From "Polanski Controversy" to "Hanell Incident"
Roman Polanski was born in Paris, France in 1933 to a Jewish father and a half Jewish mother. In 1936 the Polanski family moved to Krakow, Poland. After the start of World War II, Krakow was quickly occupied by Germany, Polanski was driven into the Krakow ghetto, his father was sent to the Austrian concentration camp Mauthausen-Gusen, and his mother was sent to to Auschwitz and died shortly after arriving. After the war, Polanski was reunited with his father and moved back to Krakow.
Polanski started filmmaking in Poland and France in the early days, and later moved to Hollywood at the suggestion of Robert Evans, the director of Paramount Films. His 252-page screenplay based on the horror novel of the same name was a box-office hit and an Oscar nomination for his first Hollywood film, "Rosemary's Baby," in three weeks. After that, he also directed the excellent crime film "Chinatown", and the film "The Pianist", which reflected the persecuted Jewish pianists in World War II, won the Palme d'Or and Academy Awards at the Cannes Film Festival. In addition, Polanski's directorial career has many excellent works, such as: "Bitter Moon" and "Venus in Furs", which exposed lust and human nature, "Oliver Twist" and "Tess" adapted from classic drama works "Macbeth".
On August 9, 1969, Polanski's eight-month-pregnant wife and four others were brutally murdered by the "Manson Family", a murder group led by Charles Manson, at their Los Angeles home. The murderers were all hippies who had been brainwashed by Manson. They believed that "Rosemary's Baby" was a signal that the killing method was extremely cruel and there was no remorse when they were arrested. A major story in Quentin Tarantino's 2019 film Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is based on this event and rewrites history in its own way.
On March 11, 1977, Polanski was arrested in Los Angeles, accused of sexually abusing 13-year-old Samantha Gaymer during a photo shoot for the French magazine Vogue. Polanski was charged with six counts, including rape, all of which he pleaded not in court. Samantha's lawyers next arranged a plea bargain, five counts to be dropped, and Polanski accepted the offer. But Polanski fled the United States before the final sentencing, so the charges were not dropped. Polanski's agreement to plead guilty and to flee the United States before his final trial was almost a confession of his own guilt. From then until today, Polanski could not set foot in the United States or countries with extradition regulations with the United States, otherwise he would be arrested immediately.
As the voice of feminism has attracted more and more attention in recent years and has gradually become the mainstream of society, the criticism against Polanski has risen again. At this time, Polanski launched his new film "I Accused", which described the world-famous "Dreyfus Case" in France before the First World War. Opponents of Polanski believe that the themes of injustice and anti-Semitism in the film are reflections and quibbles of the director's personal experience, and the film's multiple nominations at the French Caesar Awards and the Venice Film Festival have set off a wave of opposition. Venice The head of the jury for the main competition, Lucecia Martel, spoke out against it. Adela Harnell, who was nominated for a Caesar Award for "Portrait of a Woman on Fire," walked out in protest after learning of Polanski's award.
Adela Hanel is 30 years old this year. She has won the Caesar Award twice and has been selected for 16 films in Cannes. She is a French first-line movie star. On November 14, 2019, French media Mediapart reported that between the ages of 12 and 15, she was sexually assaulted by director Christophe Lucia, who was nearly 40 years old. In the #MeToo movement, Janel also became France's first A-list star to "break the silence". This sensational news has drawn more attention to the sexual assault incident. After the official release of "I Complain", some theaters will play Hanel's interview video before the film is released.
For a while, everything from the personal indictment of Polanski to whether the creators should be judged separately from the works became the center of the debate, even causing quarrels and protests.
What is I Complaining about?
Polanski's new film tells a story:
A young Jewish captain, Dreyfus, was charged with treason and was dismissed from the military and exiled to Alcatraz. The investigation and trial process was riddled with bias, hasty and irregularities, as anti-Semitism was rife in France at the time . However, there are still people who pursue the truth in the society who discovered the irrationality of the whole incident and insisted on seeking the truth. After twists and turns of investigation, trial and protest, as the truth behind it was gradually exposed, Dreyfus finally got his way in 1906. rehabilitated.
After Dreyfus's vindication, French society had to face up to its own anti-Semitic tradition, and in the large-scale debate, progressive pioneers such as Emile Zola made many meaningful remarks. This event also led to the birth of the Tour de France.
Such a famous historical event is very easy for Polanski, who is good at dramatic conflict, to navigate. There are also multiple characters' experiences in this historical event that can be used as an entry point. For example, Dreyfus himself, the wrongful conviction of the case, the public sentence in the square, and the anti-Semitic remarks of the people were not the beginning of racial discrimination against him. He had already felt all kinds of prejudice during his education in the military school. And the vindication of the wrongful case is not an unfair end. The years Dreyfus lost due to serving his sentence have not been squared up, and the correction of his own faults by the army and the court is not reflected in his rank. The unfair treatment of these personal perspectives can well reflect the problems of French society and government at that time, and the humiliation and torture Dreyfus suffered during his imprisonment in Alcatraz also aroused the sympathy of the audience, which caused a strong dramatic effect.
From the perspective of Dreyfus’s lawyer or writer Emile Zola, it is also possible, whether it is an upright lawyer who defends the dignity of the law in the face of power, or a person who exposes the crimes of the privileged class with sharp articles despite the strong opposition from society. Progressive writers, no doubt, can tell compelling stories.
However, Polanski chose Colonel Picard as the character to be followed by the camera to unfold the entire historical event. After watching the effect presented by the film, one has to sigh Polanski's talent. Colonel Picard, as a member of the army, was also directly involved in the first trial of Dreyfus. Picard's obedience to orders when he didn't know the truth at the beginning, to his voice for the truth almost betraying the army, coupled with the contrast between Picard and the racists who united in the army, made Picard's integrity vertically and It has been three-dimensionally shaped horizontally. In addition, Picard is a high-level military member, and he is not a revolutionary. He is essentially loyal to the army and the country , so we can watch the whole incident from Picard's perspective, including the above. All the key information from the perspective of several people, and not as emotionally charged as from a lawyer, Zola, or Dreyfus himself. This naturally makes the whole film less dramatic, but instead, the restraint and the still tense atmosphere at key moments give the film a uniquely calm, objective and powerful viewing experience.
Polanski's most blunt indictment in My Indictment is an indictment of the unfair treatment of Dreyfus personally by the military and the state's privileged class, as well as an indictment of the anti-Semitism that was prevalent in France at that time. However, it is not difficult to see from the film that Polanski still wants to express some personal justifications for him through the mouth of this film. In the era of the movie, anti-Semitism was "political correctness", so when Dreyfus, a Jew, was humiliated in public in the square, the crowd was also agitated to insult the "traitor", and when Zola published a criticism of the current situation and the military, when the famous article in support of Dreyfus' innocence came together, angry people gathered to burn the newspaper that published the article. Polanski's description of these scenes in a large amount of space is undoubtedly insinuating the violent side of mass public opinion, implying that feminism is the new "political correctness" of the contemporary era, and his works should not be banned and protested.
accusation, controversy, debate
In the Metoo movement sweeping across Europe and the United States, France has its own special situation. In January 2018, more than 100 women in France spoke out in support of men's freedom of chatting, including the famous French actress Catherine Deneuve. This social voice thinks that France is not America and they do not profess Puritanism. And no matter what society, even if there are so many women speaking side by side, it is still so difficult to break the silence. For example, a woman like Hanel, who has only publicly complained after many years, often asks why she did not report the case immediately, but suddenly after many years Revisited. In addition, there are many remarks in favor of men. For example, only when a director falls in love with his actor can he better create a screen image. Polanski himself has directly stated that "everyone likes girls".
However, with a little thought, none of these views hold or apply to Polanski. It is mostly helpless to speak out and complain after many years. After all, in the social environment a few decades ago, women who have been violated may suffer secondary harm from incomprehensible voices after speaking out in public, that is, social prejudice such as slut humiliation ( Sadly, this phenomenon persists into contemporary times). And how can a teenage girl resist a powerful director? French flirting or romance can indeed be regarded as a unique cultural behavior, and directors and actors are also independent individuals who have the right to love freely. But falling in love with an actress is one thing, sexual assault and harassment are another; and sexual violence and lust are two different things. So not only is "everyone likes girls" a controversial statement, liking is by no means the same as being violated. Polanski's crimes are irrefutable, and he has done the damage to the little girl for a lifetime.
So should we judge directors and productions separately? Should we ban a director's work because of his conduct? The fact is that in today's society, these issues are still inconclusive. If we associate private morality with artistic creation, we will get the following conclusion: people who violate the law and commit crimes cannot create great works, only people with high morals In order to carry out artistic creation, this is obviously not a tenable conclusion. There are also many unresolved issues: liberals have always been cautious about censorship and blocking. If you start blocking authors, where are the boundaries of blocking? Who will make these rules? If these problems cannot be dealt with in a balanced way, it is very likely that one step will lead to mind control. Not only will the creators who committed crimes be banned, but those who are not in line with the political concept of the authorities may also lose sight of the light of the system. . Censorship and the self-castration of creators will form a vicious circle, and the heavy gravity of reality will make all detached and flying thoughts slam to the ground.
These discussions were tentatively inconclusive and often turned into chaotic squabbles, though until a sweeping change was made. But this kind of free discussion is undoubtedly meaningful, at least allowing us to re-examine the contemporary power structure and see the dark corners hidden behind the sun. After all, in the 20th century not far from now, provisions such as "men are the masters of the family" and "employers can legally dismiss pregnant women" are still written in American laws, and the burning of newspapers in "I Complaint" also It's still happening in every corner of the world. Contemporary society is far from perfect equality and peace, and it seems that it never will.
The need for a complaint
So far, the film industry of various countries has not banned Polanski's films on a large scale. As audiences, whether to watch his films is also a personal free choice.
But I hope that fans who choose to watch his films will be able to change their perspective, just as we look at the female images that appeared as prizes for male heroes in Hollywood movies of the last century, or the movies that were castrated by censorship at a certain time or anti-Semitic. the same as the movie. We can no longer watch these films from a single viewing angle like the audiences in that era, and when we watch Polanski's films, we must not only have the attitude of appreciating the new works of "great directors", but also be aware of this Man is a rapist. Can the creative ideas hidden in his works reveal his criminal mind? Are some of his apparently ulterior motives of film language self-defense? This kind of attention can be throughout the viewing process, or it can be reflected after focusing on the film, but it cannot be ignored. After all, we have to sadly admit that the pure screen is gone, and since the film world has gradually become an ideological battlefield, we can no longer maintain pure appreciation.
View more about An Officer and a Spy reviews
