Guess who's back?
 

Ok team.
As you all know, our fave filmaker, Michael Moore just won the Palm D'or for his new film, Farenheit 9/11 at the Cannes film festival.
Once again, ol' Mikey takes potshots at GW for his policies before and after 9/11 and his links to the Bin Laden family.
Miramax films has been banned by the Disney Corp from distributing the film due to its controversial subject matter.
Now then, you all know which side of the fence I fall on when it comes to politics but what's going on here?

1. Should Disney ban the film due to controversial subject matter?
2. What happened to free speech?
3. Isn't that in your constitution?
4. Are we allowed to critisise the President?
5. Who decides?
6. Shouldn't they just show the film and let the people decide whether they want to believe it or just walk out or whatever?

Believe me, I have been to places where you cannot critisise the govt and they are not pleasant places to be. Is this what America will become?

Click here for the story on Cannes.

Click
here for the censorship part

OK class, discuss. Gentlemen (you know who you are) START YOUR ENGINES

The US government didn't squash the film from being shown. A private company (Disney) did. As a company the board can decide what gets pushed out what doesn't. Nothing to do with the Constitution and all that good stuff. As a company I wouldn't publish that kind of crap. He should take it to another smaller outfit that would love the publicity of pushing the film.

Free speech runs rampant in the US and every nuckle-dragging-mouth-breather has been bashing the current administration. Every day/night on the news someone is bashing Bush & his boys. Plus, it's an election year - that doesn't help. Moore is just a fat shmuck that dislikes anyone in office. He wants to run the world (IMO). I could care less about him or his worthless movies, and hopefully one day he'll get so disgusted with the USA he'll move elsewhere. But that's not likely to happen since the US is the best place on earth to live (IMHO) and he knows it. What a jackarse.

ARRRRrrggghhhh... there goes the 'ol blood pressure again... I need to :smoke: now. Great..

I want a pack a rabies infested wolves to rip that slug Micheal Moore to pieces. That felt really good to get off my chest... now to the topic at hand. As dzervit said Disney is a private company that can do as it pleases. If they choose to not distribute the film it's their choice. If moore gets another group to distribute it then it gets shown which will most likely happen.

Umm anyone can say as they please( although it may cause repercussions they may not enjoy). This is not an issue of free speech.

exactly what dzervit said, the US government isn't putting the kabash on the film, Disney is. I agree with their stance in not wanting to get involved with the film. I'd tell that fat bastard to take his film elsewhere too.

EnglishAdam,

1. Should Disney ban the film due to controversial subject matter? Whether they should, or shouldn't, that's their business decision to make.
2. What happened to free speech? I don't think that Disney's decision is a "Freedom of Speech" issue..insofar as they are not being pressured or prevented by the government from distributing the film. I believe that they do not want their business to suffer from the potential negative backlash from consumers over a controversial film like this.
3. Isn't that in your constitution? Freedom of speech is part of our "Bill of Rights"...I'll leave it to 01XLT to quote the particlar sections that apply. Again, I don't feel that this is a "Freedom of Speech" issue.
4. Are we allowed to critisise the President? I would say so...just pick up a newspaper or log on to the internet. Criticsm abounds.
5. Who decides? Who decides if we can criticise the President, or who decides whether the film should be made available for me to see?
6. Shouldn't they just show the film and let the people decide whether they want to believe it or just walk out or whatever? Like I said before, I believe it's a business decision for them. Just like Mel Gibson's "The Passion" raised doubts about it's ability to be a commercial success, then became one after all of the press regarding the controversy with the film...Michael Moore's film will probably end up being distributed by someone willing to take the risk of the backlash and leverage the controversy. The film will be seen by many who will want to see what all the fuss has been about. Most people will either love it or hate it based on their political leanings. Many already have strong feelings about the movie without having even seen it.

John

Re: Guess who's back?
 

EA,

I think you added this in the edit that occured after I hit the "Reply" button when I first read your message. In any case, I still see nothing that indicates there is Government censorship involved here. Michael Moore implies that the decsion made by Disney was influenced by the tax breaks that Disney receives from the state of Florida and that offending Florida's governor (Jeb Bush) and may cause them to lose those breaks. I think that is quite a stretch to try to link the decison to being influenced by the government. More likely, Disney is afraid of the media & theme park boycotts that would likely be organized by any number of groups if the film were to be released with their name attached.

Personally, it doesn't bother me if the film is distributed in the U.S. Lots and lots of good & bad films (too many bad, IMO) are distrubuted all the time. This one is just getting a lot of free publicity.

John

Michael Moore is just a disgruntled former auto worker that makes a living pissing people off.

I just have to laugh at Michael Moore. The man epitomizes everything he hates (and he does hate btw). Fat, rich, lying bastard. :rolleyes:

As far as censorship, I think it's been pretty much stated. Disney doesn't want to be involved with this type of stuff. It's happened a few times before. Dogma being one example.

hit wrong button

I could not have said it better myself! I don't degrudge people their beliefs but I have heard Moore speak, he is a shameless self promoter, an egotisitcal dirtbag and a pompous a$$ of imense proportions who will do anything to get himself a spotlight and an audience whether it is an appropriate venue for his rhetoric or not (just thank the audience for the award and sit down, don't bother with a political rant). He is a crazy left wing nut b/c it pays for him to cater to those types of people (see Cannes film festival) so he can market more of his brand of crap films and get more of the spotlight. He probably secretly votes republican!:lol:

Yeah - what they all said.

What type of lowlife puts out a so called 'documentary' on a tragic incident so he can make a ***** load of money and use it as a means of telling everyone HIS political views.

Why the hell are we giving him this free publicity?

Hmmm... I got an idea... let's buy a SINGLE copy of the flick (better yet, bootleg it), then post it on every newsgroup/web site/ftp server known to man. Then alert the media it can be downloaded for free...

.. at least then people can watch it and no proceeds will go to feeding that fat bastard. Then we can :lol: watching him cry about how unfair it is that he's not getting paid!! BWWWWAAAAH HAH HA HA HA - no more twinkies for you jackarse!!! Your movie is seen by millions, but no $$ for you!!! :devil:

That's all he's after - $$$. Hit 'em where it hurts!!

I applaud Michael Moore. I don't agree with a lot of his views, but I can't fault someone for standing up for their beliefs. I think it is great we have someone like Michael Moore getting people to open their eyes and discuss the issues. If what he's saying is lies then so be it but at least people are examining the issues more than glossing over newspaper headlines. IMO the US full of people who say they care about something and/or believe strongly in something else but don't do anything about it. Ya'll can moan and groan on here all you want but unless you take some actions then nothing is going to change. I bet 9 out of 10 people would agree politicians and/or the government is corrupt but that's because we let it be that way.

Side note. The same argument could be used as to why MM is so successful. The population in general (yes I'm being too broad) will watch the film and take it hook line and sinker. We need to debate the issues not just ignore them. My girlfriend just read MM's "Dude, Where's my Country" it's taken way to much energy to explain to her that his books are not definitive.

As was mentioned before the only entity that can be guilty of “censorship” is government itself.

Any privately owned business/enterprise/corporation etc can censor anything they want. That is why “public” TV and radio broadcast have to follow strict outlines on what they can and can not say over the “public” airway, for example particular words etc.

However, privately owned TV stations (cable) and airwaves (satellite) can say and do just about what ever they want since the public does not own it or have a right to it.

Disney is well within their legal rights to not run or show the movie. If Disney owns the movie they could take it and edit what ever they wish to edit out of it because it is their personal property. Is what Disney did right? Well that’s for Disney’s customers to decide and may affect the next decision Disney makes on an issue like this…

Thanks 01 XLT Sport. I knew I could count on you. :thumbsup:

John