Disney says 'no' to Moore

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
I don't believe the Kerry/McCain talk. McCain is a Republican, and is supporting Bush. If I were advising Kerry, I'd tell him to pick Clark as a running mate.
 
nbcrusader said:
The French liked Jerry Lewis movies as well.

From the Boston Globe:
http://www.boston.com/dailynews/143/world/Michael_Moore_s_Fahrenheit_9_1:.shtml

'Fahrenheit 9/11'' won the top award from sharply divided Cannes moviegoers, who found a solid crop of good movies among the 19 entries in the festival's main competition but no great ones that rose to front-runner status.

While ''Fahrenheit 9/11'' was well-received by Cannes audiences, many critics felt it was inferior to Moore's Academy Award-winning documentary ''Bowling for Columbine,'' which earned him a special prize at Cannes in 2002.

Some critics speculated that if ''Fahrenheit 9/11'' won the top prize, it would be more for the film's politics than its cinematic value.

...

Quentin Tarantino headed the nine-member jury that handed out prizes in Cannes' main competition. The other jurors included actresses Kathleen Turner, Tilda Swinton and Emmanuelle Beart.

Yep, those are very French names. :rolleyes:
(OK, Emmanuelle B?art actually is French)
BTW, the other five jurors were:
Edwidge Danticat (Haiti), Beno?t Poelvoorde (Belgium), Jerry Shatzberg (USA), Tsui Hark (Vietnam) and Peter Von Bagh (Finland).
Also very French... :rolleyes:

C ya!

Marty
 
the french eat snails and are therefore wrong
then again, they play rugby instead of american football so they might be on to something

michael moore tends to press his own point of view and should therefore not be recognised as a documentary maker but as a comedian
then again, Bush makes me laugh more

it's all very difficult really

I shall ponder this some more
unless I would actually go and watch this documentary and realise that like 99.7% of the world population I don't really care
 
I would like to remind people that, especially in a field dominated by postmodernism, all genre definitions are loosely enforced. All of them. But, even before postmodernism, there has been an unending debate as to what constitutes a documentary, and while one is more inclined to say that a documentary should be more "realist," Moore could also be a pioneer for the "formalist" documentary, because while it is not "realist" as a National Geographic Special, his films aren't fictional either. I personally believe that both can co-exist, as someone who has studied media extensively and likes the postmodern element within film/television production. :wink:

Melon
 
LOL! All this "controversy" from Disney is just giving Moore free
publicity for his film. More people will want to check this out.
"The film Disney refused to release" coming soon to a theater
near you.
:)
 
RockNRollDawgie said:
LOL! All this "controversy" from Disney is just giving Moore free
publicity for his film. More people will want to check this out.
"The film Disney refused to release" coming soon to a theater
near you.
:)

Give the man credit where credit is due.
 
Sorry, Ray Bradbury, I don't think you have a case, but nice try.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=sto...ap_en_mo/bradbury_fahrenheit_911_14&printer=1

Ray Bradbury is demanding an apology from filmmaker Michael Moore (news) for lifting the title from his classic science-fiction novel "Fahrenheit 451" without permission and wants the new documentary "Fahrenheit 9/11" to be renamed.

"He didn't ask my permission," Bradbury, 83, told The Associated Press on Friday. "That's not his novel, that's not his title, so he shouldn't have done it."

With respect to Bradbury, I'm glad that he has been as gentlemanly about the issue as he has been, but, as far as I know, titles are not copyrightable. Hence, if I wanted to, I could create a movie called "Casablanca" that has absolutely nothing to do with the original film (none of the same script, characters, setting, etc.), and there's not a thing anyone could do about it. However, there's a second quotient in this issue: the fact that Moore could probably argue that his title falls under a parody, and I think that the humorous tone of his "documentary" would very likely muster any objective challenge.

Frankly, I wouldn't doubt that Bradbury might ultimately try and go to court, if the title isn't changed, but I also don't think he would win either.

Melon
 
melon said:
Sorry, Ray Bradbury, I don't think you have a case, but nice try.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=sto...ap_en_mo/bradbury_fahrenheit_911_14&printer=1



With respect to Bradbury, I'm glad that he has been as gentlemanly about the issue as he has been, but, as far as I know, titles are not copyrightable. Hence, if I wanted to, I could create a movie called "Casablanca" that has absolutely nothing to do with the original film (none of the same script, characters, setting, etc.), and there's not a thing anyone could do about it. However, there's a second quotient in this issue: the fact that Moore could probably argue that his title falls under a parody, and I think that the humorous tone of his "documentary" would very likely muster any objective challenge.

Frankly, I wouldn't doubt that Bradbury might ultimately try and go to court, if the title isn't changed, but I also don't think he would win either.

Melon

while he has a point and has the right to be upset with mr. moore for having his book title associated with such a controversial movie, i'd have to agree that he doesn't have much of a case, legally speaking. frankly i think mr. bradbury is more upset over the fact that he planned on a new movie based on his original book, and now the title will be associated with moore's movie. so as usuall, it comes down to the almighty dollar.


did i just defend michael moore? :reject: :banghead:
 
Last edited:
I find this ironic

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,122680,00.html

'Fahrenheit 9/11' Gets Standing Ovation
Tuesday, June 15, 2004
By Roger Friedman
But once "F9/11" gets to audiences beyond screenings, it won't be dependent on celebrities for approbation. It turns out to be a really brilliant piece of work, and a film that members of all political parties should see without fail.

As much as some might try to marginalize this film as a screed against President George Bush, "F9/11" ? as we saw last night ? is a tribute to patriotism, to the American sense of duty ? and at the same time a indictment of stupidity and avarice.

...
 
I printed the article so that when Roger Ailes finds it, fires Friedman, and yanks the article that I still have evidence of it being posted on FOXNews.com. :sexywink:

Melon
 
I have already gotten the bulldshit propaganda telling me not to see this movie from a large group of people who have not even seen the movie...oh how I love the American right.
 
FizzingWhizzbees said:


R rated means you have to be 17 years old or older to see the movie, unless you're accompanied by an adult.
:ohmy: Is this move more dangerous for teenagers than rape and violence scenes :confused:

:|
 
I believe the R rating is due to violent images in war footage

The ratings controversy might also be more publicity

http://money.cnn.com/2004/06/16/news/newsmakers/moore_movie/index.htm

I saw a piece on the news w/ one of the Congressmen he confronts in the movie. I can't remember the details, but he says Moore edited it to make him look like he just had a blank/stupid expression on his face(that this was his only response)..he actually said after it was just cut at that that he would follow up on it. Moore of course said he didn't edit the Congressman out at all, that he never had a speaking part in it, so that's not editing :eyebrow: Of course that's just one instance, but I can't help but wonder about how he edited the rest
 
I think it is clear how Moore has edited the movie.

And the choir he preaches to will relish the editing to help demonize the right. After all, it is only entertainment.
 
LIES, LIES AND SLANDER!!!

Moore is a patriot who tells it like it is like an enema of truth!!!! He fights against the right wing conspiracy because he is a motivated hero and not because of the huge sums of cash he gets.
 
It's coming to my town on Friday and the theater was so overwhelmed by phone calls about it that they put advanced tickets on sale today, which they never do, not even for something like LOTR. I just got tickets for Friday night and it's almost sold out.
 
I sincerely question the reliability of such a blatantly biased source as "World Net Daily."

They seem to like to write about "vast left-wing conspiracies." Definitely further right-wing than FOX News.

Melon
 
FizzingWhizzbees said:


R rated means you have to be 17 years old or older to see the movie, unless you're accompanied by an adult.


17 year olds should not be aloud to see it.

they're one year away from being ellgible to vote!
 
Back
Top Bottom