[BlackGriffen]

The Story

[...]
The activist, author and director told the Sunday Herald that, as long as pirated copies of his film were not being sold, he had no problem with it being downloaded.

“I don’t agree with the copyright laws and I don’t have a problem with people downloading the movie and sharing it with people as long as they’re not trying to make a profit off my labour. I would oppose that,” he said.

“I do well enough already and I made this film because I want the world, to change. The more people who see it the better, so I’m happy this is happening.”
[...]
Despite up to 150 people simultaneously bagging free copies of its most valuable property at any given time 24 hours a day, Lions Gate says it has no plans to oppose the practice. While unwilling to make any official statement likely to further provoke Hollywood’s heavy hitters, the film company appears to have fallen into line with its director’s laissez-faire approach.

Moore said: “Is it wrong for someone who’s bought a film on DVD to let a friend watch it for free? Of course it’s not. It never has been and never will be. I think information, art and ideas should be shared.”

Defenders of Moore’s position include Pulp Fiction director Quentin Tarantino, who earlier this year encouraged audiences in countries where his films are not legally available to obtain counterfeit copies.
[...]

Those don't sound like the words of someone in it for the money.

Regardless, this action gives me real respect for him. Not much, but it's there.

BlackGriffen

[angaq0k]

Originally posted by BlackGriffen:

The Story



Those don't sound like the words of someone in it for the money.

Regardless, this action gives me real respect for him. Not much, but it's there.

BlackGriffen

With all its numerous defects, I will probably buy the DVD anyway.

[Tater Salad]

Most people who download movies buy the DVD because the **** they downloaded isn't worth keeping. Way to boost DVD sales.

Besides, who has the patience to wait 24 hours for a poorly made "documentary?"
Go see it if you want it so bad.

[angaq0k]

Originally posted by Tater Salad:
Most people who download movies buy the DVD because the **** they downloaded isn't worth keeping. Way to boost DVD sales.

Besides, who has the patience to wait 24 hours for a poorly made "documentary?"
Go see it if you want it so bad.

I did, and you would have noticed if you had read post in the threads to which you respond to.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally posted by angaq0k:
I did, and you would have noticed if you had read post in the threads to which you respond to.

What does a thing he said, have anything to do with what you said?

[angaq0k]

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
What does a thing he said, have anything to do with what you said?

He posted:

Go see it if you want it so bad.

http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.p...95#post2065387

I saw Moore's movie today: I agree with DeathToWindows. Moores paints with a very large b(r)ush, but the substance is good for his purpose; it is thick, viscuous, sticky, and very slow to dry...

Tater Salad posted here.

The way Tater Salad posted in this thread, I had the impression he was referring to me and not BlackGriffin who showed no interest in going to see it or buy it, in this thread at least

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

LOL. Okay whatever.

"Most people..." sounds like a dead giveaway of a general statement to me, and his overall point has nothing to do with your post.

Next time I guess he'll have to consult you and cross-reference your posts in other threads, before expressing an opinion.

[angaq0k]

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
LOL. Okay whatever.

"Most people..." sounds like a dead giveaway of a general statement to me, and his overall point has nothing to do with your post.

Next time I guess he'll have to consult you and cross-reference your posts in other threads, before expressing an opinion.

Good point. I erred pretty far it seems.

Champagne?



And my apologies for the waste of bandwith and trolling this thread.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

No biggie! We all do it now and then.

Time for me to get off the net and go see some fireworks!

[RonnieoftheRose]

Honestly this type of thing has two sides and depends on factors such as production budgets, profitability, share holders and the thoughts of individual film makers. It's not black and white.

Moore and Lion Gate are indie and are happy with the money they have made because the documentary was relatively low budget compared to other wide release films and made lots of profit on its first weekend.

A movie like Troy, a piece of turd, costs over 150 mill to make and is produced by studios which have shareholders to please. For it to lose money to piracy means many people lose money. If studios lose money then that endangers future production. One can argue that studios should be making smaller more interesting films anyway but it is large profits from blockbusters that allow a studio to have the spare cash to spend on many smaller productions. If a blockbuster loses money the reaction is not to concentrate on smaller films but to go for yet another blockbuster in order to make the losses back quickly.

Piracy hurts those companies. It hurts small film companies too but they tend to be happier with the profits they make.

Regarding Tarantino, he said only where his films were not legally obtainable.

[BlackGriffen]

Originally posted by RonnieoftheRose:
Honestly this type of thing has two sides and depends on factors such as production budgets, profitability, share holders and the thoughts of individual film makers. It's not black and white.

[...]

I'm more interested in the implications this has for the folks who claim Moore is only in it for the money.

BG

[dcolton]

Originally posted by BlackGriffen:
I'm more interested in the implications this has for the folks who claim Moore is only in it for the money.

BG

I think Moore is encouraging people to download so he can infect more minds with his lies, half truths, and assault on everything Bush.

[Atomic Rooster]

Originally posted by dcolton:
I think Moore is encouraging people to download so he can infect more minds with his lies, half truths, and assault on everything Bush.

What lies?

[dcolton]

Originally posted by Atomic Rooster:
What lies?

Zimph provided a pretty good link before. Try a search for 59 deceits

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by dcolton:
I think Moore is encouraging people to download so he can infect more minds with his lies, half truths, and assault on everything Bush.

Indeed. To take advantage of the weak minded.

Originally posted by BlackGriffen:
I'm more interested in the implications this has for the folks who claim Moore is only in it for the money.

BG

He already has enough money. He's a rich boy. Not the blue color working fellow he tries to portray.

He is an attention whore though, As long as he is being talked about, he is happy.

[perryp8]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Indeed. To take advantage of the weak minded.

Like those who fall for hoaxes?

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by perryp8:
Like those who fall for hoaxes?

No, after being told it's a hoax, and people still follow it, then you get into the weak minded category.

If no one has heard otherwise, and they watched a MM and believed it, I can't really blame them.

But for those who have heard otherwise, there is no excuse.

[BlackGriffen]

Originally posted by dcolton:
I think Moore is encouraging people to download so he can infect more minds with his lies, half truths, and assault on everything Bush.

I'm sure he wouldn't use those words to describe what he would call facts, data, anecdotes, and opinions, but yes, he wants to influence people.

BG

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by BlackGriffen:
I'm sure he wouldn't use those words to describe what he would call facts, data, anecdotes, and opinions, mostly taken out of context, and given the FUD treatment but yes, he wants to influence people.

BG

Fixed.

[BlackGriffen]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Fixed.

Now that's patently false, Zim. He would never call what he did taking things out of context and using FUD.

You need to work on your reading skills.

BG

[doctorkeyser]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
He is an attention whore though, As long as he is being talked about, he is happy.

Zimphire
King of Nothingness
Posts: 20346

[Zimphire]

[cpt kangarooski]

There seems to be some dispute as to whether he actually said this. Lion's Gate is saying that they don't approve and IIRC may bring legal action against downloaders.

[zigzag]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Indeed. To take advantage of the weak minded.

At last, an explanation for Gideon Bibles.

He is an attention whore though, As long as he is being talked about, he is happy.

At last, an explanation for . . . . nevermind.

[Drakino]

If he really wanted to get the word out without making money, he would have:

1. Put it on his web site for free download

2. Put it on TV, along with the other real documentaries.

I haven't seen it yet, but after the disappointment that was Bowling for Columbine, I have a good idea of what to expect. I don't support Bush, but I also don't support a film maker who calls opinionated films "documentaries".

[hyteckit]

Originally posted by Drakino:
If he really wanted to get the word out without making money, he would have:

1. Put it on his web site for free download

2. Put it on TV, along with the other real documentaries.

I haven't seen it yet, but after the disappointment that was Bowling for Columbine, I have a good idea of what to expect. I don't support Bush, but I also don't support a film maker who calls opinionated films "documentaries".

Documentaries are not documentaries if they are opinionated?

Woah, so a documentary about the evils of logging and how it affects wildlife is not a documemntary because it opposes the logging industry? I thought most documentaries are opinionated. Even the documentary "supersize me" is opinionated.

[PacHead]

Originally posted by hyteckit:
Documentaries are not documentaries if they are opinionated?

Woah, so a documentary about the evils of logging and how it affects wildlife is not a documemntary because it opposes the logging industry? I thought most documentaries are opinionated. Even the documentary "supersize me" is opinionated.

doc·u·men·ta·ries
A work, such as a film or television program, presenting political, social, or historical subject matter in a factual and informative manner and often consisting of actual news films or interviews accompanied by narration.

Nope, can't say that BFC or F-911 meets this definition.

prop·a·gan·da __The systematic propagation of a doctrine or cause or of information reflecting the views and interests of those advocating such a doctrine or cause.

Material disseminated by the advocates or opponents of a doctrine or cause: wartime propaganda.

Yep, that describes F-911 prettty accurately.

[angaq0k]

Originally posted by PacHead:
doc·u·men·ta·ries
A work, such as a film or television program, presenting political, social, or historical subject matter in a factual and informative manner and often consisting of actual news films or interviews accompanied by narration.

Nope, can't say that BFC or F-911 meets this definition.

prop·a·gan·da __The systematic propagation of a doctrine or cause or of information reflecting the views and interests of those advocating such a doctrine or cause.

Material disseminated by the advocates or opponents of a doctrine or cause: wartime propaganda.

Yep, that describes F-911 prettty accurately.

...as it describes any speeches made by any good politician across the world.

[hyteckit]

Originally posted by PacHead:
doc·u·men·ta·ries
A work, such as a film or television program, presenting political, social, or historical subject matter in a factual and informative manner and often consisting of actual news films or interviews accompanied by narration.

Where does it say it can't be opinionated? Is Supersize Me opinionated? Yes. Is a documentary about the logging industry killing wildlife opinionated? Yes.

A documentary is to present a political, social, or historical subject matter in a factual and informative manner and often consisting of actual news films or interviews accompanied by narration.

That's what F9/11 does.

Most if not all documentary has a specific viewpoint (opinionated). Just because you don't necessarily agree with the viewpoint, doesn't mean it is not a documentary.

[Drakino]

Originally posted by hyteckit:
Documentaries are not documentaries if they are opinionated?

Woah, so a documentary about the evils of logging and how it affects wildlife is not a documemntary because it opposes the logging industry? I thought most documentaries are opinionated. Even the documentary "supersize me" is opinionated.

Ok, I suppose I worded that wrong. But to take your example, it would be called a documentary if it provided accurate facts. It looses that title when they say logging has caused the extinction of squirrels.

I agree with Moore in several ways. I however do not like the one film I have seen of his because it started me on a thought path with incorrect facts. His deaths by guns numbers were not properly represented, making America out to be a really scarry place. He 1. never showed populations of said countries to get a % of people who die by guns, and 2. tallied up the numbers differently based on the country. In the US, any type of gun death was included. Outside the US, he skipped several kinds like self defence by police and such.

I already keep tabs on the current situation in Iraq and what led to it. Why do I need to see his film? He's not going to sway my vote, since I'm not voting for Bush anyhow.

I do seem to be in a rare camp though, and saying one thing against Moore seems to put me on the Bush side here. Well, I'm not. I'm a free thinking American, who, well, damn, doesn't fit into one of two categories.

[Troll]

Originally posted by Drakino:
I agree with Moore in several ways. I however do not like the one film I have seen of his ...

Fahrenheit 9/11 is a FAR, FAR, FAR better film in every sense than Bowling for Columbine. It won the Palme d'Or not because of its politics but because of its cinematography. I didn't like BFC either but Fahrenheit 9/11 is a great work. Moore was obviously conscious of BFC's shortcomings. He appears less, the film is more balanced, and the facts have been checked by one of the top fact checking teams in the country. Even if you see it just to see a woman wrestling with the meaning of the death of her son and a cynical society's denial of her suffering, it's worth the entry price. Moore just tells the stories that the media has to date chosen not to show. The people I have spoken to remarked that they were shocked that they had never seen this type of footage before. In a world where Howard Dean's scream was flighted 24/7, a blackhawk pilot friend of mine wondered why we had never seen Bush fumbling over the state of the union, or Ashcroft singing. For me, this film is more an indictment of the American media that is not doing its job than it is of the Bush Administration, although ultimately the one impacts on the other.

I laughed in this movie, I cried, I got angry, I felt exasperated. Any movie that achieves that, especially one that does it by presenting real events, is one you should see. Besides, what's the worst that can happen? You see it and it's not good.