here! Pay Per View Launches on DIRECTV as First Destination Serving the Gay and Lesbian Market

here! Pay Per View Launches on DIRECTV as Nation's First Television Destination Serving the Gay and Lesbian Market

Monday July 7, 1:43 pm ET
LOS ANGELES--(BUSINESS WIRE)--July 7, 2003--here! Pay Per View: Award-Winning Filmmakers Paul Colichman And Stephen P. Jarchow Launch First Television Service Specializing In Gay And Lesbian Appeal Movies And Specials here! Pay Per View To Premiere August 29, 2003 Exclusively On DIRECTV® Service Paul Colichman and Stephen P. Jarchow -- two of Hollywood's most recognized producers of gay and lesbian-themed theatrical motion pictures -- have launched here! Pay Per View, a precedent-setting pay per view destination dedicated to serving the country's gay and lesbian audience. here! Pay Per View will launch on DIRECTV, the nation's leading digital multichannel television service provider.

Set to debut August 29, 2003 on DIRECTV channel 170, here! Pay Per View will offer two to six pay per view premieres each month for $3.99 per movie. These premieres will include recent theatrical and video releases, direct to pay per view premieres and a wide range of programming targeting gay and lesbian viewers, whose estimated 8 to 12 percent of the U.S. population and $450 billion annual spending power makes it the most substantial yet underserved television audience in the country.

here! Pay Per View will launch with the television premiere of "Sordid Lives," the critically-acclaimed comedy, released theatrically by here! Films, emerged as the highest grossing independent gay & lesbian film of 2002. Starring Olivia Newton-John, Beau Bridges, Delta Burke, Bonnie Bedelia and Leslie Jordan, "Sordid Lives" puts a comedic twist on a story of unconditional love, acceptance and "coming out" in a Texas family as they converge for the matriarch's funeral.

Said Colichman: "It has been long recognized that the gay and lesbian niche market is dramatically underserved in the television world. Programming such as Showtime's 'Queer as Folk' and NBC's 'Will and Grace' have demonstrated that there is a strong and dedicated market for gay-themed programming. Additionally, these programs have attracted a wider demographic beyond their target markets. here! Pay Per View is an entertainment destination whose time has come. We are dedicated towards designing here! Pay Per View as a program service that will provide entertainment to all viewers, while it fosters understanding of the gay and lesbian community - the true mandate and promise of the television medium."

"As a nationwide digital television platform, we have the opportunity to satisfy the programming needs of a highly diverse viewership," said Michael Thornton, senior vice president of Programming Acquisitions for DIRECTV, Inc. " here! Pay Per View is quality programming that enables us to take advantage of that opportunity."

Founder-principals of independent feature film production-distribution company Regent Entertainment, Colichman and Jarchow are the producing team responsible for the Academy Award®-winning (Best Adapted Screenplay) "Gods and Monsters," starring Sir Ian McKellen, Lynn Redgrave and Brendan Fraser. The pair also produced the multi award-winning "Twilight of the Golds," starring Brendan Fraser and Faye Dunaway and "A Woman's A Helluva Thing," starring Penelope Ann Miller, Angus Macfadyen and Ann-Margret.

The launch of here! Pay Per View follows on Colichman and Jarchow's formation of here! Films, which the executives formally unveiled during the 2002 American Film Market. A fully-integrated company exclusively dedicated to the production, acquisition, distribution and international sales of gay content films. Following its successful release of "Sordid Lives," here! Films is now theatrically releasing "Friends and Family," a comedy starring Tony Lo Bianco, Tovah Feldshuh, Beth Fowler, Edward Hibbert, Meshach Taylor and Anna Maria Alberghetti. The company has also acquired worldwide distribution rights for "Showboy," the directorial and acting debut of "Six Feet Under's" Emmy Award-Winning writer Christian Taylor. "Showboy" follows Taylor's attempts to become a Vegas Showboy following dismissal from his duties as a writer for "Six Feet Under" and features cameos from Siegfried and Roy and Whoopi Goldberg. here! Films also operates a foreign distribution arm representing gay and lesbian films from the Regent Entertainment library, including "Sordid Lives," "Gods and Monsters," and "Speedway Junky," and has acquired foreign sales rights to "The Trip," a gay romantic comedy, set in 1970's America; "Urbania," a darkly humorous portrait of urban legends and one man's plunge into mania; and "Big Eden," a unique drama about home and family.

Launching Friday, August 29, 2003 on DIRECTV, here! Pay Per View is a national pay-per-view programming service offering quality gay and lesbian-themed recent motion pictures, direct to pay-per-view premieres and a wide range of specials. here! Pay Per View is a venture of Stephen Jarchow and Paul Colichman, founders and principals of Los Angeles-based film production company Regent Entertainment.

DIRECTV is the nation's leading digital multichannel television service provider with more than 11.4 million customers. DIRECTV and the Cyclone Design logo are registered trademarks of DIRECTV, Inc., a unit of Hughes Electronics Corporation. Hughes Electronics Corporation, a unit of General Motors Corporation, is a world-leading provider of digital television entertainment, broadband satellite networks and services, and global video and data broadcasting. The earnings of HUGHES are used to calculate the earnings attributable to the General Motors Class H common stock (NYSE:GMH - News).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Contact: SSA Public Relations Los Angeles: Steve Syatt, Dominic Friesen, 818/501-0700 New York: Mike Rudnick, Robin Lawson, 212/679-4750

"And unfortunatly you are forced to explain to your kids why they can't watch a program open to the public on cable about the mis-information it expells. I believe in freedom of expression, but there is a limit to what should be uncontrolled. "

Oh, I don't know. It seems to me that if you're not ready to explain to children why they can't view television programming, then perhaps you're not ready to have children.

There are lots of adult things on TV that are inappropriate for children, and for a lot of reasons. If you're looking for a white-washed television environment, you're not going to find it.

Seems to me that it's time to start figuring out how to explain these things to your children. They're going to encounter lots of adult subjects out there. Or, shut down your television or block all the channels that might have such content.

Your children do not coopt my rights to view programming not suitable for children. It is your responsibility to filter your own children's access to all the media.

"Your children do not coopt my rights to view programming not suitable for children. It is your responsibility to filter your own children's access to all the media."
_______________________________________________________

My point is that television is continuing to reach down into the depths of many things that are not suitable for family viewing. I watch very little TV because of the lack of programming suitable for myself, let alone my kids. As the prime time shows move from sex and race to violence and blood, under the guise of drama, where does the small tube entertainment stop short of violating obsenity.

Each year the big screen puts out movies, with rating systems, that are taking the choice out of the showing. And my problem there is that they are not putting out enough "G" movies for the family. Those that are put out, always do well. There must be a market, and organizations have been profitable with them. Disney made a bundle over the years and "his" masters sell like crazy every time they are reissued. Tell you something?

But, the main reason I do not like the idea of this show being aired in prime time, is what the context of the show has displayed. It heroizes a deviate learned behavior and tries to make it seem natural and that the people that are in this lifestyle are exceptionable. And it tries to make the straight subject appear a loser that was lucky enough to be "saved" by the Queer people (their words, not mine).

What would happen if a black man was saved every week by the white group? Or women were saved by the men group? The NAACP and Now would be in the offices of the studio heads screaming discrimination indicating that the ideology of the show was inconsistent with reality and demeaning to the subject being portrayed the loser. It is happening every day. Look at the work of Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton just for two.

If a loser guy is saved by another group of people because he can't get girls, that's bad enough already to try to sell because it has nothing to offer an adult. But to use homosexuality as a premise to sell the program to the 15 year old which is what it's aimed at, then it needs to go because at some point you have to question the "lesson learned" of the program. It was said that "A Team" was a violent show when they never killed, or even wounded with more than a small cut, anyone on the program. That had gone to the limit. So now the viewers are expected to watch the mainstreaming of a sexual lifestyle. Put it on PPV. Isn't that where shows that are not suitable for primetime are put? And this one is not.

As for your rights to watch a program, I have no problem with you watching it. But your rights do not overstep those of the rights of the children and adults that do not like taboo busting television.

A person's sexual choice should be left in the bedroom, not publically displayed. It's your choice to be subjected to a particular type of sexual orientation, not mine. Keep it in the bedroom. I have gay people working for me, and know many others. They do not flaunt it, or openly display it any more than I do mine. That is the acceptable normal. Not what they are portraying in this show. The openness of sex on television put it into the Jack Hanna catagory, gay or straight. I'd like to think we had progressed past the animals. If you want porn, put it on PPV. The flaunting of any human sexual lifestyle is not for entertainment unless it is for pornographic purposes.

"But, the main reason I do not like the idea of this show being aired in prime time, is what the context of the show has displayed. It heroizes a deviate learned behavior and tries to make it seem natural and that the people that are in this lifestyle are exceptionable. And it tries to make the straight subject appear a loser that was lucky enough to be "saved" by the Queer people (their words, not mine).
"

Since even basic cable offers dozens of channels which are on all the time, it seems clear to me that choice lies in the hands of the consumer. At the same time this show you find objectionable is on, there are dozens of other programs to view, ranging from nature documentaries and religious programming, to children's programming and classic films.

I won't be watching this particular show. I have no interest in the gay lifestyle, and such shows would bore me to tears.

The point here is that television is a commercial enterprise. Broadcasters put out what they believe will find an audience. You are free to choose from the enormous variety of programming available, and you are responsible for the programming viewed by your children.

What you are not free to do is to dictate to the businesses which produce, pay for, and broadcast television programming. You may choose not to view their offerings, since every television receiver allows you to change channels at will.

During prime time, especially, you or another parent should be present to control what programming your children watch. Quite frankly, if I had young children, I would not allow them to view television at all except when I or my spouse was present to monitor their viewing. I would limit television viewing for any children of mine to a short period daily, and would offer them a selection of programming I thought suitable for them.

It sounds to me as if you wish to remove all programming except for that which you, personally, find suitable for viewing. That's not being conservative; that's a liberal tactic.

If you don't like some programming, simply do not watch it. If you don't wish your children to view some programming, do not allow them to watch it. It's that simple.

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.