Moore cheered at Cannes

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2004-05-18 06:56am

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/05/ ... 81300.html

Moore's new film looks very interesting, I can't wait to see it.

Skelron · Post by **Skelron** » 2004-05-18 07:47am

You might have a long wait, Disney is saying they won't distrubte, the reasons are a bit murky. With Moore saying...

May 5, 2004

Friends,

I would have hoped by now that I would be able to put my work out to the public without having to experience the profound censorship obstacles I often seem to encounter.

Yesterday I was told that Disney, the studio that owns Miramax, has officially decided to prohibit our producer, Miramax, from distributing my new film, "Fahrenheit 911." The reason? According to today's (May 5) New York Times, it might "endanger" millions of dollars of tax breaks Disney receives from the state of Florida because the film will "anger" the Governor of Florida, Jeb Bush. The story is on page one of the Times and you can read it here (Disney Forbidding Distribution of Film That Criticizes Bush).

The whole story behind this (and other attempts) to kill our movie will be told in more detail as the days and weeks go on. For nearly a year, this struggle has been a lesson in just how difficult it is in this country to create a piece of art that might upset those in charge (well, OK, sorry -- it WILL upset them...big time. Did I mention it's a comedy?). All I can say is, thank God for Harvey Weinstein and Miramax who have stood by me during the entire production of this movie.

There is much more to tell, but right now I am in the lab working on the print to take to the Cannes Film Festival next week (we have been chosen as one of the 18 films in competition). I will tell you this: Some people may be afraid of this movie because of what it will show. But there's nothing they can do about it now because it's done, it's awesome, and if I have anything to say about it, you'll see it this summer -- because, after all, it is a free country.

while Disney claims that it is against their policy to in a few different ways. (One it's not a family movie, unfortunatly Miramax was made to make Movies that wheren't the Disney usual product.) That it's a Bias Movie that will alienate some cvustomers, not that this has stopped them in the past. (They produce a Right Wing radio show after all) etc

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2004-05-18 07:52am

So long as Miramax fights, we may just get it out.

I'd like to see it too, I hope a UK release exists in the pipeline.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-05-18 07:56am

Skelron wrote:You might have a long wait, Disney is saying they won't distrubte, the reasons are a bit murky. With Moore saying...

snip

We've been over this before. The whole thing was a publicity stunt by Michael Moore.

Skelron · Post by **Skelron** » 2004-05-18 07:56am

Indeed and we have one hope, Legally by the nature of the Disney-Miramax relationship disney can only block NC-17 Movies from miramax, the film isn't an NC-17. If Miramax has to they would have a very strong Court Case....

Skelron · Post by **Skelron** » 2004-05-18 07:57am

Joe wheres the thread, The argument has been presented by disney that this is the case, but... it seems rather weak an argument that I have seen point me to the thread and I'll judge for me self

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2004-05-18 07:58am

Joe wrote:We've been over this before. The whole thing was a publicity stunt by Michael Moore.

That's obvious. What isn't is the fact Miramax told him to keep going with the production because they told him they might be able to get Disney to change its mind. Therefore the assertion floating around that Moore knew all along Disney wasn't going to roll it out is FALSE.

Skelron · Post by **Skelron** » 2004-05-18 08:06am

Indeed when someone gives you at least a Million dollars to make a film, after you are told that they won't make it, you kinda think that well... Okay it's been sorted I'm making the movie for Miramax.

Now maybe it was a case that Disney forgot to tell Miramax, No we won't make the film. But you still can't blame a guy for thinking everything was sorted after he gets given a Million dollars, I know I'd think the matter had been dealt with!

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2004-05-18 09:49am

Therefore the assertion floating around that Moore knew all along Disney wasn't going to roll it out is FALSE.

Bullshit

But in the CNN interview he said: "Almost a year ago, after we'd started making the film, the chairman of Disney, Michael Eisner, told my agent he was upset Miramax had made the film and he will not distribute it."

He admitted that he was told a year ago that Disney wouldn't distribute.

Moore told CNN that Disney had "signed a contract to distribute this [film]" but got cold feet. But Disney executives insists there was never any contract. And a source close to Miramax said that the only deal there was for financing, not for distribution.

If Moore has a signed contract, why isn't he in court enforcing it?
Answer: He does not have a contract to enforce.

Now let's see what Eisner himself had to say:

Michael Eisner wrote:To the Editor:

You accuse the Walt Disney Company of cowardice and censorship because of its decision a year ago not to distribute Michael Moore's film "Fahrenheit 9/11" (editorial, May 6). In fact, the cowardly thing would have been to be intimidated into distributing the film. We did not block its distribution. There are many avenues for Mr. Moore to pursue to get his film distributed.

Your accusations of stifling free expression are misplaced. The First Amendment does not say that The New York Times must print every article presented to it or that the Walt Disney Company must distribute every movie. If a government entity had blocked Mr. Moore's film from being released, that would have violated the First Amendment, and we would have quickly signed up to join any protest.

In the case of "Fahrenheit 9/11," we chose a path that was right for the company and its stakeholders.

The creation of intellectual product rises and falls on similar judgments by creative people and executives across America. We would hope that The Times would recognize that the Walt Disney Company has the same right of freedom of expression that it is advocating for Mr. Moore.

MICHAEL D. EISNER
Chief Exec., Walt Disney Company
Burbank, Calif., May 7, 2004

In fact, Moore did find an avenue of distribution. The Weinsteins bought the film from Disney as individuals (not as execs of Miramax) and will arrange distribution themselves.

So much for the censorship bullshit.

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2004-05-18 09:52am

Michael Moore is the most brilliant propegandist of our time.

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2004-05-18 09:54am

Col. Crackpot wrote:Michael Moore is the most brilliant propegandist of our time.

Thought that award was Hitler's.

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2004-05-18 09:58am

Admiral Valdemar wrote:
Col. Crackpot wrote:Michael Moore is the most brilliant propegandist of our time.
Thought that award was Hitler's.

I don't know about you, but Hitler isn't from my time.

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2004-05-18 10:02am

Glocksman wrote:
Therefore the assertion floating around that Moore knew all along Disney wasn't going to roll it out is FALSE.

Bullshit

But in the CNN interview he said: "Almost a year ago, after we'd started making the film, the chairman of Disney, Michael Eisner, told my agent he was upset Miramax had made the film and he will not distribute it."
He admitted that he was told a year ago that Disney wouldn't distribute.

Right but he also said Miramax told him after that that they will try changing Disney's mind. The issue was still open after what his agent said, Moore did not know for sure that Disney wouldn't roll it out.

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2004-05-18 10:06am

Col. Crackpot wrote:Michael Moore is the most brilliant propegandist of our time.

Maybe. But so what? George Bush is not fit to lead a country, the more propoganda which shows this, the better for EVERYONE.

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2004-05-18 10:09am

I don't know about you, but after the Chairman and CEO of Disney tells me in no uncertain terms that the company won't distribute the film, I'd believe him instead of Harvey Weinstein.

The point is Moore knew a year in advance that Disney wouldn't distribute the film. He may have been relying on Miramax changing Eisner's mind, but it still doesn't change the fact that he was told a year in advance.

His reliance on Miramax's assurance that they could change Eisner's mind was misplaced.

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2004-05-18 10:39am

Glocksman wrote:I don't know about you, but after the Chairman and CEO of Disney tells me in no uncertain terms that the company won't distribute the film, I'd believe him instead of Harvey Weinstein.

Moore was getting funded by Disney via Miramax. Communications between Moore and Disney would have been primarily through Miramax. So, if Miramax told me that they would "work on Disney", I would still hold a little hope.

The point is Moore knew a year in advance that Disney wouldn't distribute the film.

No, the point is Moore did not know for SURE Disney wouldn't distribute it. They were false hopes from Miramax, but they were still there.

He may have been relying on Miramax changing Eisner's mind, but it still doesn't change the fact that he was told a year in advance.

Yep that's a fact.

His reliance on Miramax's assurance that they could change Eisner's mind was misplaced.

Looks like it.

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2004-05-18 10:49am

Admiral Valdemar wrote:So long as Miramax fights, we may just get it out.

I'd like to see it too, I hope a UK release exists in the pipeline.

UK rights were sold a while back.
The Disney 'controversy' only affected US distribution.

I want to see the film, but I won't put money in Moore's pockets to do so.

Perhaps I'll sneak in after seeing another movie first at the local plex or just wait and download the inevitable pirate version.