Palin Movie to Screen at AMC Theatres

NationalJournal.com ^ | june 10.2011 | Althea Fung

[Daffynition]

A documentary film chronicling the rise of former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R) will play exclusively at AMC Theatres in Dallas, Atlanta, and a host of other cities in the South and Midwest beginning in July.

Cinedigm Digital Cinema Corporation announced Friday that the Stephen Bannon film The Undefeated, about Palin’s rise in Alaska politics, will roll out at select theaters on July 15. The film makes no attempt at objectivity, featuring Palin supporters and conservative political commentators and bloggers like Tammy Bruce and Andrew Breitbart.

The film is expected to premiere later this month in Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina, before the national rollout in Atlanta, Dallas, Denver, Oklahoma City, Phoenix, Houston, Kansas City, and Indianapolis.

“After screening The Undefeated, we took the unusual step of immediately exploring an expedited theatrical release," said Trevor Drinkwater, CEO of ARC Entertainment, the company handling distribution of the film.

Palin supporters who don't live in the cities where the film is airing still have an opportunity to watch the documentary. Cinedigm is offering the public the chance to vote for future screening locations.

[rintense]

Just curious if you find anything humorous about the email exchange.

[US_MilitaryRules]

T**t????

[rintense]

Yeah, it’s a conspiracy. Like everything else on FR.

[DoughtyOne]

So now I am required to lead you around by the hand like your father and show you what you have done, that we both already know you did?  Is that about it?

No, you and your PDS thugs are way too cultured and genteel for that. You just stop in daily to urinate repeatedly on Palin threads...  LINK

StephenJohnBanker is not a PDS thug.

StephenJohnBanker does not stop in daily to, as you so crassly described it, to urinate repeatedly on Palin threads.

[DoughtyOne]

I don’t see people attacking Palin supporters simply for supporting her. I do see Palin supporters attacking people who raise an issue related to Palin, simply for doing so even if it is true.

Please show me what StephenJohnBanker did here that supports your reply.

[DoughtyOne]

I don’t know what was written in a private eMail, and unless it was of a threatening nature, I can’t see a reason for it being made public. Private communications should remain so.

If a person doesn’t want to be contacted in private, they should simply say so.

[rintense]

I invite you on any Palin thread to see how dirty it gets. As for SJB, he may not have jumped into the mud here, but he and I have several times before (like you and I have too) yet remained sane for the most part. :)

We passionate partisans are all guilty of mud jumping and thread pissing.

Yet, here, it gets nasty in email to the point of a physical threat. That’s happened to me twice, and those freepers are gone as physical threats are not tolerated. Of course, from what I’ve seen, posting private freepmails is against the rules too.

AM, can you clarify?

[DoughtyOne]

rintense to DoughtyOne; Admin Moderator

Rintense, I have been quite civil to you here and yet you felt perfectly justified to pull in the Admin Moderator.  This confirms what I have addressed here better than I could have.

This is what you consider to be justified action if it involves Palin.

I invite you on any Palin thread to see how dirty it gets. As for SJB, he may not have jumped into the mud here, but he and I have several times before (like you and I have too) yet remained sane for the most part. :)

Okay, then why did you feel compelled to give him a hard time here?  There was a problem between two people, and you chose one of them to back.  Why?

We passionate partisans are all guilty of mud jumping and thread pissing.

Frankly I try not to be unfair.  As for your other colorful euphemism here, I don't participate in that.

Yet, here, it gets nasty in email to the point of a physical threat. That’s happened to me twice, and those freepers are gone as physical threats are not tolerated. Of course, from what I’ve seen, posting private freepmails is against the rules too.

You do see three posts deleted, 49, 50, & 51 right?  I don't know what precipitated the eMail.  Perhaps you do.

Your comment was somewhat vague.  Are you saying SJB threatened G in the eMail?  Did posts 49, 50, & 51 cause him to respond in that manner?

AM, can you clarify?

I'm rather confused why you think you need to call the Admin Moderator in here.  I asked you a simple question.  All you had to do is reply.

I believe that you are fully aware of an exchange that took place here, which has been erased.  I believe it should have been, but I do think it's rather one-sided to take one person to task and let the other person get off with barely a mention.

If you're trying to defend Palin people here, that isn't a very impressive way to do it.

Yes, you and I have had our 'discussions' before.  We have been able to end them in as cordial a manner as possible, and move on.  I think SJB deserves the same treatment here.  He didn't pick somone out of the blue and go after them.  He appears to me to have been goaded into it.

[sickoflibs]

RE :”Please show me what StephenJohnBanker did here that supports your reply.”

BUMP!

It is getting standard to accuse posters of ‘A pattern of ....’ over and over without being able to provide examples. After all, the post/comments histories are here for a reason. If the accusers had the examples, they would have used them already.

I have always noticed SJB to be well behaved, unless he is attacked.

[rintense]

SIGH... I pinged the mod to clarify sharing emails. And that’s all.

[rintense]

Oh I am not placing blame on SJB alone. It takes two go tango, and with posts removed, it should be clear to everyone where things crossed the lines.

[DoughtyOne]

I didn’t require any further clarification than an understanding between you and I. You’re going to have to forgive me for continuing to have some small degree of suspicion that wasn’t the total reason. That may not be true in fact though, and I recognize that.

We were discussing an issue that could impact a forum participant considerably. Including a third party of the nature you did seemed to rather well-timed to me.

[DoughtyOne]

Well, not to beat a dead horse, it did seem like you were giving very short shrift to one of the players, while focusing on another.

Look, I recognize it’s reasonable to have some forum participants you get along with better than others and favor them. I have been talking to SJB for some time, and I know him to be a fairly decent person. That’s all.

[rintense]

I’ve not seen an ‘official’ statement on freepmails on FR, only references by freepers and mods that posting private emails was not allowed. That’s why I pinged AM.

[DoughtyOne]

Thank you for the response.

[rintense]

It’s an honorable thing to defend your friend. Excellent character trait. So good on ya for doing so.

[DoughtyOne]

Your comments make reasoned sense to me. I would think they would to most people.

Thanks for the bump.

My observation of SJB’s posting seems to mirror what you have observed.

[DoughtyOne]

That was gracious of you, and I appreciate it.

[DoughtyOne]

In one of my longer posts, #148 I believe, I asked the following question. Could you clarify that for me?

“Your comment was somewhat vague. Are you saying SJB threatened G in the eMail?”

Thanks.

[sickoflibs]

I also think the ‘pattern of ....’ search doesnt turn up examples because the accuser's search results in examples that they don't like. For example, here is a hypothetical exchange that if they found that they wouldnt want to post(just a made up example, not saying this ever happened LOL) :

SJB :’ I think Bachmann is more Conservative than Palin. I like her better ”

Accuser:’ What?? What are you some kind of PDS troll? You have no business posting your PDS slime. Go to hell! ’

SJB :’ Are you nuts? What is wrong with you? ’

Accuser: ‘ FU you PDS troll. ’

SJB :’ ????? ”

This might be the prime example of SJB’s ‘pattern’ that they find, but would not be not very useful to use against SJB.

:)