TheJournal.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
Dublin: 11 °C Wednesday 19 June, 2013

Irish Film Institute highlights Roman Polanski films

Controversial director under the spotlight in January schedule of films as two of his major movies are re-released.

Roman Polanski during the filming of Tess in March 1981, one of the films being shown at the IFI this month.
Roman Polanski during the filming of Tess in March 1981, one of the films being shown at the IFI this month.
Image: AP Photo

THE IRISH FILM Institute is to showcase films from controversial Oscar-winning director Roman Polanski this month.

The schedule of six of Polanski’s most acclaimed movies will sit alongside the re-releases of his 1974 masterpiece Chinatown and 1965 movie Repulsion. Chinatown opens today and Repulsion on 11 January, both running until 17 January at the Temple Bar cinema. Each of the following will screen for one day only, Knife in the Water (tomorrow); Cul-de-sac (6 Jan); Tess (13 Jan); The Tenant (15 Jan); Rosemary’s Baby (23 Jan); The Pianist (26 Jan).

Polanski’s influence on European and US cinema has spanned several decades, with The Pianist becoming one of his most high-profile releases in 2002. It was nominated for seven Oscars and won three, including one for Best Director and tackled the Holocaust, which Polanski himself survived as a Polish Jewish boy.

Despite the critical and commercial success of many of his movies, the director’s personal life has frequently overshadowed his work. His wife Sharon Tate was a victim of the so-called Manson murders, when she was killed along with six others during a murderous spree by Charles Manson and his acolytes in LA in 1969. Polanski returned to Europe for some years after her death but in 1977 pleaded guilty to the statutory rape of a 13-year-old girl in LA. He lived in exile for three decades, and the US lost a bid to extradite him back for sentencing two years ago.

The IFI told TheJournal.ie that it was focusing on Polanski’s body of work, and not on his personal life:

As a cultural organisation dedicated to the art of film, the Irish Film Institute’s choice of figures from the history of cinema to showcase is based solely on the individual’s work, and not on their personal lives.

Roman Polanksi’s body of work contains some of cinema’s most iconic films, performances, and images, and providing audiences with the opportunity to see films such as these on the big screen is in keeping with our programming policy.

  • Share on Facebook
  • Email this article
  •  

Read next:

Comments (31 Comments)

  • Controversial..? Is that what we’re calling convicted rapists these days? Can’t wait to see a piece about controversial carpenter Larry Murphy.

    Reply
  • He drugged, raped and sodomised a 13 year old girl and has been on the run since his conviction in order to escape justice. This hasn’t stopped him from making millions from his films all the while he should have been rotting in a cell. The thoughts of adding to his wealth by viewing any of his offerings gives me the creeps

    Reply
  • Sean 04/01/13 #

    The IFI have every right to show his films, but I’d still have a problem going to see them.

    I can usually get past an artist’s personal life, but Polanski drugged and raped a 13-year-old child, and has never faced justice for it.
    So to hell with him.

    Safety Not Guaranteed is also playing at the IFI and it’s very good.

    Reply
  • Mmm… another controversial comment gone. Presumably it’s ok for a convicted paedophile sex offender to openly make money and be celebrated whilst on the run, but not for me to call them a sc**bag?

    Reply
  • Next week they are rerunning episodes of Jim’ll Fix It.

    Reply
  • I read an interview with his victim years ago, she said he should be left alone. I thought that was a bit strange.

    Reply
    • I read that too Brian and wondered what her reasoning was. Of course, it’s up to the victims in theses cases, to decide how to proceed, but it struck me as odd, that she never explained her very charitable stance towards him. I don’t mean to sound cynical, but it wouldn’t be the first time that a perpetrator of a crime bought the silence of the victim.

      Reply
    • Not too sure about her reaction either. Perhaps it was because her name was released in the press. She was not getting, or going to get any justice so perhaps she just wanted to try to get on with her life without always being known as ” the girl Polanski raped”. Unfortunately every time his name comes up in the news hers’ gets dragged back up too. She could have kids now that she doesn’t want hearing all the lurid details and I’m sure it would cause upset to her partner if she has one.

      Reply
    • toubini 05/01/13 #

      It was statutory rape, not like he assaulted her (did get her drunk though). As an adult she said she wanted him stay free.

      I find her mother, pimping her underage girl to a known sleazy director just as despicable.

      Reply
  • mart_n 04/01/13 #

    “Controversial director” is a bit of an understatement! His films are still damn good though.

    Reply
  • mart_n 04/01/13 #

    Out of interest, does anyone know if Polanski still earns on the back of his works? How would that go? The case has never been officially closed so presumably he’s still a wanted man in the US. If he’s still earning you’d wonder why no restrictions have been placed on the studios / distributors that pay him.

    Reply
    • I can’t actually find any info on this but his films are distributed in the US and he is not profiting directly from his crime I think he is most likely earning the same as any other Oscar nominated director.

      Reply
    • Sean 04/01/13 #

      I really don’t know enough about that to comment, but it’s the internet so I’m going to anyway.

      His movies will likely be made by European studios or private backers who would then get distribution deals for the US.
      In that case his fee would already have been agreed and paid for by the time a distribution deal was struck, or US authorities have no right to view anything that is outside of the distribution deal.
      Basically there’s enough buffer there for him to keep the US authorities out of his financial affairs, if they even had the ability or cared to pursue that path.

      Again, I have more or less pulled that answer out of my ass, but it fits with my general view of how the world works and I’m fairly satisfied with it.

      Reply
  • The pianist is one of the best movies I’ve ever seen. The other is shawshank redemption… Obviously!

    Reply
  • ‘Controversial’, euphemistically put.

    Reply
  • Waaaaaait for it.

    Reply
  • Maybe the IFI should champion up and coming Irish directors instead of promoting this peado

    Reply
  • Old perv should be banned no matter how good movies he made. I like his movies but that’s all. Take a look at “knife in the water”.

    Reply
  • Daniel R 05/01/13 #

    I’m not trying to defend his actions but does no one think that the lack of support for the families of homicide victims all those decades ago not play any, if not even a small, part in what he did? It’s a point that I’ve seen mentioned over and over again and I think it has some bearing. Doris Tate, Sharon’s mother, set up a support group for families after she admitted that she had completely shut off from the world and her family for years after her daughter’s murder. I’ll no doubt get an onslaught of red thumbs for this but people should at least consider this as a co-factor, which doesn’t pardon what he did, but nevertheless shouldn’t be disregarded. Horrific events. RIP to all the victims.

    Reply

Add New Comment