NationStates Jolt Archive

News just in:
http://money.cnn.com/2004/05/05/news/fortune500/disney_moore.reut/index.htm

Thought I'd just throw this in since TRA is no more.

Hmm, I don't know what side to take on this one. On the one hand, I really love Miramax, and I really hate Disney, so I want to see Weinstein spite Eisner. But on the other hand, I really, really hate Michael Moore, and don't want his movie to get released. I'm torn.

Well It will make a lot of money for whoever the hell releases it.

I hope Weinstein does get one over Eisner. Hopefully everyone will realise Moore for what he is.

I hope Weinstein does get one over Eisner. Hopefully everyone will realise Moore for what he is.

Yeah, I want Weinstein to trump Eisner (which he will do, because money talks), but I really dislike Moore. I'd rather his movie not make him money. It's going to gain him fame and notoriety whether or not it gets released, I just don't want him to make alot of money off of it.

what more evidence is needed to prove the dangers of media consolidation and censorship?

He's a manipulative pundit. Just the same as Limbaugh, Coultier and O'reilley. They make a lot of money. The conservative ones I especially wonder If they even personally care for the political sides they have chosen.

But They probably think that the ends justify the means. Its ok to be manipulative and bend facts, just as long as It gets people round to your political point of view. But at least moore has the guts to admit it when he gets called on his BS.

He's a manipulative pundit. Just the same as Limbaugh, Coultier and O'reilley. They make a lot of money. The conservative ones I especially wonder If they even personally care for the political sides they have chosen.

But They probably think that the ends justify the means. Its ok to be manipulative and bend facts, just as long as It gets people round to your political point of view. But at least moore has the guts to admit it when he gets called on his BS.

When has he admitted to being wrong on anything?

He's a manipulative pundit. Just the same as Limbaugh, Coultier and O'reilley. They make a lot of money. The conservative ones I especially wonder If they even personally care for the political sides they have chosen.

But They probably think that the ends justify the means. Its ok to be manipulative and bend facts, just as long as It gets people round to your political point of view. But at least moore has the guts to admit it when he gets called on his BS.

When has he admitted to being wrong on anything?

He acknowledges it, but iirc he explains away inaccuracies as satire. There's an article somewhere.

I cannot stand him, even though if I was in America I would be called 'liberal'

Not on political opinions but on Spinning facts

He's a manipulative pundit. Just the same as Limbaugh, Coultier and O'reilley. They make a lot of money. The conservative ones I especially wonder If they even personally care for the political sides they have chosen.

But They probably think that the ends justify the means. Its ok to be manipulative and bend facts, just as long as It gets people round to your political point of view. But at least moore has the guts to admit it when he gets called on his BS.

When has he admitted to being wrong on anything?

He acknowledges it, but iirc he explains away inaccuracies as satire. There's an article somewhere.

I cannot stand him, even though if I was in America I would be called 'liberal'

I hate him so much because when people say the word "liberal" in an insulting fashion, they're thinking of him. He's the poster child for extreme liberalism, and he's the stereotype that all normal liberal types like myself have to fight to avoid.

Here's an article from the Guardian, the staplw of the British left-wing.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,5673,1088297,00.html

Did any of you who "hate" Moore actually see Bowling for Columbine? It was a great documentary. It highlighted many of the problems in American society in a very smart and many times witty way. Most of all it was very poignant and made some people really think. That's what a good film maker does. If you don't like him, that's fine, that's your opinion, but I hope you have at least given him a chance and watched some of his films.

Did any of you who "hate" Moore actually see Bowling for Columbine? It was a great documentary. It highlighted many of the problems in American society in a very smart and many times witty way. Most of all it was very poignant and made some people really think. That's what a good film maker does. If you don't like him, that's fine, that's your opinion, but I hope you have at least given him a chance and watched some of his films.

Its true that Moore comes under fire Because He's a bit loose. But He mainly gives liberals A bad name because he's a controversial Public Liberal Figure. Thats it. It Makes him Fair game for all the other mean conservative pundits.

Even if He had impeccable Credibility, The Right wing Attack machine :twisted: would still want to tear him a new one

Sorry for the double post. Darn server went wonky on me.

A few more links because I'm bored, although I doubt they will illuminate further:

http://news.google.co.uk/news?hl=en&edition=uk&ie=UTF-8&newsclusterurl=http://www.dailynews.com/Stories/0,1413,200~20954~2127286,00.html


To Elenta: It is an informed opinion on my part. I've seen Bowling...., and read his books. They are good (apart from "Dude where's my country"), but I still think he is a pompous, obnoxious, self important ass who occasionally lies.

In all fairness no..never read his books, nor saw in it's entirety his movie, but I've seen enough of his television interviews to think he does you liberals poorly, especially when he goes being driven around in his stretch limos and private jet..he is a pompous ass, and ocassionally lie?...is that like being occassionally sexually active?...lol...He'd lie bout his mother dying if he thought it'd get a few more of his books sold.

And seeing as how the last movie by liberals "The Reagans" was so biased it wasn't funny I'd think that anyone wanting to do a movie would think twice very carefully before putting money to any movie.

I think Moore is 'dangerous' in another sense too. In Britain we don't get too much info on details in the states, and he drowns out better (imho) writers. Namely Bill Maher, the only reason I got "When you ride alone you ride with Bin Laden" is because I happened to find the audio version on the internet, and I only found out about Maher by accident (I was looking for stuff by Bill Hicks).


Another good book I recommend to everyone is "The Best Democracy Money can Buy" by Greg Palast.

To quote a friend who's given up on accessing the forum (I've edited some choice anglo-saxon):

"Aah, forget it, then. Even lefties get unnecessarily
idiotic over Michael Moore. And I've just given up
reading Aaronovitch's arrant c**tery."

I look at Michael Moore as a sanitised American equivalent of the great Mark Thomas. I think he does more good than harm, especially with Bowling for Columbine.

Aaronovitch, loathsome faux-liberal that he is, is thankfully not that representative of the Guardian's views.

Here's an article from the Guardian, the staplw of the British left-wing. [...]
Eh? Since when has The Guardian been 'left-wing'. It's traditionally a moderate liberal newspaper. The most well known left-wing papers in Britain are Socialist Worker and The Daily Mirror (which used to support the Labour Party in the days when that party held socialist principles).

The Grand Duchy of Tarazania

The Mirror hasn't been left-wing in a long time. I'd say the most left wing (ie centre-left in our ludicrously right-skewed media) mainstream newspaper is the Guardian, with the Mirror and the Observer barely left of centre.

You omitted the Morning Star, which I believe (though I don't have figures to hand) is more widely read than the Socialist Worker. Predictably, they hate each other.

DAILY MIRROR?!

Isnt that the one with the Naughty Pictures on the front?

Naughty pictures? Erm, occasionally.. sort of. You might be thinking of the Sun (very right wing), the Star (ditto) or the Sport (not political, just soft porn).

But it is a tabloid right. The only British papers I follow are the Guardian and that other one.

Independent's OK. Times & Telegraph are very far from my political tastes but have good standing.

Here's the part of the article that bugged me the most:
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.
Emphasis mine.

I have little doubt that Emanuel is telling the truth, simply because it makes sense that Disney execs would be concerned over precisely that sort of thing. There are few politicians who are above retribution, and Jeb certainly isn't one of them--it would be easy to imagine a special session of the Florida legislature being called later this year if Disney were the driving force behind a film that made Jeb's family look bad.

To be quite blunt about it, I don't like that Disney is pulling this kind of stunt, but it doesn't surprise me. Not in the least. And in the end, just like with the brouhaha over the publication of Stupid White Men, the movie will come out and will be held up as the answer to every question by some and a pack of lies by others and the truth of the matter will lie somewhere in the middle as always.

Independent's OK. Times & Telegraph are very far from my political tastes but have good standing.

Do you ever read Private Eye?

I read the Independent (and the Guardian online). I don't trust the Times and I have a near perverted Pavlovian response to the Telegraph (it was considered Gospel for many I knew growing up).

However I thin k the worst is the Mail.

Why is this guy, the guy who hates the "American corporation," going to one of the biggest media conglomerates in the world to distribute his movie?

Why doesn't he go Mel Gibson's way and distribute it himself?

I don't agree with every thing Michael Moore has said and done, however, on the whole, it is my belief he's quite brilliant. The problem is we live in a society today where there is a lot of people in the United States seem to think "liberal" is a dirty word. Outside of America.. liberal is not a dirty word. I have read Moore and have seen some of his movies.. and I must say he does hit the nail on the head on a lot of issues. While agreed he does it in a way that might be questionable some times, It doesn't make what he says any less true.

Why is this guy, the guy who hates the "American corporation," going to one of the biggest media conglomerates in the world to distribute his movie?

Why doesn't he go Mel Gibson's way and distribute it himself?

Because corporations worship money. If it is going to make a buttload of money they would publish it.

Contraversy is brilliant advertising. PT Barnum once said "I don't care what you say about me, just make sure you spell my name right!" ;)

Many people who probably would have not gone to see the film probably will now. Afterall what would make Disney upset?

I don't agree with every thing Michael Moore has said and done, however, on the whole, it is my belief he's quite brilliant. The problem is we live in a society today where there is a lot of people in the United States seem to think "liberal" is a dirty word. Outside of America.. liberal is not a dirty word. I have read Moore and have seen some of his movies.. and I must say he does hit the nail on the head on a lot of issues. While agreed he does it in a way that might be questionable some times, It doesn't make what he says any less true.

Damn Steph! I actually agree with you! :shock: (Looks outside for 4 guys on horses :lol: )

It is amusing that the neo-cons actually spit when they say liberal!

I wonder if the shrub's people have a hand in this?

Anybody know if the Disney Corp makes heavy donations to the Repubs like Clear Channel and Sinclair?

This is just a public stunt to hype the movie while simultaneously making a tarnished Disney appear less tacky then they really are. It's quite brilliant, I my add.

I don't agree with every thing Michael Moore has said and done, however, on the whole, it is my belief he's quite brilliant. The problem is we live in a society today where there is a lot of people in the United States seem to think "liberal" is a dirty word. Outside of America.. liberal is not a dirty word. I have read Moore and have seen some of his movies.. and I must say he does hit the nail on the head on a lot of issues. While agreed he does it in a way that might be questionable some times, It doesn't make what he says any less true.

Damn Steph! I actually agree with you! :shock: (Looks outside for 4 guys on horses :lol: )

It is amusing that the neo-cons actually spit when they say liberal!

I wonder if the shrub's people have a hand in this?

Anybody know if the Disney Corp makes heavy donations to the Repubs like Clear Channel and Sinclair?

Oh, btw Black Forrest.. I responded to your post from yesterday where you challenged my statement.. it can be found here

http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=143414&start=40

;)

Why is this guy, the guy who hates the "American corporation," going to one of the biggest media conglomerates in the world to distribute his movie?

probably for the same reason that the Communist party of America sells lunchboxes and other merchandise for profit, while the Ayn Rand Association is a non-profit...this world is just chock full of irony.

Moore whines that it "shouldn't be allowed in a free country." Presumably, in a free country, everyone should have the right to coerce private business to do your deeds.

This Orwellian use of language can only be judged one thing: evil.

War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.

And... rights are oppression.

Independent's OK. Times & Telegraph are very far from my political tastes but have good standing.

Do you ever read Private Eye?

I read the Independent (and the Guardian online). I don't trust the Times and I have a near perverted Pavlovian response to the Telegraph (it was considered Gospel for many I knew growing up).

However I thin k the worst is the Mail.

I think the worst paper is The Sun, although the Mail comes close.

He's a manipulative pundit. Just the same as Limbaugh, Coultier and O'reilley. They make a lot of money. The conservative ones I especially wonder If they even personally care for the political sides they have chosen.

But They probably think that the ends justify the means. Its ok to be manipulative and bend facts, just as long as It gets people round to your political point of view. But at least moore has the guts to admit it when he gets called on his BS.

When has he admitted to being wrong on anything?

He acknowledges it, but iirc he explains away inaccuracies as satire. There's an article somewhere.

I cannot stand him, even though if I was in America I would be called 'liberal'

I hate him so much because when people say the word "liberal" in an insulting fashion, they're thinking of him. He's the poster child for extreme liberalism, and he's the stereotype that all normal liberal types like myself have to fight to avoid.

you're the type that gives liberals a bad name. michael moore is an incredible guy. what's your problem?

I think a better title for this post would have been "disney cancels poorly thought-out politicaly-motivated screen play that promised to make little is any money"

Little is any money?

...

Wow ... That is so deep.

sorry, little if any money

I think the worst paper is The Sun, although the Mail comes close.

The Sun is the most utterly loathsome publication on the entire planet, with the possible exception of anything written by Paul Burrell.

Yeah He oughtta be thrown in the tower of london. And Kept at the mercy of Prince Charles :twisted:

Yeah He oughtta be thrown in the tower of london. And Kept at the mercy of Prince Charles :twisted:

He could be a new exibit. We could play poke the Yank, and Charles will certainly want to join in.

I think a better title for this post would have been "disney cancels poorly thought-out politicaly-motivated screen play that promised to make little is any money"

Maybe, but I was being unimaginative so used the headline.

He's a manipulative pundit. Just the same as Limbaugh, Coultier and O'reilley. They make a lot of money. The conservative ones I especially wonder If they even personally care for the political sides they have chosen.

But They probably think that the ends justify the means. Its ok to be manipulative and bend facts, just as long as It gets people round to your political point of view. But at least moore has the guts to admit it when he gets called on his BS.

When has he admitted to being wrong on anything?

He acknowledges it, but iirc he explains away inaccuracies as satire. There's an article somewhere.

I cannot stand him, even though if I was in America I would be called 'liberal'

I hate him so much because when people say the word "liberal" in an insulting fashion, they're thinking of him. He's the poster child for extreme liberalism, and he's the stereotype that all normal liberal types like myself have to fight to avoid.

you're the type that gives liberals a bad name. michael moore is an incredible guy. what's your problem?

My problem is that he's a manipulative pundit who's been known to bend and fabricate the truth in order to convey his point more thoroughly. He's less concerned with showing the truth as he is with converting people to his cause. My problem is that he's hardly a champion for the people he claims to champion, sitting in his Mahattan penthouse apartment and making millions off of his books and movies. My problem is that he's the negative stereotype that all liberals must fight to avoid whenever discussing any point.

That could also play liberals into the hnds of a wider conservative strategy.

I look forward to seeing the documentary, once it does get released.

He alluded to some of its content in his book "Dude, Where's My Country?" And like it or not, he does make a fair point. The fact is, the Bush dynasty has for many many years had, and still has, an extensive business relationship with the Bin Laden family. And while there may not necessarily be any weird al-Quaeda connection, as The Red Arrow may have had it, there is enough of a "conflict of interests" case for *any* politician to have to answer, given the circumstances.

I actually really enjoyed "Dude Where's my Country" and "Bowling for Columbine." Of course, I am what most cons out there would call a flaming socialist hellbound evildoer liberal (and proud of it, mind you!). Still, I thought Moore made some excellent points in both. I'm really looking forward to Fahrenheit 911, which, despite this Disney snafu, should get distributed somehow. (Maybe Pixar would do it! They hate Disney, right?) Anyways, I hope that the film gets out, I'm sure it will, at the very least, spark some debate on the issues it discusses. (not here on NS, I'm certain that that will happen regardless of whether the movie is released. I'm talking about the American public, which is showing a frightful amount of apathy about politics these days)


-Mentho

What would be really cool if the leaked a DVD on the net. I reckon it'd do a lot for His street Cred :D

I hope Weinstein does get one over Eisner. Hopefully everyone will realise Moore for what he is.

Yeah, I want Weinstein to trump Eisner (which he will do, because money talks), but I really dislike Moore. I'd rather his movie not make him money. It's going to gain him fame and notoriety whether or not it gets released, I just don't want him to make alot of money off of it.
How ironic. MM makes a career out of bashing Corporate America and gets rich. Maybe Ted Kennedy will invite him for drinks :lol:

In a way, it's nice, as I hate Michael Moore. In another way, it's bad, as I'd like to see him given enough rope to hang himself. Though many idiots would probably still praise his propaganda as the utter truth.

Michael Moore is at it again. The behemoth loves to complain that the media is controlled by a few and is brainwashing the public, then he claims he is being censored and the media dances his dance. I'm against censorship, but I don't think Disney is obligated to release his film. Besides he already has a deal to release his film. For someone who pretends to oppose the manipulation of information he certainly is good at it! I wonder how many tickets this "scandal" has sold already? Free advertising for his film getting in the way of actual news being reported, way to go Michael Moore. You are now (literally) the world's biggest hypocrite!

Independent's OK. Times & Telegraph are very far from my political tastes but have good standing.

Do you ever read Private Eye?

I read the Independent (and the Guardian online). I don't trust the Times and I have a near perverted Pavlovian response to the Telegraph (it was considered Gospel for many I knew growing up).

However I thin k the worst is the Mail.

Agreed and, yes, I do read Private Eye. It gives you a somewhat jaundiced view of the world but... well, the world isjaundiced, I guess.

im pretty much a left-leaning moderate, and i absolutely detest mike moore.

im pretty much a left-leaning moderate, and i absolutely detest mike moore.

Exactly. Me too.

While I do disagree with almost all of Michael Moore's politics, I'm not down with him being disallowed from releasing his movie. On the other hand, I'm also not down with Disney being forced to release it. He should go elsewhere. I'm sure someone would take him- they know they're gonna make tons of money off it.

I like Michael Moore. Funny guy. His movies have a way of grabbing my mind.

OK, I didn't read all the posts on this topic so forgive me if this has already been covered. Disney is not trying to bury this film. Miramax will not pick it up because it's simply too hot and they're afraid of a backlash or boycott by the right that will hurt Disney profits. This film will be distributed however, recent reports are that they are considering several other distribution houses and it's only a matter of time before an announcement of which will get it is made. In the mean time 'Fahrenheit 9/11' will compete in the Cannes film festival which will only increase it's exposure and give it free publicity for when it is actually distributed.

He's a manipulative pundit. Just the same as Limbaugh, Coultier and O'reilley. They make a lot of money. The conservative ones I especially wonder If they even personally care for the political sides they have chosen.

But They probably think that the ends justify the means. Its ok to be manipulative and bend facts, just as long as It gets people round to your political point of view. But at least moore has the guts to admit it when he gets called on his BS.

When has he admitted to being wrong on anything?

He acknowledges it, but iirc he explains away inaccuracies as satire. There's an article somewhere.

I cannot stand him, even though if I was in America I would be called 'liberal'

I hate him so much because when people say the word "liberal" in an insulting fashion, they're thinking of him. He's the poster child for extreme liberalism, and he's the stereotype that all normal liberal types like myself have to fight to avoid.

you're the type that gives liberals a bad name. michael moore is an incredible guy. what's your problem?

My problem is that he's a manipulative pundit who's been known to bend and fabricate the truth in order to convey his point more thoroughly. He's less concerned with showing the truth as he is with converting people to his cause. My problem is that he's hardly a champion for the people he claims to champion, sitting in his Mahattan penthouse apartment and making millions off of his books and movies. My problem is that he's the negative stereotype that all liberals must fight to avoid whenever discussing any point.

Sounds like just the guy to counteract the right wing spindoctors on the talk shows. Fight dirt with dirt.

I look forward to seeing the documentary, once it does get released.

He alluded to some of its content in his book "Dude, Where's My Country?" And like it or not, he does make a fair point. The fact is, the Bush dynasty has for many many years had, and still has, an extensive business relationship with the Bin Laden family. And while there may not necessarily be any weird al-Quaeda connection, as The Red Arrow may have had it, there is enough of a "conflict of interests" case for *any* politician to have to answer, given the circumstances.

I never saw or read or whatever one does with Dude, Where's My Country?. But it is an applicable question. Do the Bush haters really understand just how centrist bush is? Of couse not! They also do not see just how far the the Republican party has been pulled to the center over the last 40 years - and socially, it has been a positive thing; fiscally...well that's a different story. just check out how similar Bush's ideas are to John Kennedy's.

I think that Bush's brand of conservatism does get anywhere with the hard-core Left that had a deep distrust for capitalism. You can clearly see that the more conservatives try and cater to the Left, the more angry the Left becomes. It like that line from the U2 song So Cruel off of Achtung Baby. "I give you everything you ever wanted...it wasn't what you wanted"

I dont know what your on about. But i'll guess and say that your wrong. Ne0-Conservatives are in charge of the republican party now. They are both Socially and Fiscally conservative.

I for one am not Crazy about seeing this film released. Critics of moore Will Close thier minds to these facts. Which are true and need to be Evaluated by the Mainstream.

And I dont know If anyones Heard, But The Film will be released in the UK. So It will probably find its way into the U.S in one form or another.

I dont know what your on about. But i'll guess and say that your wrong. Ne0-Conservatives are in charge of the republican party now. They are both Socially and Fiscally conservative.

I for one am not Crazy about seeing this film released. Critics of moore Will Close thier minds to these facts. Which are true and need to be Evaluated by the Mainstream.

And I dont know If anyones Heard, But The Film will be released in the UK. So It will probably find its way into the U.S in one form or another.

I dont know what your on about. But i'll guess and say that your wrong. Ne0-Conservatives are in charge of the republican party now. They are both Socially and Fiscally conservative.

I for one am not Crazy about seeing this film released. Critics of moore Will Close thier minds to these facts. Which are true and need to be Evaluated by the Mainstream.

And I dont know If anyones Heard, But The Film will be released in the UK. So It will probably find its way into the U.S in one form or another.

I hate this server

I hate this server

I hate this server

Half my posts are probably because of it.

Ahem...I would say I hate to rain on you folks' parade, but I would be lying if I said it. Enjoy these

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=518901

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3565069&thesection=news&thesubsection=world

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,119182,00.html

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/brentbozell/bb20040507.shtml

I guess Jabba The Moore isn't quite telling the truth (yet again!)

Ahem...I would say I hate to rain on you folks' parade, but I would be lying if I said it. Enjoy these

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=518901

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3565069&thesection=news&thesubsection=world

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,119182,00.html

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/brentbozell/bb20040507.shtml

I guess Jabba The Moore isn't quite telling the truth (yet again!)

Since when does a publicity stunt require the truth?

People will belive just about anything.

Look at the amount of people that watch Fox News and Al-Jazeera ;)

And it's not like Moore lied about anything--he just held off on the announcement that Disney wouldn't let Miramax distribute the film until it was more advantageous from a publicity standpoint.

What did Moore say--that Disney wouldn't let Miramax distribute the film.
What did Disney say--that they won't let Miramax distribute the film.
Where's the lie?