More on Fahrenheit 9/11.

Little wonder that Disney's prohibiting Miramax from distributing Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 is the most talked about film-related story of the moment. A round-up of just some of the commentary:

Eugene Hernandez's story in indieWIRE is followed by a string of clashing views from readers.

Brian Clark: "Far be it from me to criticize a filmmaker for making the promotional best of controversy, but I fear that Michael has forgotten what it means to be independent (or how easy it is now to avoid being in a position where Disney can influence what you can and can't do with your film.) But Michael lost that option when he took $6M from Miramax."

David Poland: "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?"

Mike Monello: "This only reinforces my belief that we as filmmakers must figure out new ways to distribute films and find our audiences."

Matt Langdon: "What's just as ridiculous is that Disney knew exactly the kind of film Michael Moore would make."

"Here's Filmbrain's take on it - as a corporation, Disney has the right to protect their interests.... The only thing to do is to hurt Disney where it counts - a full boycott of their products, theme parks and whatever else they have their fingers in.... Filmbrain is curious to see how Harvey handles this one."

Posted by dwhudson at May 5, 2004 1:47 PM