Skip to comments.
Cuban 'Fahrenheit' Telecast Raises Oscar Questions
Yahoo ^
| Aug 3, 2004
| Steve Gorman
Posted on 08/04/2004 3:10:45 PM PDT by swilhelm73
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-30 last
To: My2Cents
Absolutely - considering it is not actually a "documentary" in the first place . . .
. . . rules as for litle prople, and not the Hollywood gliterrati.
21
posted on
08/04/2004 4:33:40 PM PDT
by
BenLurkin
("A republic, if we can revive it")
To: Keith in Iowa
Rule Twelve Special Rules for The Documentary Awards I. DEFINITION 1. An eligible documentary film is defined as a theatrically released non-fiction motion picture dealing creatively with cultural, artistic, historical, social, scientific, economic or other subjects. It may be photographed in actual occurrence, or may employ partial re-enactment, stock footage, stills, animation, stop-motion or other techniques, as long as the emphasis is on fact and not on fiction.
i would say it is a documentary, but you may argue it isnt a very good one because it is (say) innacurate.
22
posted on
08/04/2004 5:38:43 PM PDT
by
sweneop
To: swilhelm73
This is the first article I've seen to assert that the televising of this film was unauthorized. Seems they would have made a bigger stink about it before the "Oscar" question came up.
Why isn't the MPAA railing against this piracy, isn't that one of their big pet issues these days?
Didn't Michael Moore give tacit approval to those who bootlegged this film because he wanted it to be seen? It seems that the topic came up in one of his interviews.
23
posted on
08/04/2004 6:12:31 PM PDT
by
weegee
(YOU could have been aborted, and you wouldn't have had a CHOICE about it.)
To: Keith in Iowa
Note that they say it is elligible for "Best Screenplay", wouldn't that disavow the "documentary" status? Has any other documentary been nominated for "Best Screenplay"?
24
posted on
08/04/2004 6:13:50 PM PDT
by
weegee
(YOU could have been aborted, and you wouldn't have had a CHOICE about it.)
To: P-Marlowe
I hope it wins best picture of the year. That will be the ultimate indictment of the entire industry.If "Bowling For Columbine" was this industry's indictment, then "F-9/11" is it's conviction to a life sentence.
25
posted on
08/04/2004 6:17:39 PM PDT
by
GOP_Raider
(Conservative, Republican, Raider Fan)
To: mewzilla
26
posted on
08/04/2004 6:20:01 PM PDT
by
weegee
(YOU could have been aborted, and you wouldn't have had a CHOICE about it.)
To: swilhelm73
I fully expect PBS to air this film on TV the night before the election.
27
posted on
08/04/2004 7:36:02 PM PDT
by
aimhigh
To: weegee
28
posted on
09/18/2004 1:15:40 PM PDT
by
Raven281
To: aimhigh
No doubt they will..I think they should place it in a new catagory Sh*t film of the year .Personally ,I'd hang him for treason
29
posted on
09/18/2004 1:20:18 PM PDT
by
omstrat
(zip code77034)
To: swilhelm73
Axis Mikey has already decided to forgo the "Best Documentary" nomination and to instead compete in the other categories this year.
Lord Fat Ass (heir apparent to Nazi Germany American broadcaster Lord Haw Haw) is still trying to swing an election eve broadcast in the United States for his film.
I've tried to raise the point several times that I certainly didn't hear any shouts from Michael Moore, his investors/distributors, or the MPAA over Cuba's violating of Michael Moore's film rights. I still suspect that it was an authorized showing.
30
posted on
09/18/2004 2:53:59 PM PDT
by
weegee
(What's the provenance, Kenneth? Where did the forged SeeBS memo come from?)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-30 last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson