Disney Has Blocked the Distribution of My New Film... by Michael Moore (1 Viewer)

[pete]

Disney Has Blocked the Distribution of My New Film... by Michael Moore

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.

Yours,

Michael Moore
[email protected]

www.michaelmoore.com

 

[pete]

May 6, 2004 – Editorial, New York Times

Disney's Craven Behavior

Give the Walt Disney Company a gold medal for cowardice for blocking its Miramax division from distributing a film that criticizes President Bush and his family. A company that ought to be championing free expression has instead chosen to censor a documentary that clearly falls within the bounds of acceptable political commentary.

The documentary was prepared by Michael Moore, a controversial filmmaker who likes to skewer the rich and powerful. As described by Jim Rutenberg yesterday in The Times, the film, "Fahrenheit 9/11," links the Bush family with prominent Saudis, including the family of Osama bin Laden. It describes financial ties that go back three decades and explores the role of the government in evacuating relatives of Mr. bin Laden from the United States shortly after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. The film was financed by Miramax and was expected to be released this summer.

Mr. Moore's agent said that Michael Eisner, Disney's chief executive, had expressed concern that the film might jeopardize tax breaks granted to Disney for its theme park, hotels and other ventures in Florida, where Jeb Bush is governor. If that is the reason for Disney's move, it would underscore the dangers of allowing huge conglomerates to gobble up diverse media companies.

On the other hand, a senior Disney executive says the real reason is that Disney caters to families of all political stripes and that many of them might be alienated by the film. Those families, of course, would not have to watch the documentary.

It is hard to say which rationale for blocking distribution is more depressing. But it is clear that Disney loves its bottom line more than the freedom of political discourse.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/06/opinion/06THU4.html?ex=1084420800&en=dd695e1433b69ff3&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE

 

[YankeeGobshite]

followup

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

Moore admits Disney 'ban' was a stunt

By Andrew Gumbel in Los Angeles

07 May 2004



Less than 24 hours after accusing the Walt Disney Company of pulling the plug on his latest documentary in a blatant attempt at political censorship, the rabble-rousing film-maker Michael Moore has admitted he knew a year ago that Disney had no intention of distributing it.

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 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."

Nobody in Hollywood doubts Fahrenheit 911 will find a US distributor. His last documentary, Bowling for Columbine , made for $3m (£1.7m), pulled in $22m at the US box office.

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.

 

[pete]

followup

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

Moore admits Disney 'ban' was a stunt

ehhh... no he didn't.

By Andrew Gumbel in Los Angeles

07 May 2004

Less than 24 hours after accusing the Walt Disney Company of pulling the plug on his latest documentary in a blatant attempt at political censorship, the rabble-rousing film-maker Michael Moore has admitted he knew a year ago that Disney had no intention of distributing it.

Ehhh, no he didn't.

What he said was:

Gorani: What was your communication with Disney?
Moore: Almost a year ago after we'd started making the film, the chairman of Disney, Michael Eisner, told my agent that he was upset that Miramax had made the film -- Disney owns Miramax -- and he will not distribute this film.

Miramax said don't worry about that, keep making the film, we'll keep funding it. The Disney money kept flowing to us for the last year. We finished the film last week, and we take it to the Cannes film festival next week.

On Monday of this week we got final word from Disney that they will not distribute the film. They told my agent they did not want to upset the Bush family, particularly Gov. Bush of Florida because Disney was up for a number of tax incentives, abatements ... whatever. The risk of losing this -- we're talking about tens of millions of dollars -- they didn't want to risk it over a little documentary.

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.

Where did he claim that?

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.

Michael Moore in self-publicity shock. Who'd have thought it.

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 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."

Obviously Andrew Gumbel has trouble understanding the phrase "... got final word from Disney...".

Nobody in Hollywood doubts Fahrenheit 911 will find a US distributor. His last documentary, Bowling for Columbine , made for $3m (£1.7m), pulled in $22m at the US box office.

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.

 

[pete]

White House 'tried to ban film'
By Ian Youngs
BBC News Online entertainment staff in Cannes
The White House tried to halt the making and release of Michael Moore's new film Fahrenheit 9/11, the film-maker alleged in Cannes on Sunday.

The director told a Cannes audience that the Bush administration wanted to keep the film off screen in the run-up to November's US election.

The film examines the Iraq war and alleges connections between the Bush family and Osama Bin Laden.

Fahrenheit 9/11 is to get its world premiere in Cannes on Monday.

The film studio Disney had backed out of a deal to distribute the film in the US for political reasons, Moore says.

He has given no evidence to substantiate his allegations, but he said that "someone connected to the White House" and a "top Republican" had put pressure on film companies not to release the film.

"The potential of this film to have an effect on the election is much larger than they [film studios] thought," Moore said.

Undercover in Iraq

The film was originally scheduled to be released through Disney-backed independent studio Miramax, before Disney blocked it.

It is now being released through a third party.

Disney accused Moore of engineering a dispute about the film's release to gain maximum publicity. It said it had blocked the film because it wanted to be impartial during the election, but strongly denied coming under any outside pressure.

The director has already shown the film at test screenings in the Midwest of the US.

"The reaction was overwhelming," he said. "People who were on the fence - undecided voters - suddenly weren't on the fence."

Moore has revealed that he had three undercover film crews embedded with US troops in Iraq.

"I was able to sneak three different freelance crews into Iraq," he said on Saturday.

The soldiers had "expressed disillusionment that they had been lied to", said Moore.

The film from Iraq was a "very important" part of the documentary, he added. "It is certainly something the Bush administration does not want people to see," said Moore.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/entertainment/3719261.stm

 

[pete]

Moore film shows 'US Iraqi abuse'
By Ian Youngs
BBC News Online correspondent in Cannes


Oscar-winning director Michael Moore has screened at Cannes what he claims is the first film footage of US soldiers abusing Iraqi prisoners.

It appears in his new documentary, Fahrenheit 9/11 which also explores alleged connections between the Bush and Bin Laden families.

The abuse "occurred in the field - outside the prison walls", Moore told the film festival.

The White House declined to comment on this issue.

Moore's film, which received its world premiere in Cannes, France, on Monday, shows what appear to be US soldiers putting hoods on Iraqi prisoners.

Moore, who won an Oscar last year for Bowling For Columbine, said he sent three under-cover film crews to Iraq.

"You saw this morning the first footage of abuse and humiliation of these Iraqi detainees," he told reporters on Monday.

The world had seen now notorious photographs from Abu Ghraib prison, near Baghdad - but no photos or footage from outside a prison until now, he said.

On Saturday, President Bush said he would not allow any more abuses by US troops in Iraq. But he also said the abuses were restricted to Abu Ghraib.

Soldiers in Moore's film were shown outdoors ridiculing a man covered in a blanket on the ground, calling him "Ali Baba".

"It was an older man who was actually drunk, and it was early in the morning, and he was lying on the ground on a stretcher with a blanket over him," Moore said.

The footage was shot in Samarra in December 2003, he told BBC News Online, but did not reply when asked which military division was involved. He said it was "disgraceful" that it took him, using stringers and freelance camera crews in Iraq, to bring such footage to the public.




"The American people do not like things being kept from them, and I think what this film is going to do is to peel back the layers so the people can see what is really going on," he said.

"They are going to be shocked and they are going to be in awe - and they are going to respond accordingly, he said - alluding to his aim of convincing voters not to re-elect Mr Bush in November's presidential election.

The film also alleges Saudis, including those with links to the Bin Laden family, had funded oil and arms companies run by the Bush family and their inner circle. And the film claims the military operation in Afghanistan was carried out purely so a natural gas pipeline could be built through the country.

Moore has said the White House has tried to stop the film being made and released because they are afraid of the effect it could have on November's election.



He told BBC News Online someone "connected to the White House" and a "top Republican" had put pressure on film companies not to fund Fahrenheit 9/11.

When asked what evidence he had, he said: "I only know what I was told by my agent. That's all I know.

"I don't know who made the calls. I don't know what was said."

'Not shocked'

Film studio Disney has refused to distribute the film and Moore is now having trouble finding another distributor to release the film on his preferred 4 July release date.




Film critic Derek Malcolm gave his verdict on the film to News Online, saying: "I think it's over-long and quite boring in parts but it is strong in other sections.

"It is a more even-handed offering than Moore's previous films. But one is not very shocked by the film. It certainly won't win [John] Kerry the [US] election."

And the Hollywood Reporter described it as "angry polemic against the president, the Bush family and the administration's foreign policy".

"There is no debate, no analysis of facts or search for historical context. Moore simply wants to blame one man and his family for the mess we are now in," it said.

Meanwhile, labour unrest threatens to hit the film festival on Monday with unions urging hotel and restaurant workers to go on strike for more pay. The new action is designed to push hoteliers, restaurateurs and cafe owners to increase their staff wages by 5% and throw in a 200 euro (£135, $240) bonus for each worker.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/entertainment/3720569.stm