The W
Views: 97599392
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
23.7.14 0706
The W - Current Events & Politics - Moore's film has distributor. Yea.
This thread has 1 referral leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 5.37
Pages: 1
(1330 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (14 total)
Reverend J Shaft
Liverwurst








Since: 25.6.03
From: Home of The Big House

Since last post: 13 days
Last activity: 55 sec.
#1 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.53
For those who were worried that Moore's little hate film wasn't going to find a distributor, worry no more. You'll get to see the film beginning June 25.

Oh, and big, bad Disney, who wouldn't distribute the film (THOSE DAMN OPPRESSORS), has agreed to donate any profits its receives to charity. But that tidbit is tucked neatly at the bottom of the article.

(edited by Reverend J Shaft on 2.6.04 1131)



Behold, the chalice representing the power of my fro! Be afraid, L.A. Be very afraid!
Promote this thread!
Joseph Ryder
Head cheese








Since: 19.3.02
From: Seattle, WA

Since last post: 1106 days
Last activity: 639 days
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.28
    Originally posted by Reverend J Shaft
    Oh, and big, bad Disney, who wouldn't distribute the film (THOSE DAMN OPPRESSORS), has agreed to donate any profits its receives to charity. But that tidbit is tucked neatly at the bottom of the article.


I didn't realize you could neatly tuck away tidbits at the bottom of a 255 word article. I mean, I could see the entire article on my screen without needing to scroll.

And what do you want Disney to do with the distribution profits for a film they refused to distribute?
JoshMann
Andouille








Since: 17.11.03
From: Tallahassee, FL

Since last post: 2200 days
Last activity: 2197 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#3 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.84
    Originally posted by THE YAHOO ARTICLE
    The film will be released by a partnership of Lions Gate Films, IFC Films and the Fellowship Adventure Group, which was formed by Harvey and Bob Weinstein specifically to market Moore's film


Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the Weinsteins more or less under the Disney umbrella anyway?

(edited by Blanket Jackson on 2.6.04 1242)


I expect you fans, you people here in LA to do what you do best. RIOT!
Reverend J Shaft
Liverwurst








Since: 25.6.03
From: Home of The Big House

Since last post: 13 days
Last activity: 55 sec.
#4 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.53
    Originally posted by Joseph Ryder
    I didn't realize you could neatly tuck away tidbits at the bottom of a 255 word article. I mean, I could see the entire article on my screen without needing to scroll.


Change the pixellation on your screen to 800 x 600 then.

    Originally posted by Joseph Ryder
    And what do you want Disney to do with the distribution profits for a film they refused to distribute?


Well, seeing as how they OWNED the distribution rights to the film, they could have done anything with them they damned well please, especially since they PAID for the film.

But, since the Weinsteins returned the money, I find it telling how much Disney wanted nothing to do ANY sort of political bent by agreeing to donate the profits they might receive from this movie. You know, to clear things up for any conspiracy theorists out there.

(edited by Reverend J Shaft on 2.6.04 1431)



Behold, the chalice representing the power of my fro! Be afraid, L.A. Be very afraid!
Llakor
Landjager








Since: 2.1.02
From: Montreal, Quebec, CANADA

Since last post: 469 days
Last activity: 460 days
AIM:  
#5 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.43
When Disney purchased Miramax in 1993, the deal was predicated on the Weinstein's retaining autonomy on the films that they produced.

I refer you to:
http://print.google.com/ print/doc?articleid=GVfqmVYnqyE

To quote Harvey Weinstein from the article, "We are autonomous so we greenlight the movies, we make the financial decisions, the creative decisions"

The article also presciently predicts exactly this kind of conflict although over issues of sex not politics, "Also at issue is how a traditionally conservative company such as Disney will live with Miramax's proclivity toward distributing controversial, racy, sexually explicit and sometimes violent movies"

Whether you are a fan of Michael Moore or not, the decision to make Farenheit 9/11 was a creative decision made by the Weinstein's.

Which leaves us with Disney's decision to not release it. Without being disingenous, why wouldn't Disney release the film? It's clear that even without this controversy the film would have made a massive profit.

(According to IMBD, Bowling For Columbine made $21 million dollars just in the US on a budget of $4 million. That doesn't include overseas, or video/dvd or ppv money. http://imdb.com/title/tt0310793/business
Given that Farenheit 9/11 was made for only 6 million, it could turn a profit even it was only half as successful as Bowling For Columbine.)

It's pretty clear that they made a decision not to release the film because they were afraid that being associated with the film would hurt their corporate profits. That they would be punished for releasing it, in other words.

(The implication being that this punishment would come from the US and Florida Governments and the Bush family.)

Now, I'm not suggesting that the Weinstein's and Moore didn't very cleverly maneuver Disney into proving that when push came to shove that they valued corporate profits over free speech, but then again they weren't wrong were they?

So, I have to ask, what is more disturbing:

That Disney would be prepared to abandon free speech to protect corporate profits...

That Disney did so because they were afraid of retaliation by the US and Florida Governements...

Or that they were correct to be afraid?



"Don't Blame CANADA, Blame Yourselves!"
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 8 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#6 Posted on | Instant Rating: 9.07
    Originally posted by Llakor
    So, I have to ask, what is more disturbing:

    That Disney would be prepared to abandon free speech to protect corporate profits...

    That Disney did so because they were afraid of retaliation by the US and Florida Governements...

    Or that they were correct to be afraid?
Oh, come on.

1. Once again, the concept of "free speech" does not apply when discussing how a BUSINESS conducts its BUSINESS because they're a BUSINESS and not CONGRESS.

2. Was this conclusively proven? Eisner's quote never lead ME to that conclusion.

3. Again, I find the proof lacking.



CRZ
Eddie Famous
Andouille








Since: 11.12.01
From: Catlin IL

Since last post: 242 days
Last activity: 236 days
#7 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.44

Disney is bigger than Florida.



"In the sky. Lord, in the sky..."
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1177 days
Last activity: 974 days
#8 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
    Originally posted by Eddie Famous
    Disney is bigger than Florida.
Yeah, but Disney does have some really wild concessions from the state...like building a nuclear power plant on thier land without approval from the state.

    Originally posted by Llakor
    It's pretty clear that they made a decision not to release the film because they were afraid that being associated with the film would hurt their corporate profits. That they would be punished for releasing it, in other words.
Last time I checked, a compnay has the right to make available any product that they wish and have the rights to. Disney wouldn't push a series of Al-Qaeda action figures for the same reason they wouldn't push Moore's crap; the company would receive a major, major backlash.

EDIT: Ray Bradbury also seems to have a low opinion of Michael Moore.

    Originally posted by Salon through a translation of a interview in a Swedish Paper
    "Michael Moore is a screwed asshole, that is what I think about that case. He stole my title and changed the numbers without ever asking me for permission....

    ....He is a horrible human being. Horrible human!

    ...I have won prizes in different places and they are mostly meaningless. The people there hate us, which is why they gave him the d'Or. It's a meaningless prize.


The original Swedish is here.

"Moore r en skitstvel" HA

(edited by Grimis on 3.6.04 0915)


"If we will keep closing our eyes to evil, then that evil will defeat us tomorrow. Unfortunately there's more hatred in men than love. Those who murder understand only force and nothing else. And the only force that is able to stand against them is the American democracy."- Marek Edelman, last surviving leader of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising

"The Geneva Conventions are so outdated and are written so broadly that they have become a sword used by terrorists to kill civilians, rather than a shield to protect civilians from terrorists. These international laws have become part of the problem, rather than part of the solution."- Alan Dershowitz
PalpatineW
Lap cheong








Since: 2.1.02
From: Getting Rowdy

Since last post: 2738 days
Last activity: 2580 days
AIM:  
#9 Posted on | Instant Rating: 9.00
Ray Bradbury, briefly. Pretty angry at Moore's play on his previous work.

Hat tip to Roger L. Simon.



In Theo We Trust
Joseph Ryder
Head cheese








Since: 19.3.02
From: Seattle, WA

Since last post: 1106 days
Last activity: 639 days
#10 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.28
Don't forget about Ray Bradbury (blogs.salon.com). He's also pretty mad at Moore.
OlFuzzyBastard
Knackwurst








Since: 28.4.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 2 days
AIM:  
#11 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.65
(deleted by CRZ on 3.6.04 2003)
Doc_whiskey
Frankfurter








Since: 6.8.02
From: St. Louis

Since last post: 307 days
Last activity: 251 days
AIM:  
#12 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.19
    Originally posted by Reverend J Shaft
    For those who were worried that Moore's little hate film wasn't going to find a distributor, worry no more. You'll get to see the film beginning June 25.

    Oh, and big, bad Disney, who wouldn't distribute the film (THOSE DAMN OPPRESSORS), has agreed to donate any profits its receives to charity. But that tidbit is tucked neatly at the bottom of the article.

    (edited by Reverend J Shaft on 2.6.04 1131)


I have a feeling while they think this movie will do well, they couldn't have picked a worse time to release it. Right now it would have Shrek 2/Harry Potter to compete with not to mention Riddick coming out. Then 5 days after its released, the predicted king of the summer Spiderman 2 comes out. If I were them I would delay the release a little if they plan on doing well with it.



Lisa: They used it to settle fights at taverns
Homer: She said tavern! I'm going to Moe's
Marge: I never agreed to that rule
Von Maestro
Boudin rouge








Since: 6.1.04
From: New York

Since last post: 132 days
Last activity: 15 hours
#13 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.54
    Originally posted by Doc_whiskey
    I have a feeling while they think this movie will do well, they couldn't have picked a worse time to release it. Right now it would have Shrek 2/Harry Potter to compete with not to mention Riddick coming out. Then 5 days after its released, the predicted king of the summer Spiderman 2 comes out. If I were them I would delay the release a little if they plan on doing well with it.


I don't think there is much audience crossover between Moore's stuff & the movies you mentioned. While I'm sure many people see both types of movies, the moviegoer who sees documentaries will go regardless of what big budget flick Hollywood is releasing at the time.

Besides, shouldn't the gate of Moore's film be irrelevant? Isn't that a Capitalist concern & therefore not an issue for the filmmaker...? ;)
Lexus
Bierwurst








Since: 2.1.02
From: Stafford, VA

Since last post: 4 days
Last activity: 17 hours
AIM:  
#14 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.78
I wanna see Fahrenheit 9/11 and Micheal Moore hates America, if only because the right answers, the truest common sense of America, can be found in both films; painting those whose ideals differ from your own as inferiors and fattening your wallet rather than actually cooperating with people you disagree with and accomplishing something for the greater whole.

Trailers to each.

http://www.fahrenheit911.com/trailer/

http://www.michaelmoorehatesamerica.com/ trailer_sm.html

Pre-schoolers show a higher grade a maturity than these guys; at least when toddlers throw a hissy at each other, they calm down, eat a cookie, and play together at the end of the day.





Say Cheese!
Thread rated: 5.37
Pages: 1
Thread ahead: Nichols jury hung - No death sentence
Next thread: Dead Presidents
Previous thread: Is there more Oil than we think there is?
(1330 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Rich Little is probably an actual better fit for this particular audience. They didn't seem to enjoy Colbert that much. I figure they should get somebody that will entertain them, even if it doesn't entertain the rest of us.
The W - Current Events & Politics - Moore's film has distributor. Yea.Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.123 seconds.