lackblogger
SasqWatch
- Joined
- November 1, 2014
- Messages
- 4,778
Many people were looking forward to Woody Allen's return to a New York narrative in his latest film A Rainy Day In New York. Well, I say many but this is a relative statement considering Allen has never been the Hollywood Blockbuster type of guy. He's also 82.
However, even though the film is complete it's been shafted by its distributor, Amazon. Why? Because Amazon claim it is unpromotable after Allen dared to speak out against the #metoo movement and defend his wife of 22 years. Apparently this now means Amazon wont touch him with a bargepole and alongside refusing to market his latest film are also backing out of the associated four picture deal.
Allen, who puts up a lot of his own money for each picture he makes, felt he had no option but to sue Amazon for a whole variety of reasons. On July 31st a US judge decided that many of these reasons were invalid, though the case is still scheduled to got to court within the next year.
A Rainy Day In New York will at least get a European release without the involvement of Amazon, but this whole mess is almost beyond facepalming.
1. Before every movie you ever see it states "Nothing in this movie represents the opinions of the people distributing it" [paraphrase] so why in the hell can't Amazon distribute something just because someone somewhere doesn't like Allen? If that was a universal norm then no art would ever get released.
2. However much people 'at the top' feel obliged to back-up the #metoo movement and make mountains out of every mildly sexual molehill, Allen's case is one that has not only already run its full media course decades ago, but relates mostly to someone he's been married to for 22 years, someone who herself rejects the allegations against her husband and rejects the assertations made about him and any other of his own children he may or may not have touched inappropriately once.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-film-woody-allen-amazon-com-idUSKCN1UQ2FL
--------------------------------
But the real kicker of all of this, completely regardless of your interest in Allen's art, what is mainly the subject of this thread is the newly created legal obligations that the #metoo movement is placing upon the artistic community with the full support of the lemming-like top brass of business.
From now on, all people of stature involved in a movie will have to sign 'morality clauses' as part of their contract deals - effectively making them prisoners of anti-artistic morality, effectively forcing an almost ubiquitous religion-like morality upon all.
And how is this going to play out in the real world? Why, it's going to make the good old fashioned routine of evil blackmail and extortion exceptionally easy to manipulate. Every time an artist is about to release something… hey, give us a million or we claim you 'touched' someone once, and it doesn't even matter about proof any more, the papers will dutifully report it as if it's fact according to new laws that protect the 'victim' with impunity. By the time you can prove it's all horseshit you'll be so knee deep in debt and disgrace no-one'll care.
Seriously, Blofeld couldn't operate a more universally evil system of money generation via extortion and blackmail, let alone the societal control. The Ayatollah Khomeini looks liberal by comparison.
So yes, if you notice artistic works seeming… less quality(?)… over the coming years, you at least know why now, all the real talent is going to be too afraid to move and whatever's left is either going to be gullible/naïve marks-to-be or pogrom sanctioned parrots of a stale and dry specific religious ethos.
Or, to look on the bright side, this could be Europe's time to shine and take a bit of global movie market share, assuming it's not afraid to…
However, even though the film is complete it's been shafted by its distributor, Amazon. Why? Because Amazon claim it is unpromotable after Allen dared to speak out against the #metoo movement and defend his wife of 22 years. Apparently this now means Amazon wont touch him with a bargepole and alongside refusing to market his latest film are also backing out of the associated four picture deal.
Allen, who puts up a lot of his own money for each picture he makes, felt he had no option but to sue Amazon for a whole variety of reasons. On July 31st a US judge decided that many of these reasons were invalid, though the case is still scheduled to got to court within the next year.
A Rainy Day In New York will at least get a European release without the involvement of Amazon, but this whole mess is almost beyond facepalming.
1. Before every movie you ever see it states "Nothing in this movie represents the opinions of the people distributing it" [paraphrase] so why in the hell can't Amazon distribute something just because someone somewhere doesn't like Allen? If that was a universal norm then no art would ever get released.
2. However much people 'at the top' feel obliged to back-up the #metoo movement and make mountains out of every mildly sexual molehill, Allen's case is one that has not only already run its full media course decades ago, but relates mostly to someone he's been married to for 22 years, someone who herself rejects the allegations against her husband and rejects the assertations made about him and any other of his own children he may or may not have touched inappropriately once.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-film-woody-allen-amazon-com-idUSKCN1UQ2FL
--------------------------------
But the real kicker of all of this, completely regardless of your interest in Allen's art, what is mainly the subject of this thread is the newly created legal obligations that the #metoo movement is placing upon the artistic community with the full support of the lemming-like top brass of business.
From now on, all people of stature involved in a movie will have to sign 'morality clauses' as part of their contract deals - effectively making them prisoners of anti-artistic morality, effectively forcing an almost ubiquitous religion-like morality upon all.
And how is this going to play out in the real world? Why, it's going to make the good old fashioned routine of evil blackmail and extortion exceptionally easy to manipulate. Every time an artist is about to release something… hey, give us a million or we claim you 'touched' someone once, and it doesn't even matter about proof any more, the papers will dutifully report it as if it's fact according to new laws that protect the 'victim' with impunity. By the time you can prove it's all horseshit you'll be so knee deep in debt and disgrace no-one'll care.
Seriously, Blofeld couldn't operate a more universally evil system of money generation via extortion and blackmail, let alone the societal control. The Ayatollah Khomeini looks liberal by comparison.
So yes, if you notice artistic works seeming… less quality(?)… over the coming years, you at least know why now, all the real talent is going to be too afraid to move and whatever's left is either going to be gullible/naïve marks-to-be or pogrom sanctioned parrots of a stale and dry specific religious ethos.
Or, to look on the bright side, this could be Europe's time to shine and take a bit of global movie market share, assuming it's not afraid to…
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2014
- Messages
- 4,778