Originally posted by Living-In-Clip
I am just waiting on someone to argue my point, but we all know I am right. It is not censorship.
Do you people realize how many films are funded and not released? There are a bunch, even one\'s with big name actors. I don\'t see you people crying censorship on that, but instead, this is Michael Moore and it just has to be censorship, right?
Seriously, this has nothing to do with "Land of the free", "cenorship" or any of that NON-SENSE. This is a simple case of a company making a choice not to release a film, but in the process of this, somehow , some of you people have decided to spin doctor this into a cenorship story.
Wow you certainly are proud of yourself, making two posts to repeat the same point.
It hasn\'t been proven what Disney\'s motivation was for backing out of their distribution agreement with Miramax. They could have made the decision because they see themselves as catering primarily to redneck middle america, and they don\'t want to be accused of being liberal. That seems to be what you all want to believe, and if it\'s true, then it is spineless, shortsighted, and weak, but not exactly censorship. The situation would be no different from those of other films that are axed by their studios as you mentioned above.
HOWEVER, if Disney reached the decision because they were concerned that distributing a political film that was critical of GW Bush would piss of his brother the governor of Florida, and endanger the corporate welfare they\'re receiving from that state, then I believe there is a definite tinge of censorship about it. What do you call it when a Governor exerts direct or indirect pressure to have a film shelved because he doesn\'t like the content? Do you want a government official telling you that you shouldn\'t see something?
I know many of you don\'t care about this because you don\'t like Michael Moore, you\'ve never seen his movies, and you don\'t plan to see this one. However, try to reverse the situation and tell me how you\'d feel if it was a film containing conservative viewpoints, funded by a corporation based in Vermont, and that corporation backed out of a distribution deal because they were afraid Gov Howard Dean would cut off their tax breaks.
(I know it\'s hard to imagine, but give it a try
) I don\'t know why people like you, L-I-C, find it so easy to applaud this kind of back-stabbing corporate decision making.
