Marina Zenovich: Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired (2008)

[Chris Knipp]

Marina Zenovich: Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired (2008)

The media, the law, and a famous director

Review by Chris Knipp

Roman Polanski's name, while illustrious, is clouded by both tragedy and scandal. Tragedy because his parents died in the Holocaust and his wife Sharon Tate, when eight months pregnant, was horribly murdered in the Manson Family massacre, scandal because of a notorious case of sex with a minor that led to his flight from the United States, where he is still "wanted." In France he is "desired," and then some. A lifelong French citizen and a member of the Academie des Beaux Arts, he is part of the cultural establishment there, and he has received frequent European awards. The Polanski of Knife in the Water, Repulsion, The Tenant, Rosemary's Baby, Chinatown and The Pianist is a great director, but a flawed man. He never denied that he liked young girls. "I think most men do," he says in this film. Partying and women were essential to his life, and also partly how he coped with a singularly heavy past. This documentary shown on HBO and in a handful of theaters focuses on the 1977 case when Polanski was 43 and eventually pleaded guilty in a media-blitzed Santa Monica trial to the charge of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, 13-year-old Samantha Geimer, whom he plied with champagne and quaaludes during a photo shoot for Vogue at which no one else was present. The film explains what happened and why Polansi left this country before the trial was quite over and has never returned since.

Mainly this is a story of media frenzy and a corrupt, foolish judge, Laurence J. Rittenband. In determining the case, it emerges, Rittenband was so frivolous and uncertain that he sought and followed advice from a cub reporter, his two girlfriends, and his bailiff. The course this celebrity-mad magistrate ultimately followed was illegal. The upright defense lawyer, Samantha Geimer's lawyer, the lawyer for the prosecution and Geimer herself, all of whom contribute to the documentary, have nothing positive to say about Rittenband. His conduct of the case is shown to have been contradictory, erratic, and profoundly injudicious. Polanski, it emerges, did not flee "justice" under the California DA's office, to which he had willingly submitted, but the unpredictability of Judge Rittenband.

Director Zenovich seeks to show that some media-mad American judges (Rittenband is clearly not the only one) cannot be relied upon for justice or even sane behavior when celebrities are on trial. You have to watch the movie to get the intricate, far-fetched details of Rittenband's oscillating procedures, which wind up with him hoping to get the lawyers' complicity in his pretending to give a more severe sentence--to give the media what he thought it craved--than was justified by the case. Note: unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor was the only charge that held, not rape or anything else, and the decision from various sides was that Polanski should be given probation. In an earlier compromise Rittenband had already confined him to the California State Prison at Chico for 43 days of "observation" in that dangerous environment, misusing this procedure as a sentence. After the judge's erratic behavior, neither defense nor prosecution lawyers had any confidence that he would hand down a logical or appropriate sentence if Polanski submitted again. The film conveys a sense that the director had endured enough.

Though the film doesn't say so, it seems important to note that Polanski was never a resident of the US but only here on visits to make a few films and a longtime resident of England. Hence his 30-year absence from the US to avoid legal hassles is "exile" from a country he never intended to make his permanent home. He was offered the option to return to complete the trial with the same lawyers and a new judge and the promise of no sentence ten years ago, but ironically that judge insisted the proceedings be televised, so Polanski refused. Many Americans, conditioned by the media hysteria of those years, continue to see the diminutive Polanski, a horror movie director in his mid-career, as a monster "dwarf" of dark intent.

The film also presents much information about Polanski's life, with glowing descriptions by friends and associates of his talent, his technical rigor, and his joie de vivre. To the film's credit, it speaks in favor of Polanski (even his victim has forgiven him) without in any way seeking to gloss over any of his misconduct. In interview excerpts from various times he never tries to excuse himself either--even at the height of the scandal, which came on top of the Sharon Tate murder and his depiction at that time as somehow to blame for what was in fact a great personal tragedy for him.

Wanted and Desired may surprise and shock in its careful rehabilitation of the director's personal reputation for American viewers. The whole case, through the cooperation of the principals, is outlined with admirable thoroughness. Alas, there is not as much as there could have been about the larger themes of sex crime and the corrupting effects of media overexposure and celebrity worship on the American legal system. Zenovich has wielded her magnifying glass with skill, but if she'd stepped back for a longer look her film could have taken on more significance.

Seen at the Roxie Film Center, San Francisco. The composer, Joe Rudge was on hand for a Q&A after the screening.

[oscar jubis]

Polanski was arrested in Switzerland yesterday. Extradition procedures to follow. Read Variety's coverage here:http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118009235.html?categoryid=10&cs=1&nid=2248

[Chris Knipp]

The CNN article about the arrest and possibilities is here. (m/2009/CRIME/09/27/zurich.roman.polanski.arrested/index.html)

[cinemabon]

In the past few days, several people have come forward with a variety of opinions on this case, the least of which outspoken Whoopi Goldberg all but pardoned Polanski on The View (parodied two days later by SNL on Thursday night).

I thought you gave an interesting review of the HBO special while leaving out many of the details surrounding the case, especially how the victim and parent (s) of the victim were used to manipulate the media. I was in LA during the trial. It was a feeding frenzy, worse than OJ, since the press were all out to paint Polanski as a rapist (as they did Errol Flynn).

Hollywood is now in a tug of war with itself. One camp is all a flutter that a fellow celebrite is being persecuted. However, as we have seen recently with Robert Blake and Phil Spector, OJ kind of spoiled the party. The other camp, led by rights advocates, is ready to string Polanski up the moment he steps ashore. RAPIST! The blogosphere is buzzing with venom.

If the public only knew how teenagers, especially young teenagers, are abused in Hollywood every day, they would not be shocked by a producer or director having his way with a young woman who flirted with an older man and seduced her. Many teenagers, young teenagers, work on the streets as prostitutes, many gay "celebrity men" have sex with teens 14 and 15 years of age. This "chicken hawk" lifestyle has been around for a long time, as well as "sugar daddies" who go for young teenage girls, often dressed up to look older. I don't see anyone flocking to end this system of underage prostitution. The last time I looked, it was a thriving industry, especially in New York, Miami, San Francisco, and Washington D.C.!

While everyone can agree, child pornography is sick and should be stopped at all costs. However, at what point does a boy or girl stop being a child and starts being an adult? Is 14 too young? Is 15? The legal age is 18 in most states, but consenting age is 16 here in North Carolina (yep, that's right). Yet, politicians, celebrities, and many other people in positions of power go for teenagers much younger than 18... and many, if not most, get away with it. So Polanski got caught. After living in Hollywood, I'm not impressed. Tell me something I don't know.

[Johann]

I think Roman Polanski has paid for his crime.
He's had it hanging over his head for more than 30 years, and he's never "raped" anyone since then. Angelica Huston was in the house at the time of the crime, and she's on record as saying that Polanski is not "a bad man". And he's not.
He's a brilliant Oscar-winning filmmaker who has made enormous cultural and historical contributions to the human race.
I think a judge would have to take that into consideration.
Personally, I think Polanski was just a horny guy who pushed his luck by having sex with a 13-year old girl. He should have known better and running away did not help him at all, as we now see.
The victim was offered half a million dollars in compensation for her ordeal. That also must be taken into account.

I have a question.
If a girl can start her period as young as age 11, what does that mean? Huh? Think about it. Why is it that nature determines a girl can get pregnant at a very young age? If sex with minors is absolutely forbidden, then why does NATURE ITSELF dictate that pregnancy can occur at a very young age?
I'm not saying men should sleep with young girls. At all. That is obviously so wrong it hurts.
I'm just asking why does nature allow it yet it is so wrong?
Were humans supposed to be free sexually at young ages?
Boys have the "plumbing turned on" at a very young age too.
Nobody wants to talk about that. God himself gave humans the ability to procreate at a very young age. But we have to avoid that like the black plague. Hey, it's a valid question: Why do we as a species have to suppress sexuality until we're adults?
We're equipped to get it on very young.
I have my own answer to the question, but I just wanted to see what people think here.

Don't tell me the "authorities" are gonna hang this 70+ year old Master over this? He should've face justice 30 years ago.
He didn't. If they couldn't ship him back, border to border back then or any day since then, then he should be left alone.
Justice wasn't served. They knew where he was all this time. He wasn't really "hiding". In fact he was quite visible.
People get away with crimes far worse than his, and they certainly don't make classic films or win Oscars.
Context is essential on this case.

[cinemabon]

After having studied anthropology and biology, I can perhaps put a face on some of your questions regarding why women and men mature early.

First of all, we were never intended by our evolutionary path to live for one hundred years. Our species should probably live 60 or perhaps 70 years tops. Life prolonging discoveries in the last century changed that. Mortality rates dropped and with it, our population boomed (mostly due to prosperity). We have isolated our species from nature by living in houses (apartments included). This means we are not exposed to predators, bacteria, viruses, or insects that added to our attrition. As we first evolved, so did our biological clock, which allowed our species to mature quickly so that we could bear offspring faster. Most men and women were meant to make babies in their teen years when their bodies can recover from the rigors of reproduction. Women's breasts and vaginas change in their twenties and men's sperm production along with their virility drops after the age of twenty!

Second is the cultural and moral aspect. We live in a puritanical society, shaped by the Puritans who started this country. That influence has never left. Disgusted with the lack of morality they found in Europe, religious fanatics came to America and literally founded the place. These high minded people shaped our constitution and our moral outlook on life. As far as prudes go, we are near the top of the list (although the Middle East probably has us beat by a mile). While no one wants to or even advocates to sexually exploit children, most countries, especially the Middle East and Asia, don't mind exploiting them for labor. Our society went the extreme opposite way and pushed adulthood out of the teen years, mostly because of our secondary school system which keeps teenagers in school until the age of eighteen. Therefore, they live at home and are under the influence of their parents. This was NEVER the case until the 19th Century, when social mores began to influence legislation in America and England. Europe followed suit along with the rest of the world when 20th Century America crammed its morality down their throats (let us not forget Victorian England as they helped contribute to this attitude).

Add these two things, biological and social aspects, together and you have a repressive society that forbids contact between adults and teenagers, whom the law still regards as children despite their ability to reproduce or act independent of their parents. We have made 18 the magic number and stubbornly resist any change in lowering that number. So it is the law. I'm surprised the Bush Republicans didn't try to raise the age of most things back to 21 (where it was during the 1950's), including consentual sex. By the age of twenty one, most women have sagging breasts and even the most ardent teenager has begun to lose his luster for sexual appetites.

Encourage teen pregnancy? Absolutely not, unless... unless you are independently wealthy, have a secure home away from parents, and are capable of devotion to the children without interference. But in our society, who can do that? Therefore we are stuck with the system we have, full of faults and a legal system that shows little mercy for the innocent.

[Chris Knipp]

It's culture, not nature that's in play here I agree. It's also which way the wind blows. Schwarzenegger says Polalnski should pay because he doen'st want to look too "liberal" to his base. The right could care less that the woman in the case has forgiven RP and wants the case dismissed and her life allowed to go on. Sarkozy used to dine with RP but now hints are dropped that the French support is fading -- in violation of the rule that the French don't extradite their citizens and RP is a French citizen. Because politicians like to see which way the wind blows. As for the time period, yes, the current arrest is completely arbitrary, but all statutes of limitations on sex crimes against minors seem to have been dropped and it is probably still legal to nab RP at any time. Or maybe not. Some autoritative lawyers have said that the extradition will be dropped.

Earlier this week, both France and Poland wrote a controversial official letter to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton calling for Polanski's release, saying he was being persecuted because of his celebrity.

President Nicolas Sarkozy's administration has so far stuck by the 76-year-old, who was born and lives in Paris, saying he should be released from prison. But government spokesman Luc Chatel said Polanski should face justice because he 'is neither above nor beneath the law'. Mr Chatel said: 'We have a judicial procedure under way, for a serious affair, the rape of a minor, on which the American and Swiss legal systems are doing their job.' --UK Daily Mail

[Johann]

Great replies. Thanks.

It's definitely our culture that influences these things.
The right definitely do not entertain the idea that he's been forgiven by his victim. That's so Christian of them...is forgiveness not in their vocabulary? Cripes...

I hope they feel all warm and fuzzy inside nailing a man who hasn't commited any crimes of this nature since. If he was a serial rapist and never learned his lesson, then yeah, nail his ass to the wall. But he's been nothing but a cultural beacon ever since he fled the U.S.
What would they like to see?
What would the victim like to see?
Hasn't this haunted everybody for so long that it's just bad news all around? Where is the good in this arrest?
He's 76 years old. I don't see him as a threat in these golden years. Let God deal with him when he passes..

[Johann]

I finally got a membership at Invisible Cinema (best video store in Ottawa!) and I'm holding a mini-film fest tonight.
I plan on watching 6 films in a row:

Polanski: Wanted and Desired
Too Tough To Die (a doc on Johnny Ramone)
Man on Wire
The U.S. vs. John Lennon
My Winnipeg
and
The White Stripes: Under Great White Northern Lights

I'll post on 'em all.

[oscar jubis]

Doc night, uh? Great selection, man.

[Johann]

Hard to pick, but yeah, I find I'm going more for documentaries nowadays than features.
These are all ones I wanted to see badly, so I got 'em.

My postings should be in much greater quantity this year.
Invisible Cinema has had a credit-card only policy for years (to keep the rare film thieves at bay) and now they've lifted that policy.
Now you can give them a deposit and get it back when you return the film.
It used to suck because I would browse in there and get annoyed that I couldn't rent anything. Not that my credit is bad, I just have no use for credit cards.
They've got all the world cinema and rare shit that I need.
A friend of mine is a classmate of the owner. They both go to Carlton U and are studying film.
I'd work there, but the store only has two employees and they are NEVER giving up their jobs.
Don't blame 'em...

[Johann]

Wow.

This well put together documentary by Marina Zenovich gives us the proper information and context on Roman Polanski vs. the State of California.
My emotions went up and down while watching this.
Polanski is one of my favorite directors, and after seeing this film, my admiration for him is even higher. But believe it or not there are things revealed about him in Wanted and Desired that almost made me say "hang that fucker".
He didn't help his case much, as I'll explain.

This is gonna be a tough one to review.

First things first: Polanski did not "flee".
As this doc shows, he complied with every single authority and lawyer he was asked to.
His "fleeing" was a result of piss poor judgements by a media-hungry Judge Rittenband.
This guy makes the O.J. trial's Judge Ito look like a kid toying with the media.
He made scrapbooks of media clippings and pulled it out in his office whenever he wanted, he struck *illegal* deals with both the prosecution and defence teams because he didn't know what to do with Polanski. He held a press conference- what Judge has ever held a press conference??
A huge part of this debacle was the 90 day assessment that was ordered of Polanski in lieu of county jail time. He served 42 days and was let out. I still don't know why exactly that happened. It's clear that the judge wanted to keep up appearances of justice for the salivating media.

Polanski and his lawyer thought that the recommended probation was gonna be the end of it. But then everything got fubar'd.

And Polanski did not help himself at all when he went to Germany and attended that Oktoberfest.
I never knew or heard about that part of the case. There he was, flanked by babes, smoking a huge cigar, with a look on his face like "I'm not going to jail for my sexual mistakes". I was shocked at that, and so was everyone else.
Judge Rittenband was then out for blood. "That arrogant little Pollack won't get away with this" was his mantra.
Polanski was allowed to leave America to shoot his film with Dino DeLaurentis, which was because of all the money and livelihoods that were at stake with Polanski's career. A deal was struck to postpone actual jail time until absolutely necessary, in increments. It was a farce.

Another thing that didn't help Roman was his obliviousness to the seriousness of this crime.
It didn't even register with him that it was wrong to have sex with a 13 year-old girl.
He was in a fantasy land!
But the girl's mother was no saint- she was a Z-grade "actress" who thought it would be a great idea to have her daughter model for Roman Polanski- it could be the gateway to a film career. The victim Samantha says "leave my mother alone- it wasn't her fault".
This girl was naked in a jacuzzi while Polanski snapped photos, which in an eye-opening revelation, we're told about the scenes in his films where women are naked in water, being photographed: it was a fetish of Roman's, and it's determined to be a "theme".
I had never considered that before.

Then he gives her champagne with quaaludes. Then...you know the rest.
The shit hit the fan.
He was totally oblivious to the crime, like it was just a normal day for him. That aspect of this case lessened my ability to defend the man.
The juxtaposition of scenes from his films with the real-life court dramas weighs on your psyche too.
You don't know whether to condemn or stand by the man. If you're a fan of his films it's damn hard to condemn him- this whole part of his career is an utterly awful thing to consider. Friends of his say he does not fit the quote unquote "RAPIST" tag.
And he doesn't.
He just made a tremendously serious error in judgment. The girl was more damaged by the media circus and scrutiny than anything Polanski did.
In fact, I gleaned from her that she has her own part to own up to. She has a look in her eye that tells me she knew what could have happened in the company of Polanski- I even wonder if her mother told her to do whatever Roman asked. He was big-time Hollywood mover and shaker. What did she have to lose? The forces were all there for scandal.....
Plenty of blame to go around, I think.
Samantha publicly forgave Roman in 1997.
His film career flourished in the decades following this debacle.
He won the Palme D'or, he won an Oscar, he became a member of the Academie des Beaux Arts in France, he's hardly looked back.

It was pointed out in the film that this man has endured more devastating blows to his psyche than most normal people could even contemplate.
And he kept having huge triumphs in his chosen career field. He had the ability to overcome his demons and give bold and exciting cinematic works to the world. For that I admire the Holy Hell out of the man. But his sexual preference of *very* young girls gave him a stigma and stain that would destroy lesser men. I mean, how do you recover from being slapped with the "CHILD MOLESTER" tag?

This film will wag tongues.

[Chris Knipp]

That is an excellent summary -- you were paying very good attention -- though you don't give certain details of the trial that explain why he fled as he did. Also that it was a media circus to the Nth degree, making the trial very distorted, and the questionable behavior history of the judge. My memory is somewhat incomplete now three years after seeing the film at the Roxie Theater in San Francisco (which has some special showings of films not released elsewhere).

Recently it has been commented that Polanski's settling in France, apropos of the current Dominique Stauss-Kahn (DSK) case, may relate in part to the indulgent attitude of the French toward men who are predatory womanizers. He has been fully forgiven in France, given high honors and high access, and the French have interceded for him when they could. The French passion for cinema is another factor. A director is an artist to them, and an artist, for him we make allowances.