|
5/24 |
2004/5/7 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30091 Activity:nil |
5/7 Shocking news flash! Michael Moore is a self-promoting lying scumbag. http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=518901 \_ self-promoting? sure. everyone in the industry is. lying? The crux of his charge is that disney decided not to distribute his film because of pressure from politicians. when he knew about it doesn't change the validity of the charge. scumbag? i'll leave that to people who know him. Keep in mind that he was already on the cannes festival shortlist. \_ i can handle one little white lie by mm versus well just about 1000 other things going on right now. \_ Non sequitur. \_ If you read what Mickael Moore really said, that article does a very good job at taking stuff out of context to make him sound a lot worse that he really is. Shocking news flash! The Independent is a totally partisan rag! \_ You can't really fault a filmmaker for trying to create free publicity. MM is indeed a lying scumbag, so much so that this is \_ Yes I can. like criticising the devil for smoking (though, i have to admit, i still am a bit of a fan), but it is his affinity for dishonesty *IN* his movies that is dispicable, not his self-promotion. -phuqm \_ Of Satan or Michael Moore? -- ilyas \_ shrug, what's wrong with having an agenda to make Disney look bad? He didn't lie in this instance. He just held the news until he could exploit it to maximum negative effect. Seems to me the reporter is just swallowing the freeper spin hook, line, and sinker. |
5/24 |
|
news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=518901 The admission, during an interview with CNN, undermined Moore's claim that Disney was trying to sabotage the US release of Fahrenheit 911 just days before its world premiere at the Cannes film festival. Instead, it lent credence to a growing suspicion that Moore was manufacturing a controversy to help publicise the film, a full-bore attack on the Bush administration and its handling of national security since the attacks of 11 September 2001. In an indignant letter to his supporters, Moore said he had learnt only on Monday that Disney had put the kibosh on distributing the film, which has been financed by the semi-independent Disney subsidiary Miramax. But Moore's publicity stunt, if that is what is, appears to be working. A front-page news piece in The New York Times was followed yesterday by an editorial denouncing Disney for censorship and denial of Moore's right to free expression. 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. |