Acquiunk wrote:joefromchicago wrote:[
Your attorney is correct. Titles of books, movies, plays, etc. cannot be copyrighted.
If that is the case then what is copyrighted? It would seem to me that Bradbury would have a case if More had titled his movie Fahrenheit 451 as that is central to his reputation as an author.
Bradbury can copyright his words, he can copyright his characters, but he can't copyright his titles. Go to
www.imdb.com and search titles like
"monkey business" or
"independence day": you'd quickly find that lots of movies share the same title.
Now, if Moore was attempting to pass off his work as that of Bradbury, he'd have a problem. But as long as it was clear that his work was distinct from that of Bradbury's, he would be legally entitled to call his film "Fahrenheit 451" or "The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms" or even "Moby Dick."
There are often novels and movies of the same title with different concepts. That's because they are within the copyright laws. Bradbury should thank Shakespeare who can't sue for "Something Wicked This Way Comes," but that's also because he's dead.
It would surprise me greatly if Bradbury was very offended at all, even aside from the legal issues. A tip of the hat, from one author or artist to another, when something has been borrowed or alluded to seems mannerly to me, but as in this case, where the borrowing is completely above board, that borrowing can itself be a 'tip of the hat'.
The right has instituted a full court press against Moore and the film, sending out their scrubbed-faced minions to all compass points. The good reviews, like Denby's in the New Yorker, take note of where Moore omits data or where he posits background intentions/events which are highly theoretical if not unlikely, but also take note of the effectiveness and the passion and the truths in this Moore film.
The New Right learned certain effective techniques in media control and rhetoric from the left, and they've put it to good use in gaining control of the republican party and the country. It's now quite fair for the left to adopt some of the newer tricks that the New Right had developed over the last 20 or so years, and to bring that ammo to the battle. The key figures of the modern right (Kristol, Norquist, Reed, Limbaugh, etc) have engaged and fomented divisive and partisan politics. I think it a very happy thing to join them in their game.
joefromchicago wrote: But as long as it was clear that his work was distinct from that of Bradbury's, he would be legally entitled to call his film "Fahrenheit 451" or "The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms" or even "Moby Dick."
Ok I get it. The title of my next movie, actually my first movie, that is if I ever get to make a movie, will be: Moby Dick: The Fahrenheit 451 Beast from 20,000 Fathoms. It should be a mega block buster.
The band Moby could provide the score.
It would be a whale of a film probing the depths of the big mouthed politicians.
That bit about Moore going to senators asking them to enlist their sons or daughters came after showing recruiters targeting the poorer folks of America to join the armed forces knowing that the more well to do would have no reason to since they can afford to go to college.
That was one of the most brilliant parts of the film. The other is letting Bush and Co. flash across the screen indicting himself. The parts were little sight and sound bites but add them up and it is devastating.
As I wrote elsewhere, the right calls it Moore's lies - but, it is simply the facts of the Bush regimes with Moore's slanted anecdotes of which Moore has not taken any attempt to justify his umbrage.
