Disney Forbids Distribution of Moore Film

After that LAST piece of dreck that he passed off as a documentary (Columbine), I too would be disinclined to release this 'work'.

I think that trying to release a poorly disguised bit of anti Bush propaganda just in time for the November elections and trying to pass it off as a documentary just goes to show what many of us knew...

Michael Moore wants to be the Leni Riefenstahl of the Democratic Party.

Like her, he wants to be recognized as a documentary artist, and like her, he is just passing off barely concealed propaganda as 'fact'. (I think SHE did it MUCH better, but there is no accounting for some peoples taste.)

( I still think Moore should have had his Oscar taken back for 'Coumbine' because of the 'staged' and 'set up' scenes he passed off as a legitimate film. )

Thanks
I hope that the rabid, bootlickin, bootclickin' right wing zealots protest this film.

This looks like great publicity for the film.

Good work, Disney!
They coulda kept quiet, released it into some dim bulb locations where no one would watch it, and let it die. They know how to sink films they don't care about. But, no.

Gotta love it.

Yes... come see his new film.

Go ahead and delude yourself that Moore is anything other than the propogandist that he is.


Try reading the facts on Moore's last 'documentary' here at:

http://www.bowlingfortruth.com/

Enlighten me -- just what scenes were "set up" and/or "staged?"
I'm sure the judges at the Cannes Film Festival would also like to know.

Check the link LW

Doesn't matter if he's a propagandist, sooth-sayer or Martian, Fedral. This is getting the film some super attention, and we all know controversy sells tickets.

Check out bowlingfortruth? I think not.
I think I'll stick to actual news sources, without a U.S. bone to pick.

Controversy DOES sell tickets, but if the film isn't distributed to the theatres, no one will see it.

0 butts in seats = 0 dollars for Moore

Sites like that with their bogus analysis can never be taken seriously. Their descriptions are so obviously contrived by amateurs and anyone who can't see through them is not operating on all cylinders.

Dear MoveOn member,
Oscar-winning director Michael Moore has finished his latest documentary, but The Walt Disney Company is refusing to let the American public see it.

The film, "Fahrenheit 911," is critical of President Bush's actions before and after Sept. 11 and describes Bush's relationships with powerful Saudi families, including that of Osama bin Laden.

According to the New York Times, Moore's agent says embattled Disney chief Michael Eisner feared the documentary could endanger the company's tax breaks in Florida, where Bush's brother, Jeb, is governor.

We can't let corporate favors for politicians dictate what movies we see. Tell Disney to show us Michael Moore's documentary:

John Spelich
Corporate Communications
The Walt Disney Company
Phone: (818) 560-8543

If the line is busy, call a Disney store near you. The salespeople aren't responsible for this decision, but ask them to pass your concerns on to the manager.

If it will help you sleep, I'll agree.


But it will get distribution. There's more than one way to skin that cat.

Not many Disney stores left to call but there's nothing and there's only sales clerks manning the stores that are hanging on. Their retail stores failing is one of the problems that brought down Eisner. Selling manufactured animation cels for fifty times what they are worth is hardly an endorsement for Disney.

Look, it's just no big deal.

The movie gets a lot of extra publicity and finds another distributor.

That's not to say this kind of corporate censorship combined with media concentration isn't an issue, but I doubt it's going to impact this movie one bit.

Moore is the shizznit, if for no other reason than he really gets the goats of the wingnuts (like Fedral).

I really laughed at how he fed it to Moses in "Bowling."

The theatrical boxoffice outside of the U.S. will bring poor Michale a bundle of dough and he's not going to lay down an play dead over this little set-back.

It certainly shows how effective he is when the righties fall for the bait and begin gnashing their teeth.

I have to admit that I am hip hop challenged and so can't precisely translate "shizznit," but if it means "sh*thead," I whole heartedly agree.

"Wingnuts (like Fedral)" Whether or not this is "shizznit," it certainly is "Mooresian," which is to say, it is base partisan tripe.

Moore is a opportunist making a huge fortune masquerading as the voice of the proletariat. That this voice is utterly obnoxious is telling as to his audience of syncophants. Does anyone think that Moore can possibly be as important as he thinks he is?

By the way Federal, I appreciated your comments. Obviously this makes be a fellow "wingnut," but forshizzle wingnizzle, we rizzle. (I think)

Good discussion; I'm learning some'tn. Thx, c.i.

Another point of view.
******************
Disney Forbidding Distribution of Film That Criticizes Bush
May 5, 2004
By JIM RUTENBERG

WASHINGTON, May 4 - The Walt Disney Company is blocking its
Miramax division from distributing a new documentary by
Michael Moore that harshly criticizes President Bush,
executives at both Disney and Miramax said Tuesday.

The film, "Fahrenheit 911," links Mr. Bush and prominent
Saudis - including the family of Osama bin Laden - and
criticizes Mr. Bush's actions before and after the Sept. 11
terrorist attacks.

Disney, which bought Miramax more than a decade ago, has a
contractual agreement with the Miramax principals, Bob and
Harvey Weinstein, allowing it to prevent the company from
distributing films under certain circumstances, like an
excessive budget or an NC-17 rating.

Executives at Miramax, who became principal investors in
Mr. Moore's project last spring, do not believe that this
is one of those cases, people involved in the production of
the film said. If a compromise is not reached, these people
said, the matter could go to mediation, though neither side
is said to want to travel that route.

In a statement, Matthew Hiltzik, a spokesman for Miramax,
said: "We're discussing the issue with Disney. We're
looking at all of our options and look forward to resolving
this amicably."

But Disney executives indicated that they would not budge
from their position forbidding Miramax to be the
distributor of the film in North America. Overseas rights
have been sold to a number of companies, executives said.

"We advised both the agent and Miramax in May of 2003 that
the film would not be distributed by Miramax," said Zenia
Mucha, a company spokeswoman, referring to Mr. Moore's
agent. "That decision stands."

Disney came under heavy criticism from conservatives last
May after the disclosure that Miramax had agreed to finance
the film when Icon Productions, Mel Gibson's company,
backed out.

Mr. Moore's agent, Ari Emanuel, said Michael D. Eisner,
Disney's chief executive, asked him last spring to pull out
of the deal with Miramax. Mr. Emanuel said Mr. Eisner
expressed particular concern that it would endanger tax
breaks Disney receives for its theme park, hotels and other
ventures in Florida, where Mr. Bush's brother, Jeb, is
governor.

"Michael Eisner asked me not to sell this movie to Harvey
Weinstein; that doesn't mean I listened to him," Mr.
Emanuel said. "He definitely indicated there were tax
incentives he was getting for the Disney corporation and
that's why he didn't want me to sell it to Miramax. He
didn't want a Disney company involved."

Disney executives deny that accusation, though they said
their displeasure over the deal was made clear to Miramax
and Mr. Emanuel.

A senior Disney executive elaborated that the company had
the right to quash Miramax's distribution of films if it
deemed their distribution to be against the interests of
the company. The executive said Mr. Moore's film is deemed
to be 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.

"It's not in the interest of any major corporation to be
dragged into a highly charged partisan political battle,"
this executive said.

Miramax is free to seek another distributor in North
America, but such a deal would force it to share profits
and be a blow to Harvey Weinstein, a big donor to
Democrats.

Mr. Moore, who will present the film at the Cannes film
festival this month, criticized Disney's decision in an
interview on Tuesday, saying, "At some point the question
has to be asked, `Should this be happening in a free and
open society where the monied interests essentially call
the shots regarding the information that the public is
allowed to see?' "

Mr. Moore's films, like "Roger and Me" and "Bowling for
Columbine," are often a political lightning rod, as Mr.
Moore sets out to skewer what he says are the misguided
priorities of conservatives and big business. They have
also often performed well at the box office. His most
recent movie, "Bowling for Columbine," took in about $22
million in North America for United Artists. His books,
like "Stupid White Men," a jeremiad against the Bush
administration that has sold more than a million copies,
have also been lucrative.

Mr. Moore does not disagree that "Fahrenheit 911" is highly
charged, but he took issue with the description of it as
partisan. "If this is partisan in any way it is partisan on
the side of the poor and working people in this country who
provide fodder for this war machine," he said.

Mr. Moore said the film describes financial connections
between the Bush family and its associates and prominent
Saudi Arabian families that go back three decades. He said
it closely explores the government's role in the evacuation
of relatives of Mr. bin Laden from the United States
immediately after the 2001 attacks. The film includes
comments from American soldiers on the ground in Iraq
expressing disillusionment with the war, he said.

Mr. Moore once planned to produce the film with Mr.
Gibson's company, but "the project wasn't right for Icon,"
said Alan Nierob, an Icon spokesman, adding that the
decision had nothing to do with politics.

Miramax stepped in immediately. The company had distributed
Mr. Moore's 1997 film, "The Big One." In return for
providing most of the new film's $6 million budget, Miramax
was positioned to distribute it.

While Disney's objections were made clear early on, one
executive said the Miramax leadership hoped it would be
able to prevail upon Disney to sign off on distribution,
which would ideally happen this summer, before the election
and when political interest is high.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/05/national/05DISN.html?ex=1084791905&ei=1&en=d7adac4b71843c01

Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company