generous if you were that girls father, then or now? Would you be patting him on his back for his good films and homouring him? Would you like him or his kind living next door to you and your children?
@Paula Leavy: yes she has forgiven him., in more than one TV interview and she has communicated with him via email.
@Sorcha Ní Shúilleabháin: there are plenty of sex offenders in every community. Its the ones I don’t know of and who are not named to protect the identity of their victims that worries me.
@Paul O’Sullivan: No she hasn’t. And even if she did, it’s not in any way ok for a man who several times over raped a 13 year child to escape justice like he did. You and your opinions are utterly disgusting.
@Paula Leavy: she has forgiven him she says it in an interview… she emails him …
She does not want to be seen as a victim… she is sick of hearing about it and she has publically asked a long time ago that it’s no longer raised innrekayion to him … it’s her way of taking control of her life.
The actress that walked out of the Cesar awards is only looking for attention and her name on the front covers.of magazines. . Yet she would work with him at the drop of a hat.
@Paul O’Sullivan: you’re actually deluded, she has not forgiven him. She walked out in disgust that her peers would honour him, so I’m pretty sure she wouldn’t work with him “at a drop of a hat”. Unlike you, the vast majority of people don’t support or condone nonces. You’ve shown yourself up for the bigoted and misogynistic turd that you are.
@Paula Leavy: no I’m not a quick google search will sort out your delusion…
Samantha Geimar has forgiven Roman Polanski . She has asked that the case be dropped in the US.
@Paul O’Sullivan: she has asked for the case to be dropped so she can put it behind her. She has never publicly forgiven him.
Go have a look yourself on google. Christ almighty.
@Paul O’Sullivan: she hasn’t forgiven him, just because you say the same thing over and over again, it doesn’t make it true. She has stated she doesn’t want another trial because of the media scrutiny in her life. And furthermore you’re an absolute dirt for defending a paedophile who drugged and repeatedly r@ped a 13 year old child. No go off to whatever cave you dragged yourself out of you nonce loving turd
@Fabio Dillon: she has forgiven him I’m currently watching her being interviewed by piers Morgan… she say says there are many untruths about the case… “I forgave him many years ago, almost immediately after. ”
She was sexually active by her own admission although that does not excuse Polanski actions
She says the whole case is corrupt with people trying to make names for themselves … her father was a lawyer who was more concerned with making his career out of this than protecting his own daughter . People wake up ffs
@Paul O’Sullivan: Whataboutery! The article is about this known offender not unknown individuals. Regardless of whether or not she forgave him justice was not served and he never paid for the crimes he admitted. Instead he absconded and had the luxury of getting on with his life. You’re speaking about him as if he were someone to be pitied or worse still, admired and deserving of the honours bestowed upon him. Unbelievable.
@Fabio Dillon: watch 60 mins on You Tube she gives a full account of the incident and the misconceptions associated with it. And she forgives him. She says she was not traumatised over it she was already sexually active. She said people would like her to be traumatised..
@Paul O’Sullivan: You still seem to be missing the point. The law precludes adults from having sex with little children. Children are unable to consent. I teach 13 year olds, they’re unable to make an informed decision about what to have for dinner let alone consent to or understand the repercussions of sexual activity. If she was sexually active at 13 and her mother was complicit then she was abused by multiple offenders. He admitted to comitting a crime and then fled when he realised he would get a custodial sentence, and for some strange reason you’re defending him.
@Sorcha Ní Shúilleabháin: of course what he did was wrong. I do not condone his actions. In my humble opinion I would like to see him man up and return to the states to do his time
However, he has been showered with praise for his work winning numerous awards etc and now it seems cool to criticise him. He got a standing ovation in 2004 when he got best director for the Pianist, now it seem cool to take that away from him. It smacks of hipocracy.
See the man separate from the work
I don’t see the point of an actress at an award ceremony throwing a hissy fit… he won Best Director for his film because his peers see it that way.
I am not defending him , but Samantha Geimer has repeatedly asked that people stop referring to his rape of her…
There is no need to try and educate me on consent. That’s not my issue.
@Paul O’Sullivan:
For you and any other paedophile apologists
https://www.salon.com/2009/09/28/polanski_arrest/amp?__twitter_impression=true
@Paula Leavy: I know he raped a child, I said that in my original post. I’m not defending him. Roman Polanski apologised and made a settlement out of court to Samantha Geiser. She has accepted the apology and she has forgiven him.
They both have moved on from this.
I ask you a question would you watch his films?
Would yiu read a book that was written by a person who has either murdered or raped and come out of prison reformed ?
@Paul O’Sullivan: In fact consent is your issue, it’s everyone’s issue. Public criticism of him isn’t something new cooked up by bandwagoners. Your use of the term ‘hissy fit’ really speaks volumes about how you view those women who no longer feel they need to remain silent under threat of having their careers ended. I wonder if it was a mechanic down the road from you or a local plumber would you be able to seperate the man from his work if they were charged with and admitted to the drugging and sodomy of a child, or is that reserved for the Hollywood elite?
@Paul O’Sullivan: You’ve gone to great lengths to downplay the repeated anal rape of a drugged 13 year old buddy, probably time for a rethink.
@Paul O’Sullivan: you are defending him to quote your OP ” That’s should be the end of the matter a far as I’m concerned….. She was sexually active by her own admission. ” No I don’t engage or support people who are paedophiles or r@pists, I won’t listen to Micheal Jackson or R.Kelly for example no matter how much I enjoyed their music.
Again she hasn’t accepted his apology, and I don’t care how sorry he is. He evaded justice and continues to be supported and allowed to work, and continues to win praise and awards despite him being a paedophile.
And you are defending him, and you are vile in doing so.
I wonder if it was a male who walked out would you declare him having a “hissy fit”. Probably not.
@Sorcha Ní Shúilleabháin: consent is not my issue, she was a child and could not consent.
My point is that this man has continued to work and win awards for his work since this happened in 1977, people have gone onto defend him throughout his life… and now be gets criticised because an organisation has given him another award. And all because it is now fashionable to do so. The same people have been applauding him its hypocrisy, that is all I am saying . .. I know he has done wrong and believe me their are many other artists who done bad too but that does not mean we cant appreciate their art
@Paul O’Sullivan:
Norman Mailer , stabbed his wife twice in a drunken argument. I do not condone but he was a brilliant writer.
William Burroghs killed his wife said it was an accident. Killed her with a crossbow.
Doestevsky , supposedly raped a child who later hung herself, but that is only rumour , it does not stop me from reading him. He is thought in nearly Literature degree course across the world
People do bad things I’m not saying we should brush things under the carpet, but I would have more respect for that actress if she had just said “I do not think we should be rewarding people who have committed certain crimes”…
In my opinion Roman Polanski who is a brilliant, innovative film maker should exclude himself from awards. Because of what he has done. But a lot of people are still willing to work with him.
@Paul O’Sullivan: So the question is: can people separete art from the artist. I can’t. I can live full life without his art.Its like having picture on the wall by an artist who did this. So can I really appreciate the picture when every time I see it I think about who made it and what he’s done? But its a movie, so you don’t stare at it all the time.Just a parabole. Also, you are rationalizing his behavior…that is worrying and thats why he shouldn’t get awards or even work.Cause this happens. And oh please…art of movies and acting is one of the lowest arts there..not worth this hype at all..but hey its the TV.
@Nikolina Fiume: I rise above it,
@Paul O’Sullivan: or you just lack empathy. By the some things you wrote, you definetly lack logic. But, nevermind that. I wonder how you would rise above it if you were the victim. I bet you would scream: art above all. :D And I know what Polanski did since I was 15 and watched his movie for the first time. Thats 25 years now, never have I read an article about him without this being mentioned.Its not a new thing, its just that pedos cover pedos. Thats the industry.
He raped a 13 year old !!!! Thats it ..
The MeToo movement:
The New York Times gloats over the destruction of “the Monster” Weinstein
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/02/26/wein-f26.html
@PV Nevin: Why wouldn’t they? He’s a serial sex offender? A convicted one.
Zzzzzzzzz
@Paul O Faolain: What is it with people who feel the need to comment like that? Whether it’s French cinema awards or the welfare of women that you don’t care about, there’s really no need to announce it.
Another les mis? Sacre Bleu
@Kieran Graham: gas
Le Grand Walkout est un coup de théâtre et Polanski se trouve comme un Bad Boy, n’est pas?
Use precise geolocation data. Actively scan device characteristics for identification. Store and/or access information on a device. Personalised advertising and content, advertising and content measurement, audience research and services development.
These cookies are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched off in our systems. They are usually only set in response to actions made by you which amount to a request for services, such as setting your privacy preferences, logging in or filling in forms. You can set your browser to block or alert you about these cookies, but some parts of the site will not then work.
These cookies may be set through our site by our advertising partners. They may be used by those companies to build a profile of your interests and show you relevant adverts on other sites. They do not store directly personal information, but are based on uniquely identifying your browser and internet device. If you do not allow these cookies, you will experience less targeted advertising.
These cookies enable the website to provide enhanced functionality and personalisation. They may be set by us or by third party providers whose services we have added to our pages. If you do not allow these cookies then these services may not function properly.
These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and improve the performance of our site. They help us to know which pages are the most and least popular and see how visitors move around the site. All information these cookies collect is aggregated and therefore anonymous. If you do not allow these cookies we will not be able to monitor our performance.
Cookies, device or similar online identifiers (e.g. login-based identifiers, randomly assigned identifiers, network based identifiers) together with other information (e.g. browser type and information, language, screen size, supported technologies etc.) can be stored or read on your device to recognise it each time it connects to an app or to a website, for one or several of the purposes presented here.
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times an ad is presented to you).
Information about your activity on this service (such as forms you submit, content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (for example, information from your previous activity on this service and other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (that might include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present advertising that appears more relevant based on your possible interests by this and other entities.
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on your advertising profiles, which can reflect your activity on this service or other websites or apps (like the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects.
Information about your activity on this service (for instance, forms you submit, non-advertising content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (such as your previous activity on this service or other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (which might for example include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present content that appears more relevant based on your possible interests, such as by adapting the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find content that matches your interests.
Content presented to you on this service can be based on your content personalisation profiles, which can reflect your activity on this or other services (for instance, the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects. This can for example be used to adapt the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find (non-advertising) content that matches your interests.
Information regarding which advertising is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine how well an advert has worked for you or other users and whether the goals of the advertising were reached. For instance, whether you saw an ad, whether you clicked on it, whether it led you to buy a product or visit a website, etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of advertising campaigns.
Information regarding which content is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine whether the (non-advertising) content e.g. reached its intended audience and matched your interests. For instance, whether you read an article, watch a video, listen to a podcast or look at a product description, how long you spent on this service and the web pages you visit etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of (non-advertising) content that is shown to you.
Reports can be generated based on the combination of data sets (like user profiles, statistics, market research, analytics data) regarding your interactions and those of other users with advertising or (non-advertising) content to identify common characteristics (for instance, to determine which target audiences are more receptive to an ad campaign or to certain contents).
Information about your activity on this service, such as your interaction with ads or content, can be very helpful to improve products and services and to build new products and services based on user interactions, the type of audience, etc. This specific purpose does not include the development or improvement of user profiles and identifiers.
Content presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type, or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times a video or an article is presented to you).
With your acceptance, your precise location (within a radius of less than 500 metres) may be used in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
With your acceptance, certain characteristics specific to your device might be requested and used to distinguish it from other devices (such as the installed fonts or plugins, the resolution of your screen) in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Your data can be used to monitor for and prevent unusual and possibly fraudulent activity (for example, regarding advertising, ad clicks by bots), and ensure systems and processes work properly and securely. It can also be used to correct any problems you, the publisher or the advertiser may encounter in the delivery of content and ads and in your interaction with them.
Certain information (like an IP address or device capabilities) is used to ensure the technical compatibility of the content or advertising, and to facilitate the transmission of the content or ad to your device.
Information about your activity on this service may be matched and combined with other information relating to you and originating from various sources (for instance your activity on a separate online service, your use of a loyalty card in-store, or your answers to a survey), in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
In support of the purposes explained in this notice, your device might be considered as likely linked to other devices that belong to you or your household (for instance because you are logged in to the same service on both your phone and your computer, or because you may use the same Internet connection on both devices).
Your device might be distinguished from other devices based on information it automatically sends when accessing the Internet (for instance, the IP address of your Internet connection or the type of browser you are using) in support of the purposes exposed in this notice.
The choices you make regarding the purposes and entities listed in this notice are saved and made available to those entities in the form of digital signals (such as a string of characters). This is necessary in order to enable both this service and those entities to respect such choices.
have your say