It tends to be the case that New York-born ilk stick together. Even when they each hail from the Montague-Capulet divide of Manhattan and Brooklyn. This could be, in part, why Scarlett Johansson, born in the former borough, has openly defended Woody Allen, born in the latter, and whom she has worked with three times (Match Point, Scoop and Vicky Cristina Barcelona) in a mid-00s period of serving as his muse. Her defense comes at a point when the director has joined some other scorned men (Roman Polanski, Kevin Spacey, et. al.) by turning to Europe for artistic freedom without the stigma of #MeToo (because the French and Italians do not give credence to maligning men based on their personal lives…they just don’t).
Her comments, which appeared in an article from The Hollywood Reporter, were, naturally, parsed out from everything else that was mentioned or discussed, like a new film with Noah Baumbach called Marriage Story. That Baumbach discussed the project with Johansson when she was going through her own falling apart marriage to “journalist/art consultant,” Romain Dauriac, added a further layer to the film as Baumbach, too, was dealing with the shrapnel of his destroyed marriage to Jennifer Jason Leigh. Johansson’s collaboration with another beloved (though perhaps not as much as he should be) director, Taika Waititi, on Jojo Rabbit (which comes out in September, a few months before Marriage Story is released to Netflix), was also discussed. Yet it was her past work with one auteur in particular that has been analyzed ad nauseum in the media. Her assertion that she would work with Woody Allen again “anytime” is what has been glommed onto. Yet her further explanation is conveniently left out–even if most feel that there can be no explanation. Nonetheless, it was as follows: “‘I see Woody whenever I can, and I have had a lot of conversations with him about it. I have been very direct with him, and he’s very direct with me. He maintains his innocence, and I believe him.’ Asked if this position feels fraught to express in a cultural environment where there is a new and powerful emphasis on believing women’s allegations, Johansson says, ‘It’s hard because it’s a time where people are very fired up, and understandably. Things needed to be stirred up, and so people have a lot of passion and a lot of strong feelings and are angry, and rightfully so. It’s an intense time.’”
Little did she know, what amounted to one paragraph out of the entire article would offer more “intense” results than perhaps even her Ghost in the Shell casting (given flak for being a white woman in an “Asian” role–though, in the film, she’s a “Caucasoid cyborg implanted with the wiped brain of a Japanese woman”) and attempt at playing a trans man in Rub & Tug, which she ultimately backed down from after the backlash. This latter controversy was possibly most startling of all because of how committed Johansson originally seemed to her right as an actor to portray whatever kind of person she wanted. It didn’t take long for the pressure and outrage of the trans community and outlying PC police to beat her conviction out of her–leaving one to await in anticipation: will she backpedal on this declaration as well?
This time around, the stakes are slightly different, in addition to being higher. For one thing, the comment involves someone she is actually friends with (as opposed to a faceless Asian or trans collective). For another, her embarkation on her most mainstream movie yet, Black Widow, could stand to mean that the studio she’s at the mercy of will “gently nudge” her to make a retracting statement of apology to Dylan Farrow and any other victims of sexual abuse she might have offended. To be sure, Johansson could have been more careful in her choice of words in coming to the defense of Allen; rather than painting the situation as him being innocent (which means Farrow is guilty and her experience misconstrued), maybe she could have just said, “Yes, I would work with him again,” and leave it at that. Granted, she didn’t get as buckwild as Alec Baldwin, who stated of Farrow, “One of the most effective things Dylan Farrow has in her arsenal is the ‘persistence of emotion.’ Like Mayella in To Kill A Mockingbird, her tears/exhortations are meant to shame you into belief in her story. But I need more than that before I destroy someone, regardless of their fame. I need a lot more.” That Baldwin was a white male didn’t help his cause. Johansson’s defense, therefore, has more clout, mixed, at the same time, with many feeling a sense of betrayal when considering she was among the actresses to be at the helm of Time’s Up when it dominated the first Oscars ceremony in the wake of the #MeToo movement. She was even blunt enough to call “hypocrite” on accused sexual abuser James Franco for wearing a pin in support of Time’s Up by remarking, “How could a person publicly stand by an organization that helps to provide support for victims of sexual assault while privately preying on people who have no power? I want my pin back, by the way.” To be sure, those who remember that speech are saying the same to her now that she’s publicly shown her support of Allen. And most certain of all is Farrow’s own contemptuous response to Johansson’s remarks, solidified on the emblem of celebrity rage that is Twitter with the words, “Because if we’ve learned anything from the past two years it’s that you definitely should believe male predators who ‘maintain their innocence’ without question. Scarlett has a long way to go in understanding the issue she claims to champion.” Maybe so–but it seems, more importantly, that Johansson needs to start understanding that the statements dripping in controversy for the media hyenas seeking to feast on sound bites are ones she should have the backbone to stand by. Otherwise, what is she but as big of a pushover as Western Europe with its leniency toward Britain’s threats to leave the union?
Yet, once again, the lust for sexual predator blood at all costs seems to be detracting from the fact that Johansson is entitled to her say in the matter on Woody Allen, just as she is to work with him again. Where she starts to lose that right is when she wavers in her so-called convictions in the face of too much media scrutiny. A scrutiny that began most palpably after she was launched into the limelight with Sofia Coppola’s 2003 film, Lost in Translation (incidentally featuring a male-female age difference between two characters that one might hold Woody Allen responsible for if they didn’t know better).
If she were to truly stick to her guns, however, one can’t help but envision a movie about a film director’s reputation ruined by the accusation of sexual assault written by Allen with Johansson in a role as one of the actresses who joins the bandwagon to accuse him once it becomes chic to do so. This, undoubtedly, would be far too much of a commitment to her likely soon to be teetering in defense ways. As for Allen, he has other projects in the pipeline, most recently completing a movie in Spain called Rifkin’s Festival, in keeping with his “movie a year” method. Speaking in France in promotion of A Rainy Day in New York (which won’t see the light in the U.S.), Allen asserted, “If tomorrow nobody would finance my films and my plays or publish my books, I’d still get up and write because that’s what I do.” If Johansson suddenly changes her mind about him, that could very well be the case. Or she, Angelica Huston and Diane Keaton (the latter two who have also openly declared their support for him) could star in his unfinanced 2021 feature. Knowing Johansson’s wishy-washy nature, however, her actually working with him again appears unlikely.
