HBO Announces Four-Part Docuseries On Woody Allen Allegations 

The story of Woody Allen and the multitude of allegations made against him throughout the past few decades has been one of the largest scandals in the entertainment industry. Now, one of the most controversial figures in Hollywood will have his life, and all of the allegations made throughout his career, explored in a four-part HBO docuseries called ‘Allen v Farrow.’

The series will use home movies, police evidence, court documents, and never-before-heard audio tapes that will expose and explore the 1992 allegation of sexual abuse against his seven-year-old daughter Dylan Farrow who he had with his then wife, Mia Farrow. The series will also discuss Allen’s marriage to Farrow’s adopted daughter Soon-Yi Previn, the years of controversy after and how Allen was able to remain so relevant after all of it. 

Embed from Getty Images

The four-part series was directed by Kirby Dick, Amy Ziering, and Amy Herdy; the filmmakers behind the documentary film ‘The Hunting Ground,” which explored on campus sexual assault cover ups throughout America, as well as ‘On The Record,’ which discussed the longstanding allegations of sexual assault against hip-hop mogul Russel Simmons. 

‘Allen v Farrow’ will also feature exclusive interviews with Dylan and Mia Farrow, as well as Ronan Farrow; Mia’s son. Other interviews in the series include the New Yorker journalist, family friend Carly Simon, prosecutor Frank Maco, relatives, investigators, experts, and eyewitnesses. The series will also act to explore Allen’s film’s, and how public allegations of sex crimes effect a notable mans image in Hollywood. 

Back in 2017 Dylan Farrow famously wrote an op-ed piece for the Los Angeles Times which begged the question “Why has the #MeToo revolution spared Woody Allen?” After the article was published several prominent Hollywood figures publicly vowed to never work with Allen, including Greta Gerwig, Colin Firth, and Mira Sorvino. 

Embed from Getty Images

Back in 2019, Allen sued Amazon after the company terminated a film deal worth $68 million following controversial statements made about Harvey Weinstein and the #MeToo movement in general. Allen claimed that the movement was “very sad for everyone involved, and you don’t want it to lead to a witch-hunt atmosphere, a Salem atmosphere, where every guy in an office who winks at a woman is suddenly having to call a lawyer to defend himself.” 

Allen has continued to direct films and deny any and all allegations made against him. Back in May 2020 he discussed his memoir and lack of acknowledgement over all of his past allegations: “It doesn’t pay to sue. Do I really want to be a tabloid fodder for two years and go to court? And do I really care?” 

‘Allen v Farrow’ is set to premiere on HBO Max on February 21st. 

Cancel Culture

‘Cancel Culture’ Creates A Gray Area Of Accountability

Cancel culture has become a new wave in the realm of social media, and has been just as beneficial as it has harmful. To “cancel” literally means to destroy, whether that means the effectiveness, validity, or physical form of something, either way there’s a removal of authenticity. When celebrities get “cancelled” it’s referring to general society, and social media users alike, deciding to strip you of your platform due to personal reasons or a public shaming. For example, Kevin Spacey no longer being offered any acting roles and termination from any current acting roles he had at the time that his sexual assault cases came to light. The whole idea of cancelling people was born with the #MeToo movement and originally started with making sure men were held accountable, publicly scrutinized for their crimes, and taken out of any sort of spotlight, unless it was coverage of their court cases. 

We saw it happen to Matt Lauer, Harvey Weinstein, Louis C.K., etc. and rightfully so, no one should get away with using their power to intimidate and coerce others into doing something they don’t want to do. However, the cancel culture movement has begun to take a turn that has left many social media users confused on who they’re allowed to publicly support or not. People attempt to “cancel” singers and actors when they say one comment that maybe their fans don’t agree with, and from that point on the individual is branded with the scarlet letter of their mis-wordings. Many individuals attempted to cancel Taylor Swift, for her lack of political involvement when she has such a large conservative following, and more traditional first wave feminist lyrics. However, Swift took a turn within the past year, being very outspoken about her discontent with Trump and advocacy for the LGBT+ community. So it becomes a weird grey area that gets complex especially when social media is involved and personal vendetta against specific celebrities snowball into a multitude of reasoning’s behind stripping someone of their platform. 

“Cancelling” also doesn’t always work. Jenna Wortham, a culture writer for the New York Times, contemplated this phenomenon in regards to individuals who have been “cancelled” for serious crimes but still went on to gain success within their industry, such as Micheal Jackson and Chris Brown. She says “…Jackson is still everywhere. His songs influenced generations of musicians. It simply isn’t possible to totally cancel him. So it (cancel culture) doesn’t really work, you can’t just cut problematic people and problematic cultural properties or entities out because it’s whack-a-mole, right? You’re dealing with the symptoms of a sick society rather than actually treating the disease.”

Within the past year we’ve mainly seen “cancelling” in the form of old social media posts from celebrities that would now be considered offensive and insensitive. However, more times than not these celebrities were young teenagers when they tweeted whatever they get exposed for, we also need to remember how different humor was even just ten years ago. Humor was rooted in sexism, racism, homophobia, basically stereotyping in general was high at the time in regards to what was considered “comedy.” That doesn’t excuse any of the behaviour or content that’s come to light, but it does, yet again, create a tricky grey area. It seems that “cancelling” someone is less about holding someone accountable for a real consistent wrongdoing, and more gaslighting of one mistake made many years ago to distract from bigger issues. When a celebrity gets outed for something they said, or did, years ago that is deemed as inappropriate, offensive, or just straight up illegal, they should be held accountable, but we also shouldn’t let it tarnish complete careers/reputations. Obviously, every case is subjective and different, so we really can’t generalize when it comes to who should be cancelled and who shouldn’t, but we should make sure we’re paying attention, and engaging in discussions.

Comedian Billy Eichner took to Twitter a few months ago amid old homophobic tweets from Kevin Hart resurfacing which lead to his termination from hosting the Oscars. “I’m not into people being permanently ‘cancelled’ over something like this. To me, ‘cancellation’ is childish. I’m into conversation, not cancellation. I’m into owning up to past mistakes, acknowledging blindspots and hurtful remarks, talking through it, discussing it, learning, moving past it and making progress together. To cancel someone immediately, is denying them that opportunity to learn and grow.”

Eichner is making a lot of valid points and while this is commentating specifically on the aspect of cancelling culture that is scrutiny over past offensive tweets, jokes, etc. it speaks volumes to how quickly we as a society are ready to change our thoughts on an individual based on public perception. It needs to be more about a discussion around what was deemed offensive, why it’s offensive, and how the person plans to make up and grow from it. 

While cancel culture isn’t always valid, sometimes is over reactive, and is basically all based around grey areas of accountability, it does, at least, do just that; hold individuals accountable.