|
Moore Di$ney Cen$or$hip
http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/index.php
Wednesday, May 5th, 2004 Disney Has Blocked the Distribution of My New Film... by Michael Moore Friends, I would have hoped by now that I would be able to put my work out to the public without having to experience the profound censorship obstacles I often seem to encounter. Yesterday I was told that Disney, the studio that owns Miramax, has officially decided to prohibit our producer, Miramax, from distributing my new film, "Fahrenheit 9/11." The reason? According to today's (May 5) New York Times, it might "endanger" millions of dollars of tax breaks Disney receives from the state of Florida because the film will "anger" the Governor of Florida, Jeb Bush. The story is on page one of the Times and you can read it here (Disney Forbidding Distribution of Film That Criticizes Bush). The whole story behind this (and other attempts) to kill our movie will be told in more detail as the days and weeks go on. For nearly a year, this struggle has been a lesson in just how difficult it is in this country to create a piece of art that might upset those in charge (well, OK, sorry -- it WILL upset them...big time. Did I mention it's a comedy?). All I can say is, thank God for Harvey Weinstein and Miramax who have stood by me during the entire production of this movie. There is much more to tell, but right now I am in the lab working on the print to take to the Cannes Film Festival next week (we have been chosen as one of the 18 films in competition). I will tell you this: Some people may be afraid of this movie because of what it will show. But there's nothing they can do about it now because it's done, it's awesome, and if I have anything to say about it, you'll see it this summer -- because, after all, it is a free country. Yours, Michael Moore [email protected] www.michaelmoore.com Get it.. I put Moore instead of More.. ha.... ha... |
The brewing war over Fahrenheit 9/11
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...sure_disney_dc
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Oscar-winning filmmaker Michael Moore (news)'s documentary linking President Bush (news - web sites) with powerful Saudi families, including that of Osama bin Laden (news - web sites), is stirring up controversy even before its release. That's if it even gets released. Hollywood trade paper Daily Variety said in its Wednesday edition that Walt Disney Co. has moved to prevent its Miramax Films unit from distributing "Fahrenheit 911." The Disney edict could herald the bloodiest political battle yet between Miramax's feisty co-chairman Harvey Weinstein and Disney CEO Michael Eisner, who oversaw the purchase of Miramax a decade ago, Daily Variety said. "Fahrenheit 911," Moore's follow-up to his Academy Award-winning film "Bowling for Columbine, will still premiere in competition at the Cannes Film Festival (news - web sites) in France later this month. Rumors had been circulating of a July release date in North America, but the film does not appear on Miramax's summer schedule, the paper said. It quoted a Miramax spokesman as saying that the company was "looking forward to resolving this amicably." Officials from Miramax and Disney were not immediately available for comment on the report. |
this is just the beginning. Bush's cronies are coming out of the wood work to muzzle michael moore.
|
*Ahem* ;)
|
Originally posted by sauce07 this is just the beginning. Bush's cronies are coming out of the wood work to muzzle michael moore. |
Censorship!!!
Wow - I've actually waited to yell that in the forum...I think this is the first time it's actually been applicable. Michael should just go the Mel Gibson route and get an independent release...when it "wows" them at Cannes, Disney is going to look like a bunch of Nazis keeping it from the public. Obviously, someone's trying to keep them from releasing it unitl AFTER the November elections. Isn't it fun to live in a society that puts such a premium on freedom of speech?! |
Originally posted by Shannon Nutt Censorship!!! Wow - I've actually waited to yell that in the forum...I think this is the first time it's actually been applicable. Actually it's still not applicable. Disney, as a company, has the right to NOT distribute whatever they feel like they don't want to. When this is actually proven to be some action that the United States Government commanded then perhaps it may be considered it. But for the time being a company has choosen that they do not want to distribute it because it may effect business in other aspects. Just like how the big studios passed on Passions. They felt that they would suffer from protestors. They, like disney, are making a business choice right now. Michael should just go the Mel Gibson route and get an independent release...when it "wows" them at Cannes, Disney is going to look like a bunch of Nazis keeping it from the public. Obviously, someone's trying to keep them from releasing it unitl AFTER the November elections. Isn't it fun to live in a society that puts such a premium on freedom of speech?! [/B] Capitolism at it's best. Oh yeah.. Repost. can we get a merge up in the house with my thread which was created a minute before and has a better thread title. ;) |
Uh oh....Shannons gonna bust a nutt.
Anyway, screw Moore. However, if in fact Disney is holding his film back for political reasons that's sucks. |
:lol:
and Jack is usually one of the 1st ones to make a "Use search" comment. :p |
Hey, I won by the minute. I deserve to have a Moore thread that will go 14 pages before two political "counter views" are said and it's closed. :p
|
I can't say that I'm surprised by Disney's move. I mean really, this is Disney we're talking about here. Hopefully Moore can find another outlet since I would really like to watch this film.
|
Since it worked so great wit CDs, just put on this still right before the movie starts, and everything will be hunky dory:
http://www.isitfast.com/images/Decal...aladvisory.jpg |
So is it possible for Moore to use a different studio or perhaps an independent release instead of Di$ney/Miramax? Or are they under contract with eachother, which would prevent Moore from taking it to another studio? Must... see... this... film.
|
Only Moore would call this censorship.
|
Originally posted by renaldow Only Moore would call this censorship. |
Originally posted by steebo777 So is it possible for Moore to use a different studio or perhaps an independent release instead of Di$ney/Miramax? Or are they under contract with eachother, which would prevent Moore from taking it to another studio? Must... see... this... film. How did these two come together in the first place - working for the mouse, hmmm (live and learn). |
Moore needs to suck it up . . . how many hundreds of movies have been held from release from how many hundreds of different reasons? Just because his has a political message does not mean that it is safe from the proverbial chopping block.
|
Originally posted by Giles Disney/Miramax + Moore = :hscratch: Miramax has options, one of which is to create a temporary company outside of Disney control and probably paid for straight from non-Miramax money via the Weinstein brothers. As for other movies getting held up, yes that does happen. However, Michael Moore is a hot commodity after Bowling for Columbine (which was done under Miramax as well). Cannes will probably be a good test of whether it is as great a movie as Moore thinks it is. Harvey Weinstein is usually pretty good at noticing good stuff and he often takes a hands-on approach with that kind of stuff. Moore's next movie: Eisner and Me? ;) |
The issue here is Moore is not really liked in the public eye for many reasons. Passions had a market. Even if this does "wow" people in Cannes, that still doesn't mean the general public will give a rats ass about this and it wont generate big bucks like Passions did. <i>Bowling for Columbine</i> grossed $40 million worldwide. Obviously, he's not as famous as Christ (The Passion) but to say he's not liked is a stretch. Considering how well his books sell and how well his films do, I'd say you are wrong. BFC made $37 million. Nothing to sneeze at. |
Originally posted by Jackskeleton He still has the freedom of speech. Just not the soap box at disney to stand on and yell his comments. |
Originally posted by Dimension X I don't understand why it's so hard for some people to understand this. |
Originally posted by CRM114 :hscratch: <i>Bowling for Columbine</i> grossed $40 million worldwide. Obviously, he's not as famous as Christ (The Passion) but to say he's not liked is a stretch. Considering how well his books sell and how well his films do, I'd say you are wrong. BFC made $37 million. Nothing to sneeze at. Arguing that this is a business decision based on predictions that people don't like Moore and this film won't sell just doesn't add up. |
I don't see what the big deal is. Moore is just a flavor of the month that people like or hate cuz it's still trendy to like or hate him. "Oooo he's so great because he hates the president." So what if Disney doesn't wanna release his movie. Move on and find another studio to do it. I'm sure there's one out there that would love to release it... And if he shows his film at Cannes and people like it, I'm sure he'll find one.
|
Didn't Disney already pay for the production of the movie? Or was this a distribution-only deal?
|
Originally posted by necros I don't see what the big deal is. Moore is just a flavor of the month .... |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:51 PM. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.