AVALIAÇÃO DA IMDb
6,7/10
8,1 mil
SUA AVALIAÇÃO
Um olhar por trás dos anos de manchetes sensacionalistas para revelar a história privada da alegação de abuso sexual contra Woody Allen envolvendo sua filha de 7 anos e Mia Farrow.Um olhar por trás dos anos de manchetes sensacionalistas para revelar a história privada da alegação de abuso sexual contra Woody Allen envolvendo sua filha de 7 anos e Mia Farrow.Um olhar por trás dos anos de manchetes sensacionalistas para revelar a história privada da alegação de abuso sexual contra Woody Allen envolvendo sua filha de 7 anos e Mia Farrow.
- Indicado para 7 Primetime Emmys
- 16 indicações no total
Explorar episódios
Resumo
Reviewers say 'Allen v. Farrow' delves into the allegations against Woody Allen, highlighting Mia and Dylan Farrow's claims. It scrutinizes family dynamics, Allen's relationship with Soon-Yi Previn, and the sexual abuse allegations. The documentary uses interviews, videos, and documents to build its narrative. Critics claim it is biased due to Allen's absent perspective, whereas supporters commend it for amplifying victims' voices and uncovering alleged misconduct. It also discusses celebrity influence on public opinion and the legal system's case management.
Avaliações em destaque
I grew up with Woody Allen's humor which I appreciate much more than his films, not all of which are comedies. His stand-up stuff and the goofy books he wrote ("Without Feathers" and "Side Effects") along with the Marx Bothers shaped my sense of humor. Allen was a complete original and a comic genius.
I thought he was creepy ever since I saw "Manhattan" when it premiered in 1979 and his character is dating a 17-year-old girl when he's in his mid-40s. Sorry, there is no scenario when that isn't just creepy, not even in a movie-especially not in a movie. File that movie under "Ew." He made an actual movie about having sex with a child. What more evidence does anyone need?
If you needed further evidence to his creepiness, he married his step-daughter, or whatever she was. Dude, if you don't want to sully your reputations, stay away from children.
Then we learn in this documentary that Allen's favorite foreplay is watching his partner play with Lego®.
Rim shot, polite clapping, and I take a bow.
Goodnight, ladies and gentlemen. I'm here six nights a week with a matinee on Saturdays.
I thought he was creepy ever since I saw "Manhattan" when it premiered in 1979 and his character is dating a 17-year-old girl when he's in his mid-40s. Sorry, there is no scenario when that isn't just creepy, not even in a movie-especially not in a movie. File that movie under "Ew." He made an actual movie about having sex with a child. What more evidence does anyone need?
If you needed further evidence to his creepiness, he married his step-daughter, or whatever she was. Dude, if you don't want to sully your reputations, stay away from children.
Then we learn in this documentary that Allen's favorite foreplay is watching his partner play with Lego®.
Rim shot, polite clapping, and I take a bow.
Goodnight, ladies and gentlemen. I'm here six nights a week with a matinee on Saturdays.
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.
I've only seen Part 1 of this 3 part series but I kept having flashbacks to Leaving Neverland . And how similar Dylan Farrow's testimony is to the allegation made by Michael Jackson's victims. Both Jackson and Allen have a fanbase that would chose not to believe and accuse the victim. . Both men used the same grooming tactics. The tactics of isolating Dylan from other family member including her mother. . Jackson employed the same methods. Showering extreme affection on one child.. Both Allen and Jackson had private designated areas to take their victims for intimate "alone " time'. And the parents were somewhat aware or made aware of going ons but chose to be complacent.
Now many will deny and make excuses for these two men because they were great entertainers . But a rapist doesn't' assault every woman. Dog abusers don't abuse every dog they own. And just because someone give millions to charity and claims to adore all children does not mean he didn't sexually abuse some.
This is a well-edited recount of the early days of a rather perverse plot. It's always been easy to criticize Mia Farrow for just assembling a huge family of children to care for, but that is less of a target here. The slow-burn of Allen's "inappropriate" behavior with selected children is intriguing...and you just want to know more. Why? Because it is downright weird. It's about time someone documented this story and let people make up their own minds. This is a good documentary.
As someone who was also the victim of child sex abuse by a step-father, I can easily relate to Dylan's story. And I am also one of those who was lucky enough to have a mother who believed me when I told her what had been going on for 4 years right under her nose. Although she immediately took me out of harm's way and divorced the man, he was not prosecuted for the same reason Allen wasn't... they didn't want to traumatize me anymore than I had already been. My memories are as clear today as they were more than 60 years ago as to what happened to me, and I have zero doubt that it is the same for Dylan.
One thing that Allen's supporters seem to ignore is that it takes time to coach a child into a story like this and Dylan's story was revealed very, very shortly after it happened. Hardly enough time for Mia to have convinced her daughter of something that hadn't really happened, I would say.
Anyway, I think the producers allowed Allen to have his say, even though he refused any personal interviews for this story. In my book, that is fair and unbiased reporting. Two thumbs up for this informative and worthwhile film series.
One thing that Allen's supporters seem to ignore is that it takes time to coach a child into a story like this and Dylan's story was revealed very, very shortly after it happened. Hardly enough time for Mia to have convinced her daughter of something that hadn't really happened, I would say.
Anyway, I think the producers allowed Allen to have his say, even though he refused any personal interviews for this story. In my book, that is fair and unbiased reporting. Two thumbs up for this informative and worthwhile film series.
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesAlthough 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.
- ConexõesFeatured in Entertainment Tonight Canada: Episode dated 22 February 2021 (2021)
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- País de origem
- Central de atendimento oficial
- Idioma
- Também conhecido como
- Allen v. Farrow
- Empresas de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
- Tempo de duração1 hora 4 minutos
- Cor
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente
Principal brecha
By what name was Allen contra Farrow (2021) officially released in India in English?
Responda