Disney blocks new Michael moore film
- Thread starter filmelife
- Start date
Barry_Green
Moderator
Re: Disney blocks new Michael moore film
There is much controversy about this particular decision. Disney told him *before he started making it* that they would not distribute it. They told him that back in May of 2003.
His counter-argument is, yes, you did tell me that, but Miramax kept giving me money, they kept paying for it, so why all of a sudden now will you not distribute it?
Conspiracy theories abound, including that DisneyWorld in Florida is up for some big tax breaks and Disney doesn't want to tick off Jeb Bush. Or it just may be a bad film and they don't want to handle it after the controversy over the reported liberties Moore took with the facts during the making of "bowling for columbine".
In any case, Disney has the right to decide what they will and will not distribute. That's not censorship, that's free market and free will. If they prevent anyone else from distributing it, that's more suspicious. In any and all cases, it can't be "censorship" because it's not the government doing it.
There is much controversy about this particular decision. Disney told him *before he started making it* that they would not distribute it. They told him that back in May of 2003.
His counter-argument is, yes, you did tell me that, but Miramax kept giving me money, they kept paying for it, so why all of a sudden now will you not distribute it?
Conspiracy theories abound, including that DisneyWorld in Florida is up for some big tax breaks and Disney doesn't want to tick off Jeb Bush. Or it just may be a bad film and they don't want to handle it after the controversy over the reported liberties Moore took with the facts during the making of "bowling for columbine".
In any case, Disney has the right to decide what they will and will not distribute. That's not censorship, that's free market and free will. If they prevent anyone else from distributing it, that's more suspicious. In any and all cases, it can't be "censorship" because it's not the government doing it.
furystudios
Member
Re: Disney blocks new Michael moore film
This case reminds me of Kevin Smith's problems with Disney when he released Dogma. They made a mistake then and they're making another now. Guess they'll just have to learn that the hard way once someone else picks it up.
This case reminds me of Kevin Smith's problems with Disney when he released Dogma. They made a mistake then and they're making another now. Guess they'll just have to learn that the hard way once someone else picks it up.
Re: Disney blocks new Michael moore film
Right on, Barry.
Right on, Barry.
Terry_Lasater
All about the Caption
Re: Disney blocks new Michael moore film
Yeah... I really feel sorry for poor Michael Moore.
With all the problems in the World and poor Mikey no get to release his precious li'l movie... waaaaaah!!! :'( :'( :'(
Yeah... I really feel sorry for poor Michael Moore.
With all the problems in the World and poor Mikey no get to release his precious li'l movie... waaaaaah!!! :'( :'( :'(
Monglane
Well-known member
Re: Disney blocks new Michael moore film
The subject of Moore's film sounds quite interesting? I've already read a couple of articles in Time magazine on the same theme, and I see it's been selected for the Cannes festival. What I'm not clear about is, Is it a "real" documentary or a "docu-fiction" based on actual facts but including some made-up elements ?
I ask because Moore himself, on his website, describes it as "a comedy."
The subject of Moore's film sounds quite interesting? I've already read a couple of articles in Time magazine on the same theme, and I see it's been selected for the Cannes festival. What I'm not clear about is, Is it a "real" documentary or a "docu-fiction" based on actual facts but including some made-up elements ?
I ask because Moore himself, on his website, describes it as "a comedy."
Barry_Green
Moderator
Re: Disney blocks new Michael moore film
[quote author=Woodson link=board=Offtopic;num=1083888994;start=0#4 date=05/07/04 at 01:50:07]corporate censorship[/quote]
If they prevent anyone and everyone from ever seeing it, then that might be a case of corporate censorship. Even so, Moore got paid to make it.
However, Disney isn't preventing anyone from seeing it: they're featuring it at one of the largest festivals in the world, Cannes.
Disney is exercising their right to not distribute it. If someone else wants to, they're free to do so. Unless Disney won't allow someone else to distribute it, in which case it might indeed be corporate censorship. But I don't think that's the case here.
[quote author=Woodson link=board=Offtopic;num=1083888994;start=0#4 date=05/07/04 at 01:50:07]corporate censorship[/quote]
If they prevent anyone and everyone from ever seeing it, then that might be a case of corporate censorship. Even so, Moore got paid to make it.
However, Disney isn't preventing anyone from seeing it: they're featuring it at one of the largest festivals in the world, Cannes.
Disney is exercising their right to not distribute it. If someone else wants to, they're free to do so. Unless Disney won't allow someone else to distribute it, in which case it might indeed be corporate censorship. But I don't think that's the case here.
Re: Disney blocks new Michael moore film
Moore seems to be playing a publicity stunt to promote himself at the expense of Disney's reputation. It was made clear that Disney/Miramax wouldn't distribute early on.
Whatever you think of Moore or Disney, it makes you wonder if you would work with a backstabbing person like Moore who would bite the hand that feeds him.
Moore seems to be playing a publicity stunt to promote himself at the expense of Disney's reputation. It was made clear that Disney/Miramax wouldn't distribute early on.
Whatever you think of Moore or Disney, it makes you wonder if you would work with a backstabbing person like Moore who would bite the hand that feeds him.
kai
After FX Guru
Re: Disney blocks new Michael moore film
haha... I don't think we need any more anti-bush anti-war propoganda floating around right now anyways. It's all a pre-election-treason-attack if you ask me
...but i guess no one did.
I did like Bowling for Columbine, it was pretty good, but this one just seems like it would be a bit more extreme over left yonder
haha... I don't think we need any more anti-bush anti-war propoganda floating around right now anyways. It's all a pre-election-treason-attack if you ask me
...but i guess no one did.
I did like Bowling for Columbine, it was pretty good, but this one just seems like it would be a bit more extreme over left yonder
Fred_Plowman
Well-known member
Re: Disney blocks new Michael moore film
I like Michael Moores style.. Just not his politics.. I mean cant we show a documentary about the Clinton Administration who some would argue was so corupt that it makes this outfit look like boyscouts. Hes always going for the liberal (socialist) slant.
Wants to get rid of guns. Which may be a good thing in theory but isnt reality. Its a second ammendment issue. Which is to arm the populace to create check and balance form tyranny. plain and simple.
Im ranting but maybe some of you who are unaware and un educated should know that we dont live in a Democracy. Its a Republic. Go back to school. Dont pervert Our country that I love and that was built on the ideals of Freedom with socialist propoganda.
I like Michael Moores style.. Just not his politics.. I mean cant we show a documentary about the Clinton Administration who some would argue was so corupt that it makes this outfit look like boyscouts. Hes always going for the liberal (socialist) slant.
Wants to get rid of guns. Which may be a good thing in theory but isnt reality. Its a second ammendment issue. Which is to arm the populace to create check and balance form tyranny. plain and simple.
Im ranting but maybe some of you who are unaware and un educated should know that we dont live in a Democracy. Its a Republic. Go back to school. Dont pervert Our country that I love and that was built on the ideals of Freedom with socialist propoganda.
Fred_Plowman
Well-known member
Re: Disney blocks new Michael moore film
Thanks for the support Kai.. Sometimes we feel alone in this world with foreward thinking ideals of what anymore seems to be the past.
Thanks for the support Kai.. Sometimes we feel alone in this world with foreward thinking ideals of what anymore seems to be the past.
Re: Disney blocks new Michael moore film
Actually, "corporate censorship" is an oxymoron. In its pure sense, sure, it happens all the time -- conduct codes, anti-sexual harassment policies, etc., very mundane, everyday stuff that *is* censorship. But not all censorship is bad. And only the government can "censor" in the nefarious way some are presenting it here.
Disney's decision NOT to distribute something is hardly a violation of the First Amendment -- in fact, that decision is every bit as protected by, and consistent with the spirit OF, the First Amendment as a decision TO DISTRIBUTE a controversial film. Freedom of a private actor to decide what he will -- or will not -- "say" (in this case, put on a screen) is the basic premise of Freedom of the Press, Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Assebly, etc., all those things embodied in the First Amendment. Disney's size does not work as a waiver of that right.
Personally, I detest Disney. But that doesn't mean I think they shouldn't have the same rights as enjoyed by every other private actor. Moore can find another distributor.
Actually, "corporate censorship" is an oxymoron. In its pure sense, sure, it happens all the time -- conduct codes, anti-sexual harassment policies, etc., very mundane, everyday stuff that *is* censorship. But not all censorship is bad. And only the government can "censor" in the nefarious way some are presenting it here.
Disney's decision NOT to distribute something is hardly a violation of the First Amendment -- in fact, that decision is every bit as protected by, and consistent with the spirit OF, the First Amendment as a decision TO DISTRIBUTE a controversial film. Freedom of a private actor to decide what he will -- or will not -- "say" (in this case, put on a screen) is the basic premise of Freedom of the Press, Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Assebly, etc., all those things embodied in the First Amendment. Disney's size does not work as a waiver of that right.
Personally, I detest Disney. But that doesn't mean I think they shouldn't have the same rights as enjoyed by every other private actor. Moore can find another distributor.
Fred_Plowman
Well-known member
Re: Disney blocks new Michael moore film
Dave is smart... What hes saying in Laymans terms is that the Constitution or 1st ammendment (for this topic) of the "Bill of Rights" protects americans from GOVERNMENT not corporations or private sector.
It is amzing what people think and believe sometimes. They think First ammendment speech allows them to set up a soap box at the mall (private property) and spout "free speech". Sorry folks.. go get educated... ;D
Dave is smart... What hes saying in Laymans terms is that the Constitution or 1st ammendment (for this topic) of the "Bill of Rights" protects americans from GOVERNMENT not corporations or private sector.
It is amzing what people think and believe sometimes. They think First ammendment speech allows them to set up a soap box at the mall (private property) and spout "free speech". Sorry folks.. go get educated... ;D
Re: Disney blocks new Michael moore film
Mostly. Certain types of speech on private property (like a mall) are protected, like some picketing in labor disputes and so forth, or in cases where a company is found to be the de facto state (like "company towns" of old). But that's very limited, and certainly doesn't apply in this Disney/Moore thing.
Mostly. Certain types of speech on private property (like a mall) are protected, like some picketing in labor disputes and so forth, or in cases where a company is found to be the de facto state (like "company towns" of old). But that's very limited, and certainly doesn't apply in this Disney/Moore thing.
Fred_Plowman
Well-known member
Re: Disney blocks new Michael moore film
What are you Dave an Attorney?? lol
Your splitting hairs...Ever heard of the Alford Plea? ;D
What are you Dave an Attorney?? lol
Your splitting hairs...Ever heard of the Alford Plea? ;D
Re: Disney blocks new Michael moore film
Besides, would anyone have a problem -- or be crying "censorship!!!" -- if Disney or Universal or Paramount declined to distribute a movie extolling the KKK as heroes?
Thought not. The value you place in a principle is best measured by your continued adherence to it when that principle produces a result against your preference.
Besides, would anyone have a problem -- or be crying "censorship!!!" -- if Disney or Universal or Paramount declined to distribute a movie extolling the KKK as heroes?
Thought not. The value you place in a principle is best measured by your continued adherence to it when that principle produces a result against your preference.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Re: Disney blocks new Michael moore film
I believe David IS an attorney (aren't you?)
And, while we're at it, let's talk about whose voice it really is... if Miramax contracted and paid for the work, then the possibility exists that the movie in question is actually a "work for hire", which means IT ISN'T MICHAEL MOORE'S PROPERTY ANYWAY! Legally, morally, and in all other senses, it is the work of, the voice of, and the property of, the company that contracted it. If they decide not to distribute it, that's their own decision, completely unrelated to any issue of "censorship". Moore may decry corporate america, etc., but he apparently didn't have any problem selling his voice to them.
Same issue might apply if you hired an artist to paint your portrait. When they finish, you decide to hang it on your wall, in your private home, where nobody will ever see it. Should the artist who painted it have the right to whine how you're "censoring" his work, etc?
Moore's work was bought and paid for. That's the end of it.
Corporate Censorship, in the nefarious sense, would be something like what happened to Orson Welles, where it is rumored that Randolph Hearst, powerful media magnate, was so incensed by the supposed portrayal of him in Citizen Kane that he went on a vendetta to make sure that Welles was squashed. Or if someone made a film about Ted Turner, only to find out when they went to distribute it that Turner had blocked all possible distribution outlets. But that didn't happen here. Moore was hired by Miramax, paid by Miramax, and delivered Miramax's product to them. It is Miramax's choice what to do with it from now on.
I believe David IS an attorney (aren't you?)
And, while we're at it, let's talk about whose voice it really is... if Miramax contracted and paid for the work, then the possibility exists that the movie in question is actually a "work for hire", which means IT ISN'T MICHAEL MOORE'S PROPERTY ANYWAY! Legally, morally, and in all other senses, it is the work of, the voice of, and the property of, the company that contracted it. If they decide not to distribute it, that's their own decision, completely unrelated to any issue of "censorship". Moore may decry corporate america, etc., but he apparently didn't have any problem selling his voice to them.
Same issue might apply if you hired an artist to paint your portrait. When they finish, you decide to hang it on your wall, in your private home, where nobody will ever see it. Should the artist who painted it have the right to whine how you're "censoring" his work, etc?
Moore's work was bought and paid for. That's the end of it.
Corporate Censorship, in the nefarious sense, would be something like what happened to Orson Welles, where it is rumored that Randolph Hearst, powerful media magnate, was so incensed by the supposed portrayal of him in Citizen Kane that he went on a vendetta to make sure that Welles was squashed. Or if someone made a film about Ted Turner, only to find out when they went to distribute it that Turner had blocked all possible distribution outlets. But that didn't happen here. Moore was hired by Miramax, paid by Miramax, and delivered Miramax's product to them. It is Miramax's choice what to do with it from now on.
Re: Disney blocks new Michael moore film
I am resisting the temptation to comment on Moor'e's politics, but I think it is legitimate to discuss his film-making abilities.
I detest the guy, but frankly, he is a marketing genius. His documentary style fools enough people into believing whatever he is portraying on the screen. I know otherwise very perceptive people who think Bowling For Columbine is a legitimate documentary of Kleybold and Harris.
So this next one will probably be more of the same.
His questions about how Bush allowed the Saudis here in the country to flee back to their own when the rest of us were grounded are legitimate. Will this be an honest examination of that issue, or another Bush-hating primal scream?
I am resisting the temptation to comment on Moor'e's politics, but I think it is legitimate to discuss his film-making abilities.
I detest the guy, but frankly, he is a marketing genius. His documentary style fools enough people into believing whatever he is portraying on the screen. I know otherwise very perceptive people who think Bowling For Columbine is a legitimate documentary of Kleybold and Harris.
So this next one will probably be more of the same.
His questions about how Bush allowed the Saudis here in the country to flee back to their own when the rest of us were grounded are legitimate. Will this be an honest examination of that issue, or another Bush-hating primal scream?