Comments on: AMERICAN APPAREL NOT AFRAID TO PLAY DIRTY http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/2009/04/american-apparel-vs-woody-allen FilmDrunk.com is the movie blog that plays rough, just the way your mother likes it. We cover all things movie-related, but just because we watch a lot of movies don’t expect us to act all serious about them. Think of FilmDrunk as the film industry’s older brother who punches it in the shoulder when it acts queer. Sat, 11 Feb 2012 00:52:36 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.1 By: likeMike http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/2009/04/american-apparel-vs-woody-allen#comment-288018 likeMike Fri, 10 Dec 2010 15:26:31 +0000 http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/?p=12519#comment-288018 Wonk. Allen DID molest his OWN daughter. He cheated on his LONG time partner with her DAUGHTER, (adopted or not) NOT ETHICAL. He's TRASH, his movies SUCK too. Wonk. Allen DID molest his OWN daughter. He cheated on his LONG time partner with her DAUGHTER, (adopted or not) NOT ETHICAL. He’s TRASH, his movies SUCK too.

]]> By: sg http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/2009/04/american-apparel-vs-woody-allen#comment-190157 sg Thu, 16 Apr 2009 14:28:04 +0000 http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/?p=12519#comment-190157 They need better lawyers. No amount of argument regarding his endorsement will nullify the need for his permission. Allen even makes fun of his own lolicon in Manhattan, so if anything, his scandals are part of his reputation. They need better lawyers. No amount of argument regarding his endorsement will nullify the need for his permission.

Allen even makes fun of his own lolicon in Manhattan, so if anything, his scandals are part of his reputation.

]]> By: Wonk http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/2009/04/american-apparel-vs-woody-allen#comment-190072 Wonk Wed, 15 Apr 2009 22:41:20 +0000 http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/?p=12519#comment-190072 1. Allen didn't molest a child. He had consensual sex with an adult. She was not his step child. She was his girlfriend's adopted daughter. Creepy, yes, but doesn't make him a child molester. 2. The company used his image without permission. Case closed. 1. Allen didn’t molest a child. He had consensual sex with an adult. She was not his step child. She was his girlfriend’s adopted daughter. Creepy, yes, but doesn’t make him a child molester.

2. The company used his image without permission. Case closed.

]]> By: droidguy1119 http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/2009/04/american-apparel-vs-woody-allen#comment-190062 droidguy1119 Wed, 15 Apr 2009 22:18:20 +0000 http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/?p=12519#comment-190062 This is dumb. If a company used an image I owned without permission, and I said "Fuck you, that's illegal, I'm suing you for $10m", and they were like "Prove you're worth it", I don't understand why anyone would bother. No, it's my image, and I've determined that it's worth $10m to me. If you don't want to pay for it, then you can, you know, take the fucking billboard down and try not stealing the next photograph you use on a billboard. This is dumb. If a company used an image I owned without permission, and I said “Fuck you, that’s illegal, I’m suing you for $10m”, and they were like “Prove you’re worth it”, I don’t understand why anyone would bother. No, it’s my image, and I’ve determined that it’s worth $10m to me. If you don’t want to pay for it, then you can, you know, take the fucking billboard down and try not stealing the next photograph you use on a billboard.

]]> By: Domino Is My Favorite Movie http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/2009/04/american-apparel-vs-woody-allen#comment-190007 Domino Is My Favorite Movie Wed, 15 Apr 2009 20:35:46 +0000 http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/?p=12519#comment-190007 Aggressive lawyering aside, AA is clearly a fan of his image or they wouldn't have used it. But that they were using it as a celebrity endorsement or a way to sell clothes is retarded. It was a cheeky, goofy statement. Woody Allen of all people should understand that. $10 million is just vindictive and lame. Aggressive lawyering aside, AA is clearly a fan of his image or they wouldn’t have used it. But that they were using it as a celebrity endorsement or a way to sell clothes is retarded. It was a cheeky, goofy statement. Woody Allen of all people should understand that. $10 million is just vindictive and lame.

]]> By: ChinoMoreno http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/2009/04/american-apparel-vs-woody-allen#comment-189894 ChinoMoreno Wed, 15 Apr 2009 17:55:40 +0000 http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/?p=12519#comment-189894 Crap, you're such a craftsman. Crap, you’re such a craftsman.

]]> By: JHC http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/2009/04/american-apparel-vs-woody-allen#comment-189893 JHC Wed, 15 Apr 2009 17:55:08 +0000 http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/?p=12519#comment-189893 New up. New up.

]]> By: Crapbasket http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/2009/04/american-apparel-vs-woody-allen#comment-189890 Crapbasket Wed, 15 Apr 2009 17:49:43 +0000 http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/?p=12519#comment-189890 This is just a base ploy for Allen to wrench the screws on A.A. for a few more sawbucks. I hope their lawyers drill him and he gets so torqued that he bolts. This is just a base ploy for Allen to wrench the screws on A.A. for a few more sawbucks. I hope their lawyers drill him and he gets so torqued that he bolts.

]]> By: Crapbasket http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/2009/04/american-apparel-vs-woody-allen#comment-189889 Crapbasket Wed, 15 Apr 2009 17:45:32 +0000 http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/?p=12519#comment-189889 Always wipe the baby gap top to bottom. Always wipe the baby gap top to bottom.

]]> By: JHC http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/2009/04/american-apparel-vs-woody-allen#comment-189888 JHC Wed, 15 Apr 2009 17:45:15 +0000 http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/?p=12519#comment-189888 Gamespot had to change their phone number because Uwe Boll would call constantly wanting to be their spokesperson. Gamespot had to change their phone number because Uwe Boll would call constantly wanting to be their spokesperson.

]]>