# Disney won't let Miramax distribute "Fahrenheit 911"! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [May 5, 2004, 10:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-wont-let-miramax-distribute-fahrenheit-911/243616 "2004-05-05T10:41:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Hyperelastic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Hyperelastic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hyperelastic)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2004, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-wont-let-miramax-distribute-fahrenheit-911/243616/41 "2004-05-05T19:52:25Z")
The Disney people aren’t censors, just nutless pukes with vanilla custard where their spinal columns should be. Perhaps this will silence those who posit the existence of a liberal Hollywood cabal out to foist their perverted view of morality on an unsuspecting public. Then again, perhaps not. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2004, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-wont-let-miramax-distribute-fahrenheit-911/243616/42 "2004-05-05T20:09:26Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > First of all this thread title is wrong. From what I saw on the news just now, Disney isn’t preventing Mirimax from distributing the movie. A more accurate title would be: **Disney isn’t helping Mirimax distribute “Fahrenheit 911”!** Are you sure about that? From the _New York Times,_ “But Disney executives indicated that they would not budge from their position **forbidding Miramax** to be the distributor of the film in North America.” That sure sounds like “prevention” to me. > [@Debaser](#): > > So, by taking this stand, Disney distances itself from a known liar and the many falsehoods and unproven accusations that his latest movie probably makes against the president. In the meantime, they are helping to promote it for $0. It’s a win-win. Nice of you to judge the movie as having “many falsehoods and unproven accusations” without having seen it yet. :rolleyes: As for the financial incentives involved, maybe you missed this part: “Mr. Emanuel said Mr. Eisner expressed particular concern that it [the movie] would **endanger tax breaks Disney receives** for its theme park, hotels and other ventures in Florida, where Mr. Bush’s brother, Jeb, is governor.” > [@Debaser](#): > > If Disney had a real problem with Moore, then they wouldn’t have let Mirimax make his movie in the first place. By your argument, then, since Miramax was allowed to participate in the production for so long, Disney _doesn’t_ have a problem with Moore or the movie himself – which undercuts your earlier point. And if we stick with your hypothesis that Disney is only in this for the money, then the allegations that Disney is chickening out for fear of losing their Florida tax breaks gets even more credibility… ---
**Author:** ![Gatopescado](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gatopescado/32/5711_2.png) [@Gatopescado](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gatopescado)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2004, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-wont-let-miramax-distribute-fahrenheit-911/243616/43 "2004-05-05T21:02:27Z")
Moore is a :wally ! ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2004, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-wont-let-miramax-distribute-fahrenheit-911/243616/44 "2004-05-05T21:18:46Z")
> [@rjung](#): > > Are you sure about that? From the _New York Times,_ “But Disney executives indicated that they would not budge from their position **forbidding Miramax** to be the distributor of the film in North America.” > > That sure sounds like “prevention” to me. Disney isn’t trying to prevent the movie from being distributed. They just don’t want to distibute it themselves. [Drudge just posted this story:](http://www.marccooper.com/) > [@](#): > > Dissecting the current dust-up, it seems clear that Disney never intended to distribute Moore’s film. Maybe the Mousketeers are cowards, but at least they are consistent. And Moore is whining now only to hype the pre-Cannes buzz. Sources report that Miramax never planned to release the Moore film, that it was always slated to come out through Lions Gate, as did the earlier Dogma. It’s not as if Disney is dumb enough to pay to make a movie and then not have it be distributed. They just don’t want to be the ones who do the distribution, they wanted someone else to do it. That isn’t censorship. The movie isn’t being “prevented” from being distributed. > [@](#): > > Nice of you to judge the movie as having “many falsehoods and unproven accusations” without having seen it yet. :rolleyes: Nice of you to ignore the word “probably” in my sentance. I don’t see any reason to believe that his latest work won’t have many falsehoods and unproven accusations considering the track record of Moore to lie to make his case. I’ve heard the movie makes links between the Bush family and Bin-Laden’s family. Moore hates Bush enough that it is safe to say that he _probably_ will go to great lengths to bash him without actually stopping to check his facts first. > [@](#): > > By your argument, then, since Miramax was allowed to participate in the production for so long, Disney _doesn’t_ have a problem with Moore or the movie himself – which undercuts your earlier point. > [@](#): > > And if we stick with your hypothesis that Disney is only in this for the money, then the allegations that Disney is chickening out for fear of losing their Florida tax breaks gets even more credibility… Well, lets look at some more stuff from that new article on Drudge: > [@](#): > > Disney officials appeared to be caught off guard by this onslaught and denied that the company’s decision was motivated by political interests in Florida. They also pointed out they had made it clear a year ago that they wanted no involvement with Fahrenheit 911, which was picked up by Miramax against the wishes of its corporate parent. This whole controversy has erupted just days before the premire of the movie. It is being fueled by Moore himself, who wants publicity for his movie. Disney’s position on the matter has been clear to Moore for a year and he just made a stink now because the movies about to open and he wants publicity. ---
**Author:** ![buttonjockey308](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/bcef8e/32.png) [@buttonjockey308](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/buttonjockey308)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2004, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-wont-let-miramax-distribute-fahrenheit-911/243616/45 "2004-05-05T22:14:39Z")
Anyone think that just maybe, Disney doesn’t think the bloody thing will make the margins? I mean Moore’s as full of shit as a Xmas Turkey, so it maybe a credibility issue too, but seems to me there aint a whole lot of box office in documentaries. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2004, 11:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-wont-let-miramax-distribute-fahrenheit-911/243616/46 "2004-05-05T23:07:38Z")
> [@buttonjockey308](#): > > Anyone think that just maybe, Disney doesn’t think the bloody thing will make the margins? > > I mean Moore’s as full of shit as a Xmas Turkey, so it maybe a credibility issue too, but seems to me there aint a whole lot of box office in documentaries. Really? According to [this website](http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/2002/BOWLC.html), _Bowling for Columbine_ grossed over $21.5 million in the United States, and a total of $40 million worldwide. Other websites, incluuding [IMDb](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0310793/business), give similar figures. I know that’s not as much as a summer blockbuster, but it’s not exactly a figure to be sneezed at, either. Especially given that production costs are listed at around $4 million. That means that, in the US, the film grossed over five times its production cost. By contrast, _The Matrix_ didn’t even triple its production costs in box office revenues, and the final episode in the _Lord of the Rings_ series, _The Return of the King_, grossed just over four times its production budget.\* You might think that Moore is full of shit, but that probably won’t prevent the new movie from doing pretty well at the box office. As others have pointed out, controversy can help, rather than hinder a film’s receipts. - these figures don’t include video and DVD rental and sales income. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2004, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-wont-let-miramax-distribute-fahrenheit-911/243616/47 "2004-05-05T23:57:34Z")
More financial incentive for Disney to supress the film: > [@](#): > > Disney may have another reason, not mentioned by the Times, to reject a film that might offend the Saudi royal family: **A powerful member of the family, Al-Walid bin Talal, owns a major stake in Eurodisney** and has been instrumental in the past in bailing out the financially troubled amusement park (AFP, 6/1/94). The project is facing a new cash crunch, and Al-Walid has been mentioned as a potential rescuer again (L.A. Times, 1/26/04). > (from [FAIR](http://www.fair.org/activism/disney-moore.html) And while IMO it’s premature to judge the movie without seeing it (or hearing the reviews) first, it appears that a lot of the material is simply a reiteration of stuff from [this book,](http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/074325337X/qid=1083801387/sr=8-1/ref=pd_ka_1/103-9858992-7812658?v=glance&s=books&n=507846) and I don’t see the Bush apologists making the case that it, too, contains “many falsehoods and unproven accusations”… ---
**Author:** ![Larry\_Mudd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/f14d63/32.png) [@Larry\_Mudd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Mudd)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2004, 12:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-wont-let-miramax-distribute-fahrenheit-911/243616/48 "2004-05-06T00:18:44Z")
> [@buttonjockey308](#): > > Moore’s as full of shit as a Xmas Turkey… Somebody had better have a word with your mum about the family recipe. :eek: ---
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2004, 3:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-wont-let-miramax-distribute-fahrenheit-911/243616/49 "2004-05-06T03:57:49Z")
I’m trying to find the Pit thread decrying the evil corporate censorship that occurred when Mel Gibson couldn’t find a distributor for “The Passion”, being denied by every major distribution outfit in the country, but I’m having trouble locating it. Can someone help me? ---
**Author:** ![Raygun99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@Raygun99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Raygun99)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2004, 4:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-wont-let-miramax-distribute-fahrenheit-911/243616/50 "2004-05-06T04:14:15Z")
There is a huge difference between independantly making a film and not having it be bought for distribution (which isn’t even close to true; there was a not insignificant bidding war between Newmarket and the ‘prestige’ arms of several major studios over it) and making a film under an existing deal and then having it denied. ---
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2004, 12:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-wont-let-miramax-distribute-fahrenheit-911/243616/51 "2004-05-06T12:46:16Z")
> [@Raygun99](#): > > There is a huge difference between independantly making a film and not having it be bought for distribution (which isn’t even close to true; there was a not insignificant bidding war between Newmarket and the ‘prestige’ arms of several major studios over it) and making a film under an existing deal and then having it denied. _There… was… no… deal_ when Disney told him _a year ago_ that they wouldn’t release it. Harvey Weinstein, defying explicit orders, still signed MM to a deal that wasn’t approved by his higher ups, and Disney, rather than kowtow to that self-inflated asshole, is sticking to their guns. Quite honestly, were this any other industry HW would’ve been canned so damned fast he wouldn’t have known what was happening. ---
**Author:** ![Mojo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Mojo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mojo)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2004, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-wont-let-miramax-distribute-fahrenheit-911/243616/52 "2004-05-06T16:41:10Z")
So what are these “tax breaks” that Moore’s agent alludes to that will be jeopardized if Disney/Miramax releases the movie? Moore knows that a) Disney isn’t going to let Miramax distribute it, b) it will get picked up (my guess is with Lion’s Gate like _Dogma_), and c) if he plays this “the evil Disney Corp. is being blackmailed by Jeb Bush into censoring me” card he’ll drum up a lot of free publicity and a big buzz at Cannes. My guess is that since he’s known a) (and prob b) for about a year now, it’s all about c). ---
**Author:** ![MovieMogul](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f08c70/32.png) [@MovieMogul](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MovieMogul)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2004, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-wont-let-miramax-distribute-fahrenheit-911/243616/53 "2004-05-06T18:34:38Z")
[Here](http://www.thehotbutton.com/today/hot.button/2004_thb/040505_wed.html)’s an industry insider’s perspective. Excerpts: > [@](#): > > In a classic act of Moore-ish onanism, the Oscar-winning documentarian took $6 million from Miramax, making Fahrenheit 911 one of the most expensive documentaries ever made. After feasting on this capital from the “independent” division of a multinational, he brays to the Times, “At some point the question has to be asked, `Should this be happening in a free and open society where the monied interests essentially call the shots regarding the information that the public is allowed to see?” > > Well, if ya don’t want those “monied interests” to make decisions, Mike… Don’t Take Their Friggin’ Six Million Dollars!!! Adding to the pathetic nature of this scam, please be aware that Moore probably has $6 million himself and could have self-financed or sold select foreign markets to get enough money to get well within range of his production budget. What was his salary on this $6 million doc? And how much of the budget was based on the speed of completion of the film so that Moore could feel he might influence this year’s election… > > There is a huge difference between Michael Moore’s six million polemic and some documentarian having his or her film bought and squashed by the distributor for political reasons. In fact, Oliver Stone has a much more reasonable beef with Time-Warner for forcing him to rethink his HBO-financed point-of-view doc about Castro than Moore has with Disney. I didn’t like the shallow perception of Castro in Stone’s original doc, but HBO didn’t tell him that he had to make a balanced film… until the political heat revved up after people saw it. On the other hand, Disney made it clear to Miramax and Moore that this film would never see the light of day under any Disney banner back before the Miramax financing deal closed. I can’t say I have a whole lot of sympathy for Moore–especially since I don’t doubt for a second his film will get out there in one way or another eventually. ---
**Author:** ![buttonjockey308](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/bcef8e/32.png) [@buttonjockey308](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/buttonjockey308)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2004, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-wont-let-miramax-distribute-fahrenheit-911/243616/54 "2004-05-06T20:49:54Z")
mhendo sez… > [@](#): > > Really? > > According to this website, Bowling for Columbine grossed over $21.5 million in the United States, and a total of $40 million worldwide. Other websites, incluuding IMDb, give similar figures. I wasn’t referring to BfC, (which btw was full of half truths and blather too) I was referring to a movie that none of us have seen, and that, it seems according to **ArchiveGuy’s** post, there was no deal for, and what’s more, the thing was made against the wishes of a parent company, who was footing the bill. Larry… Y’know, I always thought that “turdkey” was the wrong spelling, guess i’ve solved yet another family mystery. :eek: ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2004, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-wont-let-miramax-distribute-fahrenheit-911/243616/55 "2004-05-06T20:56:04Z")
In response to **ArchiveGuy’s** message, I think it depends on how the financial arrangements were between Moore, Miramax, and Disney. Is the Miramax budget directly tied in to Disney’s coffers, or are they kept separate, for instance? Heck, are we sure the $6 million was from Miramax, and not Weinstein himself? That said, you and **Mojo** bring up some good points, especially regarding Moore’s financing of the film and the (probably deliberate) publicity-raising ruckus around it. While I can understand Moore’s goals, it’s stuff like this that lessens my support for the lugnut. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2004, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-wont-let-miramax-distribute-fahrenheit-911/243616/56 "2004-05-06T21:06:08Z")
> [@buttonjockey308](#): > > mhendo sez… > I wasn’t referring to BfC, (which btw was full of half truths and blather too) I was referring to a movie that none of us have seen… I’m well aware that you weren’t referring specifically to BfC, but your comment was a more general one, to wit: > [@buttonjockey308](#): > > …but seems to me there ain’t a whole lot of box office in documentaries. That’s a general statement about the box office pull of documentaries. The point i was trying to make is that _Bowling for Columbine_ demonstrates that there is, in fact, a fair bit of box office for certain documentaries. Furthermore, the fact that you believe that BfC was “full of half truths and blather” is irrelevant. Another point i was trying to make is that the very controversy that surrounded the film was probably one of the reasons for its box office success. And, by extension, the controversy surrounding Moore’s new film could well increase it’s taking, irrespective of the merits of the fim itself. ---
**Author:** ![PunditLisa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/4af34b/32.png) [@PunditLisa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PunditLisa)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2004, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-wont-let-miramax-distribute-fahrenheit-911/243616/57 "2004-05-06T21:15:59Z")
Oh goody. Now Michael Moore can whine and complain some more. ---
**Author:** ![Raygun99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@Raygun99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Raygun99)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2004, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-wont-let-miramax-distribute-fahrenheit-911/243616/58 "2004-05-06T23:54:28Z")
> [@JohnT](#): > > _There… was… no… deal_ when Disney told him _a year ago_ that they wouldn’t release it. Harvey Weinstein, defying explicit orders, still signed MM to a deal that wasn’t approved by his higher ups, and Disney, rather than kowtow to that self-inflated asshole, is sticking to their guns. Quite honestly, were this any other industry HW would’ve been canned so damned fast he wouldn’t have known what was happening. I was under the impression that F911 was a distribution deal; I see now that I’m in error. However the bulk of my point remains in that it’s a different situation than The Passion of the Christ where Mel basically made the movie on a flyer. The controversy for TPotC was largely embraced (and fed in much the same manner) by Icon Productions (Mel’s production company) as well – it became The Movie The Jews Don’t Want You To See! A interesting coincidence here about the connection between the films. Miramax stepped in to finance the film after the original team backed out – namely Icon Productions! ---
**Author:** ![Brutus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@Brutus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brutus)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2004, 6:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-wont-let-miramax-distribute-fahrenheit-911/243616/59 "2004-05-07T06:33:58Z")
From [The Independant.](http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=518901) > [@](#): > > Less than 24 hours after accusing the Walt Disney Company of pulling the plug on his latest documentary in a blatant attempt at political censorship, the rabble-rousing film-maker Michael Moore has admitted he knew a year ago that Disney had no intention of distributing it. It looks like **cmason32** wins the prize. ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2004, 10:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-wont-let-miramax-distribute-fahrenheit-911/243616/60 "2004-05-07T10:53:29Z")
> [@brianjedi](#): > > Yes, because Disney has a corporate image to protect. Also, there’s the issue of Disney owning ABC as well. . Their image these days seems to be that of an ineptitude. What with Eisener’s struggle to stay at the helm, the park’s troubles, Pixar’s decision to flee the ship, and a string of box office dissapointments, I’d think they’d jump at the chance to have a film with as much advance buzz and controversy as this. Hell, they _could_ have even distanced themselves from it publicly and simply let Mirimax do it’s thing and still have reaped the reward. Just seems like bad business. No matter. _Somebody_ is gonna distribute this film, and make pretty penny doing it. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-wont-let-miramax-distribute-fahrenheit-911/243616.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-wont-let-miramax-distribute-fahrenheit-911/243616.md?page=4)