Disney says 'no' to Moore - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 05-05-2004, 11:01 AM   #1
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Basstrap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 10,726
Local Time: 02:04 AM
Disney says 'no' to Moore

From Michaelmoore.com

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
mmflint@aol.com
www.michaelmoore.com
__________________

__________________
Basstrap is offline  
Old 05-05-2004, 11:17 AM   #2
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 08:34 PM
Nice. Wrap yourself up in a conspiracy involving a Bush. Michael Moore is such a victim.

It is more likely that a sloppy anti-Bush film would be a box office bomb
__________________

__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 05-05-2004, 11:18 AM   #3
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 11:34 PM
Funny how this nation is starting to epitomize another (in)famous book.

"Freedom" is just starting to sound like another hollow Bush campaign promise. Between Disney and the Sinclair Broadcast Group, maybe it is about time we start reevaluating media ownership rules in this country, because the censorship that these large media conglomerates are starting to assert has become all the more apparent. I'm afraid to even analyze the censorship that they have asserted over their news networks. Viacom is the only one that seems to have a spine anymore. The rest are as hollow and scripted as their reality television.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 05-05-2004, 11:21 AM   #4
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 11:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
It is more likely that a sloppy anti-Bush film would be a box office bomb.
Haha...good one. This is certainly not the case, particularly when you look at the very low cost to make this film. It will not take much to recover their costs, even if it isn't successful by "Passion" standards.

Even if American audiences hate the movie, independent audiences, at minimum, will eat it up, not to mention Europe, which will eat up anything critical of Bush. This is just another fight between Disney and its strong-willed Miramax conquest. Miramax releases a lot of films that are critically-acclaimed and don't necessarily do as well in theaters. In fact, most of the DVDs I own are Miramax releases, coincidentally.

Seeing the success of "Bowling for Columbine," there is no reason why they wouldn't release this movie, except out of classic American disdain for dissent. America, for instance, was the only nation to censor "Eyes Wide Shut." So, yes, I do tend to think that the First Amendment, in the eyes of government and corpoate America, has become little more than a ruse to get people to fight their endless "war on terror," but they have little intent to actually follow through with it.

In capitalist speak, let the market decide whether this film is good or bad, not Disney.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 05-05-2004, 11:31 AM   #5
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 08:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon
In capitalist speak, let the market decide whether this film is good or bad, not Disney.
When Disney is fronting the marketing and distribution costs, they are the market.

You will have this film in your DVD collection soon enough.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 05-05-2004, 11:39 AM   #6
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 11:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
When Disney is fronting the marketing and distribution costs, they are the market.

You will have this film in your DVD collection soon enough.
After having studied media for as long as I have, this would be considered a very safe investment, because this isn't like a Hollywood blockbuster. It isn't like they had to spend $100 million to make the movie and then spend another $100 million in merchandising, only to see a flop ("Treasure Island," anyone?).

Considering Moore's past success with "Bowling for Columbine," which, forget the political controversy--it was highly successful, considering the cost-revenue ratio. However, this is where I think that it probably *is* boiling down to Eisner fearing that Disney will lose their tax cuts or some other political repercussions from good ol' Jeb.

BTW, I don't own any Michael Moore DVDs. Miramax releases most of the French films that I own, and that is over half of my collection right there. Overall, though, Disney really should wait until the reaction of this film at Cannes. If it is very well-received, as expected, then they would be stupid to not let Miramax distribute it. But, then again, if it is about not wanting to poke a stick at Jeb, then we can see precisely what is wrong about media ownership rules in this nation.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 05-05-2004, 11:44 AM   #7
Refugee
 
Klaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: on a one of these small green spots at that blue planet at the end of the milky way
Posts: 2,432
Local Time: 05:34 AM
I still don't like Mr. Moores books or movies but some interesting facts here:

"Bowling for Columbine," cost 3 mio. $ and brought back 120 mio$! (same genre and a Oscar winner!) so the follow up "Fahrenheit 9/11" (Production costs: 6 mio. $, allready payed by miramax) Should be lucrative too.

Disneystatement:
Quote:
...(the movie is) against Disney's interests not because of the company's business dealings with the government but because Disney caters to families of all political stripes and believes Mr. Moore's film, which does not have a release date, could alienate many.
Miramax tries now to publish the movie with another partner in north-america (it's ok for disney to show the new movie outside the USA)

(data from: tagesschau.de )
__________________
Klaus is offline  
Old 05-05-2004, 01:57 PM   #8
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,420
Local Time: 11:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon

America, for instance, was the only nation to censor "Eyes Wide Shut."
well that's a load of crap right there... the producers of eyes wide shut could've released the movie with an NC-17 rating. they wanted the R rating, so they were asked to cut it. if they cared more about the artistic value of the movie rather than it's commercial success, they would've just released it as is.

as for disney, i'm sure they saw a cut of the film before they came to this decision. they have the right to release whatever film they want. if i took my handy cam out and made myself a movie, and went to disney and asked them to release it, if they say no, it's no friggin violation of my first ammendment rights. from a business standpoint, they did not feel mr. moore's movie was good for their company. it's their right to do so. take your movie somewhere else.
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 05-05-2004, 02:01 PM   #9
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 11:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Headache in a Suitcase
well that's a load of crap right there... the producers of eyes wide shut could've released the movie with an NC-17 rating. they wanted the R rating, so they were asked to cut it. if they cared more about the artistic value of the movie rather than it's commercial success, they would've just released it as is.
That was a decision made by Warner Bros., the distributor, not Kubrick. The uncensored NC-17 version is available on Region 2 (PAL/UK) DVD, but the Region 1 (NTSC/US) DVD is censored. I would have forgiven their censorship of the film had they released an uncut DVD for the U.S., but they didn't.

So much for "freedom," and, again, it makes me look disdainfully on the media ownership climate in this nation, along with the MPAA.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 05-05-2004, 02:03 PM   #10
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,420
Local Time: 11:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon


That was a decision made by Warner Bros., the distributor, not Kubrick. The uncensored NC-17 version is available on Region 2 (PAL/UK) DVD, but the Region 1 (NTSC/US) DVD is censored. I would have forgiven their censorship of the film had they released an uncut DVD for the U.S., but they didn't.

So much for "freedom."

Melon
again, did the government censor the film? or did warner brothers? since when did warner brothers run america?
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 05-05-2004, 02:08 PM   #11
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 11:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Headache in a Suitcase
again, did the government censor the film? or did warner brothers? since when did warner brothers run america?
Reread what I said. I said that America was the only nation to censor the film; I did not say the government.

Fuck corporations.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 05-05-2004, 02:11 PM   #12
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,420
Local Time: 11:34 PM
alrighty then
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 05-05-2004, 03:24 PM   #13
Blue Crack Supplier
 
dazzledbylight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: in the sound dancing - w Bono & Edge :D
Posts: 33,002
Local Time: 11:34 PM
short 'n "sweet" {to Disney, that is}
__________________
dazzledbylight is offline  
Old 05-05-2004, 04:09 PM   #14
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 11:34 PM
Thank you Mickey Mouse!

I would be checking facts too before it is released!
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 05-05-2004, 04:18 PM   #15
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 11:34 PM
Michael...its not censorship when companies do not want to cuirculate your bag of lies. If the governement stopped you that would be censorship.

And one more thing, you human windbag, I have to ask why you cannot tell the truth in your own letter to your "fans".

Your agent was informed in MAY 2003 that they would not distribute it. You have a had a year to do something about it. Maybe you like generating your own negative press, to hype your piece of crap film to make more $$$$.

Shame on you liar!
__________________

__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com