So apparently it’s not some kind of free for all and the festival is involved in choosing what screens. Maybe there is no official criteria, but apparently someone involved with the festival must have okayed it. But I’m not pitting just them. I’m including anyone involved with or supporting it.
Mendacious bullshit is not a “perspective”, nor is it art. Wakefield is a fraud who has been thoroughly debunked and disqualified from medical practice. The only way this film should get a pass would be as an illustrative example of outright fraud. To screen it as a “documentary” is indeed shameful.
““It’s shocking,” Michael Specter, a staff writer at the New Yorker who has studied and written extensively about the issue, said when asked in a phone interview Tuesday about the screening. “This is a criminal who is responsible for people dying. This isn’t someone who has a 'point-of-view.’ It’s comparable to Leni Riefenstahl making a movie about the Third Reich, or Mike Tyson making a movie about violence toward women. The fact that a respectable organization like the Tribeca Film Festival is giving Wakefield a platform is a disgraceful thing to do.””
Well, tell us how you really feel, Mike (wish he’d avoided the Godwin).
Evidently one or more of the Powers That Be at the festival sympathizes with the vaccines-cause-autism meme and helped push this crap through. I don’t buy the Tell Both Sides argument, doubting for instance that Tribeca would air a “controversial” film about an academic conspiracy to promote the climate change “agenda”, directed by a disgraced and de-credentialed scientist.
Based on info from the film’s PR firm, it sounds as though there are some show-biz celebrities supporting the film, which probably made it a more desirable pick:
I guess that proves the folly of getting your public affairs points of view from “celebrities.” Why anyone pays attention to what Leo dC or any other actor/celebrity thinks about anything outside their field of expertise (hint: makeup, acting, getting acting roles, how to make a speech at an awards ceremony, etc.) is way beyond my understanding.
This is a film festival that was created in the wake of 9/11, in an effort to revitalize the Tribeca area of Manhattan.
Maybe next year someone can submit a documentary about the US government’s secret role in using pre-planned explosive charges and missiles to bring down the twin towers?
[QUOTE=Tribeca VP]
Over the years we have presented many films from opposing sides of an issue. We are a forum, not a judge.
[/QUOTE]
A collection of blatant lies is not “an opposing side”. I don’t expect a film festival to be a “judge” of factual content, but I do expect a minimal level of integrity and due diligence that rises above the level of “gullible ignoramus”.
Sadly this seems all too common. It reminds me of the film The Great Global Warming Swindle produced by the charlatan Martin Durkin, which was aired on the UK’s Channel 4 and was so filled with lies and misrepresentations that it generated a flood of complaints to the UK broadcast regulator. This didn’t stop it from being shortlisted for best broadcast documentary in the UK that year and winning “Best Documentary” at an Italian film festival. On the bright side, from what I can tell the folks at Cannes at least had the good sense to reject it, because all Durkin could do was infiltrate the event to hold an impromptu press conference.
[QUOTE=Spokeswoman for the film]
There is celebrity support and they’ll be attending in New York.
[/QUOTE]
Right. And if it was a film singing the praises of scientology, Tom Cruise wouldn’t just be attending, he’d be starring in it. And if it was all about the genuine authenticity of astrology and ouija boards, Shirley MacLean would be all over it. How on earth can any reasonably intelligent person think this means something?
So, it was Robert DeNiro, I was expecting Donald or Ivanka Trump’s grubby fingers were the ones involved on the push to get that movie in the Festival.