Poll: Will Woody Allen sex controversy hurt Cate Blanchett’s Oscar hopes?

Latest development in the battle between the Farrow family and Woody Allen: Mia and Woody’s adopted son Moses, who is estranged from Mia and remains close to Woody, doesn’t believe the sex allegations. “Of course Woody did not molest my sister,” he tells People. “She loved him and looked forward to seeing him when he would visit.”

What’s next? Woody has written a response to Dylan Farrow‘s letter to the New York Times and the Times is considering publishing it. The newspaper will probably do so, of course, but, if not, another major media outlet will certainly bring it to light. Will Woody’s response be calm and diplomatic? He initially blasted Dylan’s account as “disgraceful.”

If Woody’s response is provocative, it may encourage Dylan to take the next logical step — into a TV studio where she’d put a sympathetic human face on a horror story that has been so far contained to distant written words.

As this conflict continues to grow, the question before us is: How will it impact “Blue Jasmine’s” odds at the Oscars?

Clearly, there was an awards framework to the Farrows’ attack on the film. “Blue Jasmine” was released last summer. Why else bring it up now? Dylan not only addressed the cast in her Times letter, but she made a shocking call-out to its lead star and the current Oscar frontrunner: “What if it had been your child, Cate Blanchett?” And let’s remember what triggered the most recent conflict: Mia Tweeting reminders of the sex charges against Woody during the Golden Globes’ tribute to his film career.

So far this controversy has had no significant effect on Cate’s Oscar odds at Gold Derby, as you can see from the chart above — and here. See the Experts’ latest predix here. Notice that 23 of them pick Cate to prevail, 1 opts for Amy Adams (IMDB managing editor Keith Simanton).

 

And while we’re on the subject …

 

 

 

 

RELATED: ‘It’s Oscar war!’: Michael Musto & Tom O’Neil on Woody, Dylan & Cate

21 thoughts on “Poll: Will Woody Allen sex controversy hurt Cate Blanchett’s Oscar hopes?

  1. This article is even more disgusting than the previous one. You should go see it, it has 18 comments more than 99% of your articles and most of them are negative. This SHOULDN’T impact the oscar race, and by making articles about it you are feeding the wood that lights the fire. Blanchett gave far and away the best performance in the category, and this should not be any hinderance.

  2. I agree Bill. Writing an article like this is contributing to the chance that Cate will be upset. I know GD is trying to create hits, but sometimes integrity should breed resistance.

  3. This topic again? Can we stick to the movie conversation? Continually asking this question on this site, twitter and everything else is a waste of time. If these allegations are true, they why not focus on Allen, why the focus on Cate? I am beginning to think those at Gold Derby want Cate Blanchett to lose.

  4. Please. The Academy will look like a fool if they don’t give it to Blanchett… 1) she’s got nothing to do with this whole thing. 2) she’s won almost every single best actress award in this season. 3) she gave the best performance out of the nominees.

  5. No one cares about this ridiculous gossip aside from Amy Adams’ fans who are desperate for her to win and Gold Derby who are desperate to increase traffic to their site.

  6. A win for Cate Blanchett would just be plain stupid. Her character and performance might be considered the best by many, but it wasn’t a reach for her as an actress to play that character based upon her recent interviews and speeches when she wins. She has a large ego just like Jasmine.

  7. Jake P. Hall Jr. – Come on, stop trying to make Amy Adams happen by slamming Cate Blanchett. Adams gave the worse performance of the 5 nominees. She was snubbed by SAG and BFCA in the major category. Cate Blanchett beat her in 5 regional awards.

  8. Let’s say Tom O’Neil was attacked on the way to the Oscars. He’s beaten, maybe sexually assaulted, and left for dead. He’s humiliated and embarrassed about what he’s going to have to ask the doctors to do. And his legs are broken, so he has to crawl to the nearest hotel to ask someone to call the police.

    He gets into the hotel lobby, blood pouring into his remaining good eye, but he can still see. A TV is on playing the red carpet.

    Question: do you think he’ll like Sandra Bullock’s dress, or is it too attention-grabbing? Come on, Sandra, tonight is about Alfonso!

  9. This topic – as irrelevant as it is – has been hammered to death on Gold Derby. This site has become nothing more than cheap, tabloid reporting.

  10. Tom, when did you become a mind reader? So you dismiss Cate Blanchett cancelling her interviews because of an award and not because she’s upset over the loss of a close friend? If you could properly read minds then you would read into the fact many of your readers are tired of you beating this topic into the ground. You act as if Cate Blanchett committed a crime. We get it, you don’t want her to win, but is this the way to try to discredit her? You have turned into nothing more than a gossip monger.

  11. Why don’t we create another poll?
    1- Are you tired of GoldBerby exploiting this subject? ( X) yes ( ) no
    2- Do you believe this website is committed in a smear campaign against Cate Blanchett? (X) yes ( ) no
    3- Do you think it’s ethically justified to talk about a subject as sensitive and serious as this one in an Oscar race website as if the race was more important than the subject itself? (X) yes ( ) no
    4- Do you believe this website is campaigning for Amy Adams? (X) yes ( ) no
    5- Do you think this website has been loosing all its credibility by doing these tabloid articles? (X) yes ( ) no

  12. *Sorry, I meant: 3- Do you think it’s ethically justified to talk about a subject as sensitive and serious as this one in an Oscar race website as if the race was more important than the subject itself? ( ) yes ( X) NO

  13. Regarding Judy Davis lost for Husband and Wives. It was a year prior to the Oscars the scandal broke about Woody Allen and Soon-Yi. That year, the precursors were split. Davis won some critics awards, but Joan Plowright won the Golden Globe and Miranda Richardson BAFTA. This was pre SAG and BFCA. Ironically, Woody Allen won the BAFTA for screenplay, along with Oscar and WGA nods. Davis was also more of a Hollywood outsider.

  14. An examination of the Yale report and court documents shows:
    • The Yale team used psychologists on Allen’s payroll to make mental health conclusions. “That seems like a blatant conflict of interest; they should have excluded themselves,” Schetky says.
    • Custody recommendations were made even though the team never saw Allen and any of the children together. “I’d sure want that information,” Schetky says.
    • The team refused to interview witnesses who could have corroborated the molestation claims.
    • The team destroyed its notes. “I don’t know why they would,” Schetky says. “They shouldn’t have anything to hide, unless they’re in disagreement.”
    • Leventhal, the only medical doctor on the team, did not interview Dylan. “How can you write about someone you’ve never seen?” Schetky asks.
    • The night before Leventhal gave a statement to Farrow’s attorney, he discussed the scenario with Abramowitz, the head of Allen’s legal team, for about 30 minutes.
    • The team interviewed Dylan nine times. For three consecutive weeks, she said violated her sexually. In several of the other sessions, she mentioned a similar type of abuse. When Dylan did not repeat the precise allegation in some of the sessions, the team reported this as an inconsistency.
    Must reading for anyone who wants to be informed about what really happened in this investigation:

    http://www.connecticutmag.com/Blog/Connecticut-Today/December-2013/Mia-Farrows-Son-Golden-Globes-Mention-Woody-Allens-Alleged-Child-Molestation/

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *