Posted on 06/11/2004 12:31:44 PM PDT by Impeach98
That works fine when it comes to television shows, because television ratings are not precise; they are more like a scientific poll. The money producers get for TV shows is upfront, and your viewership, regardless of whether you like it or you don't, is not counted if you are not a "Nielsen family."
On the other hand, when it comes to motion pictures shown in a theater, the only way you can "judge" it is after you have already put your hard-earned dollars in the coffers of the filmmakers, and if you are indeed offended by the product, guess what? You're not getting that money back. It's theirs now. Your adverse judgment doesn't mean jack squat to them, because you've already paid them to give your opinion.
For example: I am not going to see the new movie Saved!, the satire that supposedly is "sweetly subversive" in targeting Christian youth. The filmmaker, a former parochial school student, goes to great pains to insist the movie doesn't "bash" Christians, but from everything I have seen and read of the movie, I believe it presents a caricatured subculture of comically stupid anti-Semitic gay-hating judgmental "Christians" (the 'bad' ones) and contrasts them with sweet, cool, Christians who are accepting of Jews (as if that was unusual), teen pregnancy and homosexuality. (the 'good' ones).
Now, I can only guess at what the movie looks like as a whole, but the critics and the filmmakers (including R.E.M's Michael Stipe, who co-wrote "Losing My Religion") all say, "See it, and judge for yourself," fully knowing that if I do see it, and verify my suspicions, I will have had to have paid them to do it, thus coaxing money out of me that they wouldn't have gotten if I had just trusted my instincts and ignored the movie.
Sorry, I am not going to be suckered into that.
.."stop"ped
Stopped implies banning or not showing it.
What do you mean by STOPPED.
Intimidating movie chains not to show it.
I think you're on the wrong track. What's next, petitioning BlockBuster not to carry it.
If your campaign is successful, so will Moore.
Let people see it and judge for themselves.
This thread should be a pretty good indicator that the presumption when someone reads "Take action against the release of...Fahrenheit 9/11" is that you want the movie banned. Your methods are betrayed by your misleading headline.
I'd rather retain my ability to think for myself, instead of only knowing people tell me about it. Moore can have my $5.
I think of it as creating jobs. :)
If you can't see that distinction from how I wrote it above, then we are going to have to agree to disagree because I think it's pretty clear from where I stand.
I just responded above about why your insistence that this "bans" a movie is way off base.
The reaction we've gotten in our email account is 180 degrees different from Free Republic - that's why nobody here believed me when I told them what FReepers were saying.
I don't know why that is. There is obviously something visceral for at least some FReepers about the word "STOP" that gets them down the line of thinking that you've discussed with me.
<< Best way to deal with this [Crockumentary] is simply not to go see it. Ignore it entirely. Any publicity will help Moore, not hurt him. >>
You got it.
Moore makes his millions lying to those to damned stupid to know they're being lied to and to those to damned psychopathologically-hesperophobic and/or otherwise mean-spirited, hatefilled, enraged and psychotic to care. [To fascisocialists, including "DemocRATS," that is]
Ignore the fat pig -- and afford every last one of his psychotic customers, foreign and domestic, the dignity of the consequences of his own actions.
Through millions of Americans voicing their opposition to the movie and Moore's attempt to profit (and those theaters that show it) from a movie that undermines the War on Terrorism.
Again, I don't have the power to suppress a movie. But Americans have the power of their voices to express themselves. If they DO then movie theaters will choose not to show it.
That's the distinction. You have to respect the right of free speech of those who disagree with Moore.
"Your methods are betrayed by your misleading headline."
What misleading headline? Are you just being difficult because you are sad about the death of our greatest president. I am sad too. But you aren't being intellectually fair in your argument. I've tried to be patient in explaining why the initial reaction you've jumped to is wrong.
Our effort is called "STOP Michael Moore & His Movie Fahrenheit 9/11" - that's why this FR thread is titled as such. How is that misleading?
>>asking people to counter Moore's voice.
Then say Protest the movie, hand out oposing literature, finance a movie with an opposing POV.
You're asking businesses to stop showing it. You're calling for the abrogation of that business's privilege to show what they want, and infringing upon the freedom of those who wish to see the movie.
I still don't understand the difference between Ban and Stop. The end result is the same; you want the movie pulled. If you don't, then using the word stop is misleading.
I think you're splitting hairs semantically, and that kind of tap dancing is not convincing.
<< .... your view, "we" [Have] discussed it here at "the offices" of "Move America Forward" a number of times. >>
Are you employed by moore's publicists?
Might as well be.
Effect's the same and you might as well be paid [By moore] for what you're attempting, effectively on his behalf.
What we're asking people to do is voice their opinions so that this movie is stopped because movie theater owners decide it's not good business to offend the majority of Americans.
The one (the government and guns) is indeed a "ban."
The other (Move America Forward's actions against Moore) is a campaign to get conservatives to not sit on their couch and yell at the TV screen when Moore comes on, but VOICE THEIR OPPOSITION directly to the movie industry executives that Moore, Lions Gate Films and IFC Films have been cooing and sweet talking for months.
Thanks for giving me the opportunity to explain the difference.
AGREED
I've actually been a member of Free Republic since the Clinton Impeachment!
AGREED
I agree with that too!
"<< .... your view, "we" [Have] discussed it here at "the offices" of "Move America Forward" a number of times. >>
"
What you quoted was not written by me. Please look more closely at messages.
A sorrowful morning with the Reagan funeral and then reading and responding to some FReepers saying that our activities run counter to the right of free speech has me in need of a break.
To those who think we are akin to burning books - please speak your mind. I'll just be responding later.
To those who agree that sitting silent is not the best option, thank you. We've been heartened by the response (outside of Free Republic which astonishes me) thus far.
-- Joe
<< What you quoted was not written by me. Please look more closely at messages. >>
Didn't for a moment think so -- and nor did I so suggest. Because I was commenting on an exchange between you and the FReep I addressed, I included your address as a courtesy.
Although, it turns out, a wasted one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.