Might be old news, but..

Apparently, someone thought it would be a great idea to produce a series about killing George Bush while he is still in office. Seriously WTF

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23365246-details/President+Bush+assassinated+in+new+TV+docudrama/article.do

This is utterly disgusting. Shall I make a series about murdering movie directors and scriptors? Or how about possibly where all terrorists are decapitated and the world be in peace? Yet another example of the putrid state of our (the modern era's) "contemporary" and "thought provoking" media. Regardless of your approval of his views and actions, where is the sense of decency? At least air it after he is out of office in hindsight. GD

Yeah, it was talked about it before. People argued, disgust was expressed, punch was served.

Why is it disgusting? I think its original.

I was going to reserve judgement on the film but I just read the synopsis and realize how absurd it is. It would be funny if George W. Bush sued them for a percentage of the profits.

if bush hasnt sued the many many parodies of him on the internet, television and elsewhere, he probably wont sue them.

he'd find it difficult to do anyway because of how defamation laws apply to public figures anyway.

I will make a movie about all of you being raped, killed, murdered, tortured and mutilated, or just simply getting shot, and see if you're not disgusted.

I wouldn't be because the movie would never get made.

He couldn't sue as the president but he should be able to sue as a private citizen seeing as how they superimposed his digital likeness on an actor, presumably, without his permission. That is the type of thing that usually requires royalties. He won't sue, of course.

Its a metaform. (I know, its probably spelt with PH but I'm tired).

also, theres no 'm'.

Wow. I agree with SF_Gold.

I'm too tired so live with it



Thank you.

But it's not a metaphor. It's a simile, at best. Your simply comparing the reality of the situation to an, although unlikely, easily identifiable reality for freelancer.

Problem is, he can't get it through his skull that, despite being an unlikely incident to have a video made of him being killed, as we've already seen with his offense to us wanting to bang his mother, he'd be horribly offended, and sickened by it.

I could never agree more, the later video idea sounds much more impacting, and sounds like it would be a hit. I'll make the phone calls.

Put it this way: Say I made a video in highschool, or even college that included the hypothetical assassination of several classmates. Despite the fact that it fit my political agenda and was an attempt at satire, I'd be arrested, the school would be put on lockdown, and they'd blame Destroy All Humans.

This is absolutely no different, and is even more of a delicate situation considering many of the people behind the making, in support of, and future audience members of this movie believe he SHOULD be killed.

Actually a kid was arrested for making fictatious STORY of a similar event, it was soo lame that his PARENTS turned him in.

edit: link please?

Winner

I think I'll reserve my judgement until I've seen more than just a plot synopsis, but really, is anyone even remotely surprised by this?

Go for it. But you might be dissapointed to find out that it's probably been done.


...okay?


Decency is subjective. Stop being all "ooh nos our airwaves and movie theaters are polluted with this vile trash!!" If you don't like it, don't watch it. People should be free to create whatever they wish (within the extend of applicable law) without ridicule, just as how people should be free to watch it without ridicule.

Oh, and don't even say that decency is defined by the church, god, etc., because I will explode, and I have a new t-shirt on so I don't want that.

So what if they do that? It doesn't make it the right thing. Those kind of actions are fueled by paranoia, some of which may be applicable considering the history of school shootings.


How do you know they believe that? If Bush was assasinated, it would have a HUGE effect on not only the country, but probably the world. I think it would be interesting to see what might happen. From political, economic and diplomatic viewpoints, it makes sense to hypothesize what would happen. And what better way to portray such a hypothesis than a film?

People are overreacting. It's as if you think the thought of pondering a president's assassination makes you a horrible horrible person that should burn forever. Climb out of that festering morality hole dug by the baby boomers and be a little more rational.

Why do we have to go through all of this again? We've just recently had four pages of discussion on this.

Kirby, we already addressed your hasty assumptions here.

It's just a 'what if' scenario.



Source

I often speculate about what the effect would be on those around me if I died right now, I occasionally wonder how i'd react if someone I knew died. This film just sounds like someone speculating the impact of a public figure's death.

When I speculate about people I know dying, I don't want it to happen, I don't get a buzz from it, it just makes me think about what legacies people leave behind. If I were a public figure I would welcome such a film as long as it doesn't glorify my death, doesn't feed the desires of people who hate me etc. Who knows, I might learn a lot about how the world sees me.

Sure, there will be people who watch this just to see Bush die, but that doesn't mean the film is intended this way. If you can't view death in a reflective way, you'll probably never come to terms with it.

Ever read/see A Christmas Carol? The ghost of things yet to come?

This borders on hate speech. I'm appauled by it. That's it. I'm not saying these people are horrible people, and if I hated anyone, I'm sure I'd be in support of a movie like this.

I like how my personal reaction is "wrong." Silly billys.

Detty > *

Wow kirb, you're usually on the cutting edge of controversy. You missed the ticket with this one.

The simple point is that you can't have an opinion about it before you've seen it, silly billy.

its getting hot in here

Some of you are beginning to sound like Jack Thompson...

[QUOTE=Jack Thompson's Modest Proposal]O.K. first hops a plane from LAX to New York to reach the Long Island home of the CEO of the company (Take This) that made the murder simulator on which his son's killer trained. O.K. gets "justice" by taking out this female CEO, whose name is Paula Eibel, along with her husband and kids. "An eye for an eye," says O.K., as he urinates onto the severed brain stems of the Eibel family victims, just as you do on the decapitated cops in the real video game Postal2...

Go ahead, video game moguls. Target yourselves as you target others. I dare you.[/QUOTE]

lmao

Explain.

...it's a movie.

I, quite frankly, don't care if a movie's made about the president being killed. It's not hate speech. It's a story. It's not a plot to kill the president. It's a story.

The "story in a school" bit doesn't apply because presidential assassins don't have a history of making documentaries about their actions.

If it has a happy ending, its most likely promoting a hate message.



Good, if I make a movie about child porn being ok, I will come to say this. Decency is relative!

Gold, how do you know the movie will say that killing Bush would be a good thing?

Some of you people make way too many assumptions.

/me bites you

I didn't say it would be a good movie. A movie arguing for child porn would be equally stupid. But it really isn't anything worth getting stirred up about.

"Some of you are beginning to sound like Jack Thompson..."

Very true, the people who "argue" that this is wrong give no reason to why they think it's wrong....apparently "it just is"

No reasons at all in this thread. Nope, none.

This is not a movie suggesting that Bush be assassinated, or that it's ok to assassinate Bush.

Your parallel would be something like a dramatic movie about what "might happen" in the child porn industry, with no value judgement on child porn.



In most cases I would not be, provided that the movie provides meaningful insight as to the consequences of such a thing, the circumstances of that situation, and the implications and interactions arising from it. I would have a problem with it if the movie existed simply to show the the fact that I was being [undesirable action]ed for the sake of showing it.

The "despicable" part is the presentation, not the content: no one would find you despicable for hypothesizing about Bush dying if you brought up in an intellectual discussion the rippling effects on society the assassination of our President would have. This is the same thing, except that it's illustrated for us; thus, it's the illustration (presentation) that people have a problem with--they focus too much on the depiction of the event itself [or rather, the fact that the event is being depicted] and miss the point of the film.

Even if the movie existed simply to show the fact that I was being f***ed for the sake of showing it, guess what, Gold, I WOULDN'T CARE. You'd have every right to make the movie and show it to everyone who would watch it. I might think the movie is disgusting and that you're a complete idiot, but I still wouldn't care if you went around showing it because it's your right. Unlike others, I'm not worried about bad thoughts corrupting others. I believe that most people would think that such a film is not worth watching on their own.

I bet if a movie was made about Blair being assassinated there'd be queues at the cinemas over here