Whatever.

He may have a legitimate breach-of-contract complaint, but that's for the lawyers to handle.

It is NOT a freedom of speech issue. There is no "censorship" going on. He is COMPLETELY out of line by describing it as such. No one is Constitutionally guaranteed the right to have their movie distributed.

Mirimax/Disney are businesses, NOT government organizations or public forums. They are free to distribute or to NOT distribute films as they see fit.

If they have reason to think it will negatively affect their business in any way, then it makes sense that they would not want to be associated with it, regardless of the relevance to recent events, or the political slant of the movie's content.

They are in the movie business for PROFIT, after all...they are not in business to guarantee that loudmouth fata$$es like Moore can have a 6 million dollar soapbox.

Mike

WTF??

Like I said, I LOVE how he torques 'em off. :)

Yup, :D :D :D waytoo...

Mike,

I think in your quote (the conclusion) Moore actually refers to these parts of his own letter (the discussion):
and this:

I know that's a lot but it's all relevant and it sure smells like hypocrisy to me if not censorship plus playing partisan politics etc... on the part of Disney.

Hypocritical? Perhaps. Partisan? Probably.

But it is THEIR company, and they may be hypocritical and partisan in what they choose to release if they wish. If so, then they are far from being the first.

It is NOT censorship. This is not the FCC we're talking about. Disney is not a government organization. It is a private company that has made a business decision concerning a film that they do not wish to release under their name.

If they are in breach of their contract with Moore because of this decision, then I think Moore is entitled to financial compensation.

But does it fit the definition of "censorship"? NO.

Is it anyone else's business what films they decide to release, and why? NO.

Don't like what they're doing? Vote with your wallet. Don't go see Disney or Mirimax releases.

Mike

you're right mike. disney just seems to be funky business to me. no, it's not true censorship because it is not a gov entity but sure seems to be politacaly motivated and seems to me they are trying to keep it out.

as to moore or any one else. i just see them all through my rosy glasses anyway. ;)

Moore is an honorable man. They are all honorable men. Moore is a man seeking the truth, not a money-grubber like Eisner. Moore will do anything to promote his vision of social justice, unlike Eisner--who's only motive is maximizing profits for stockholders.

In his quest for justice, Moore may occasionally stretch the truth, but its all for a good cause. Whereas Eisner's sole motivation is transparent to everybody. No need to lie when your motives are transparently obvious.

Michael Moore may shade and color the truth a bit in order to bring attention to his vision of social justice, but that's a great motive that can overlook occasional misuse of truth. After all, what is truth? Michael Moore knows what truth is and that's why its okay for him to adjust perceptions about the truth. He serves a higher purpose. His own.

After all, Michael Moore is an honorable man.

Botnst

4 sure. :D :D

Read Julius Caesar Act III; Scene 2.

You know the part where Marc Antony begins, "Friends, Romans, Countrymen! Lend me your ears. I come to bury Caesar...".

Okay, so I'm not as good a writer as Shakespeare, but I do steal from the best. I thought since we were going for Moore's jugular, and Moore being a sort of a playwrite, it would be fun to castigate him with a bit of the Bard.

B

Shakespeare started Halliburton.

B

hahahah.....Excellent! ;)

Mike

Wow, sodomy and damnation. Imagine if you had seen one of his movies.

Actually, it is censorship, when the gov does it it's called prior restraint. (if I remember my 1st amendment class right) and while it's not illegal may give him a breach of contract action against disney, but as someone pointed out, it will be hard to prove damages if the movie does well. If it tanks, he might have a good case.

I just like to point out the failings of the liberal media (disney also owns ABC) and for the sheer enjoyment of a good Michael Moore post.

The polarizing of America, as depicted in last week's Doonesbury strips, is our greatest national weakness. It's a movie, fellas, it's just a movie.

You mean you have not convicted Jackson yet? You've convicte everyone else with out any supporting evidence. Why stop now?