Censoring/Suppressing films

One eyed Jack

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I'd be very interested to know whether there is some financial backing out there to 'support' this moving coming to cinemas. And if so, where is this financial backing coming from.

Same as most movies which aren’t made by the big Hollywood studios, they rely on private investment. One of the major backers of this movie is a guy called Michael J. Lindell -

Based on Johnson's memoir of the same name, Unplanned was produced on a $6 million budget. Michael J. Lindell, founder and owner of My Pillow, was a major backer of the film, contributing $1 million to production and having a cameo.

Seems like an interesting sort of a chap -


Prior to inventing MyPillow, Lindell launched and operated a number of small businesses including carpet cleaning, lunch wagons, and a few bars and restaurants in Carver County, Minnesota.

Lindell then invented the MyPillow pillow in 2004 and grew the MyPillow business into a major Minnesota manufacturing company with 1,600 employees in 2018 and 43 million pillows sold as of 2018.

In 1982, Lindell became addicted to cocaine and alcohol, and became addicted to crack cocaine in the late 1990s. His addictions even stretched through the early years of the MyPillow business. Due to these addictions, he lost his marriage of 20 years, his house, and nearly the MyPillow business. Lindell achieved sobriety through prayer in 2009.

In March 2017, Lindell produced The Mike Lindell Story: An American Dream, a documentary about Lindell overcoming drug addiction and building a multimillion-dollar business. The documentary was shot in Minneapolis, Minnesota at the Pantages Theatre.

On August 21, 2019, Lindell was presented with an honorary Doctor of Business from Liberty University.

Wiki: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_J._Lindell

Sweetemotion

We've gone full circle.

hetuzozaho

Harvey Weinstein wrote: »

I don't have a plan, it's possible to discuss a matter without wishing to take any kind of direct action on it.
I don't want anyone[I[/I]to be censored that's the point.
The issue here is not that people are protesting it's that some of them are attempting to suppress the film in order that people cannot see it. Big difference

Not really for me. I think protesting is fine. Free speech etc. Censorship by our government works be different.

The cinema are free to show it. This all seems fine.

Maybe I'm missing why I should be worried etc

suicide_circus

its the classic own goal i suppose.

I would never have heard of such a niche movie had it not been protested.

splinter65

Sweetemotion wrote: »

We've gone full circle.

It really didn’t take very long.
It always happens in the end.
The Brits pulled out of Ireland and the RCC stepped in for around 70 years. Now it’s the turn of the left wing fascists to be in power telling people how much better off they are now that they have them telling them what to believe how to think how to speak how to act and how to feel,who can be criticized, who cannot who to vote for what films you can watch etc.
It’s just as well the people now get pissed off with this pretty quickly and go right back to doing whatever they want.

AndrewJRenko

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Same as most movies which aren’t made by the big Hollywood studios, they rely on private investment. One of the major backers of this movie is a guy called Michael J. Lindell -

I wasn't thinking about the production of the movie, more the distribution. I have a serious doubt as to whether this movie could be distributed commercial in Irish cities. You don't see documentaries of any topic in cinemas much, if at all.


So I'm wondering if someone in financially supporting the distribution of the movie here in Ireland?

splinter65

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I wasn't thinking about the production of the movie, more the distribution. I have a serious doubt as to whether this movie could be distributed commercial in Irish cities. You don't see documentaries of any topic in cinemas much, if at all.


So I'm wondering if someone in financially supporting the distribution of the movie here in Ireland?

What makes you think it’s a documentary? It’s got a full cast of actors. Is it the fact that it’s based on a true story? If that’s the case then Titanic is a documentary too..

Homelander

It's a movie, not a documentary, and it's based on a prolife biography, so it's not remotely surprising. You'd think from all this controversy that it was some sort of demented exploitation film that is an unrelentingly assault on common decency. Yes, it is peoples right to protest, but to threaten that it will not be 'allowed' to be shown, or call for it to be surpressed, are daft.

One eyed Jack

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I wasn't thinking about the production of the movie, more the distribution. I have a serious doubt as to whether this movie could be distributed commercial in Irish cities. You don't see documentaries of any topic in cinemas much, if at all.


So I'm wondering if someone in financially supporting the distribution of the movie here in Ireland?

It’s being billed as a drama though as opposed to a documentary. I don’t know who the distributor in Ireland is, but reading the Wiki page about the film, it appears that the more people protesting about the film caused an increase of interest in the film on social media -

Many media outlets declined to air advertising for the film on account of the controversial subject matter and/or the film's R rating, including Google, A&E Networks, Discovery, Inc., Hallmark Channel, NBCUniversal, and Christian radio network K-Love. Google also listed the film as "drama/propaganda" in search results for a period of time. Only Fox News, who also did editorial coverage of the production, and the Christian Broadcasting Network agreed to air ads.

During the opening weekend, its official Twitter account was suspended (reportedly because it was linked to another account that violated Twitter's code of conduct). It was soon reinstated, gaining thousands of additional followers within several hours, eventually exceeding the number of followers for Planned Parenthood. Twitter was then accused of dropping followers of the film's account from over 200,000 to approximately 16,000. Senator Josh Hawley accused Twitter of censoring conservative views, and in a letter to Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, requested that an outside independent audit be made into Twitter's speech policies. Twitter responded and "said follower counts can often take up to 24 hours to stabilize following a suspension and that any issues with page follows should also be resolved shortly"; the next day, according to Newsweek, "the official account for the film appeared to confirm Twitter’s statement" in a tweet.

AndrewJRenko

My mistake, sorry, I picked up incorrectly that it was a documentary.

Hotblack Desiato

splinter65 wrote: »

Protest is allowing the cinema to show the film and allowing the customers to choose the film but demonstrating your disapproval of the film with placards and some noise.

Which is exactly what happened.

The objective of this group yesterday was to prevent the film being shown.
They made their objective clear earlier.

No, that's what one guy said, and you're rather conveniently attributing his words to everyone else opposed to this film. They're not in a position to prevent anything, only the cinema management can do that.

I really don’t care how many times you try to pretend that that’s not what was happening because you can convince yourself if you like but I know that taking the choice away is censorship .

Nobody is, or has, taken anyone's choice away - your outrage is entirely misplaced.

James Brown

facehugger99 wrote: »

Today's arch-liberals are yesterdays arch-conservatives under a different guise.

They will need to be faced down by all right-thinking democrats who value our hard-won freedoms.

Not really. The 'arch-conservatives' were about taking away freedoms and keeping the idea for choice and free will off the great unwashed. In this case the 'arch-liberals' are trying to stop anti-choice political propaganda being passed as art.
It's basically protesting and trying to shut down political propaganda working to take away choice. If the liberals win you can still choose not to have an abortion. If the conservatives do, that choice is taken away. That's the key difference.

Will I Am Not

So if the film is shown enough will there be another referendum or what? How many people have to see it before the polling stations are forced to open up?

James Brown

Will I Am Not wrote: »

So if the film is shown enough will there be another referendum or what? How many people have to see it before the polling stations are forced to open up?

6

Outlaw Pete

Matt Barrett wrote: »

It's basically protesting and trying to shut down political propaganda working to take away choice.

Ha. The irony.

James Brown

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Ha. The irony.

How so? If they are successful people still have free will. If the others get their way choice is taken away. Is the goal not to have choice taken away? It's a propaganda piece.

Veritas Libertas

Matt Barrett wrote: »

How so? If they are successful people still have free will. If the others get their way choice is taken away. Is the goal not to have choice taken away? It's a propaganda piece.

Anyone framing the 'abortion debate' as about choice is spreading propaganda.. that's the irony I see.

Most people are opposed to abortions one day before due date.
Most people are not opposed to abortions in early term.
It's a question of when and in what circumstance.

Therefore logic dictates this is not a debate about choice. People are more worried about the well being of the fetus/baby/infant.

But continue spreading your propaganda about choice, I'm sure facts have never stopped you before.

splinter65

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Which is exactly what happened.



No, that's what one guy said, and you're rather conveniently attributing his words to everyone else opposed to this film. They're not in a position to prevent anything, only the cinema management can do that.



Nobody is, or has, taken anyone's choice away - your outrage is entirely misplaced.

You must have missed all the well publicized demands by UCG and the Green Party amongst others on the cinema to not show the film.
You’ll have to make up your mind about where protest ends and attempts at censorship begins.

James Brown

Veritas Libertas wrote: »

Anyone framing the 'abortion debate' as about choice is spreading propaganda.. that's the irony I see.

Most people are opposed to abortions one day before due date.
Most people are not opposed to abortions in early term.
It's a question of when and in what circumstance.

Therefore logic dictates this is not a debate about choice. People are more worried about the well being of the fetus/baby/infant.

But continue spreading your propaganda about choice, I'm sure facts have never stopped you before.

It's far simpler. One side wants choice, the other wants to take away choice.

Veritas Libertas

Matt Barrett wrote: »

It's far simpler. One side what's choice, the other wants to take away choice.

That's called over-simplification. Expected from people framing the debate by spreading propaganda about choice.

Would you be in favour of an abortion one day before a woman was due to give birth? If not why are you impeding on her choice?


You see how your framing of this issue as choice has now dug you into a hole?

splinter65

Matt Barrett wrote: »

It's far simpler. One side wants choice, the other wants to take away choice.

One side thinks that people should be allowed to go to see a film of their choice.
The other side thinks that only films they approve of should be shown.
The Catholic Church did this for 70 years. Now the leftist fascists are doing it.

Stop moaning ffs

Why are they showing a ‘pro life’ film?

We settled this issue once and for all with repeal.

Haven’t they heard?

Hotblack Desiato

splinter65 wrote: »

You must have missed all the well publicized demands by UCG and the Green Party amongst others on the cinema to not show the film.
You’ll have to make up your mind about where protest ends and attempts at censorship begins.

People can demand whatever they want, doesn't mean they'll get it. Also censorship is an act carried out by a government.

James Brown

Veritas Libertas wrote: »

That's called over-simplification. Expected from people framing the debate by spreading propaganda about choice.

Would you be in favour of an abortion one day before a woman was due to give birth? If not why are you impeding on her choice?


You see how your framing of this issue as choice has now dug you into a hole?

Can only frame it as I see it. You infer conspiracy.
What would the conservative side want? Be truthful.

Veritas Libertas

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Can only frame it as I see it. You infer conspiracy.
What would the conservative side want? Be truthful.

Answer my question first: Would you deny a woman the choice to kill her baby one day before birth?

statesaver

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Why are they showing a ‘pro life’ film?

We settled this issue once and for all with repeal.

Haven’t they heard?

Agree with me or else .......

Stop moaning ffs

statesaver wrote: »

Agree with me or else .......

Doesn’t address what I asked at all but on you go

James Brown

Veritas Libertas wrote: »

Answer my question first: Would you deny a woman the choice to kill her baby one day before birth?

Never said I would. What's the situation? If it's her or the child that's for her to decide surely?

Now can you answer mine?

James Brown

splinter65 wrote: »

One side thinks that people should be allowed to go to see a film of their choice.
The other side thinks that only films they approve of should be shown.
The Catholic Church did this for 70 years. Now the leftist fascists are doing it.

Nope. One side wants propaganda with the motive of having the right to choose taken away to be stopped. The other wants to peddle anti choice propaganda.
Also when the church did it, a lot of the same minds backing this flick, it was with the weight of the state behind them. Far more nefarious IMO.

Stop moaning ffs

If we were to have been a showing a documentary in a cinema about same sex married couples with kids and families around the time of that referendum, it wouldn’t have just been a protest outside the cinema, you have all the Iona headbangers screaming about it in their weekly Irish times columns and on every news radio program every single day ranting about it.

They’d absolutely want it to be banned and not shown.