political views aside, it's still real tasteless to air miniseries of an ill person

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by jefhatfield, Nov 4, 2003.

  1. jefhatfield Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #1
    let's say instead that ronald reagan was a famous opera singer who was liked and disliked by many

    and let's say he was dying of AIDS...would it make sense to air a non flattering mini series?

    just put it in the can for now and let the man go quietly...away from the prying eyes of the press and paparazzi

    usually mini series' are aired after a famous person dies like the somewhat unflattering mini series broadcasts of liberace, elvis, or sinatra...the mini series on martha stewart was interesting, but done in bad taste since she is alive and in the midst of her legal woes...what jury could they now find that would be impartial?
     
  2. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #2
    it really is, just goes to show how much liberals hate conservatives or rather democrats hating republicans. if CBS wants to mix fiction and fact they should have enough decency to wait until this man has passed away. media liberal biased :eek:
     
  3. jefhatfield thread starter Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #3
    i think there should be a law against airing any mini series on a major, much watched network depicting a person in a negative light (with no proof) while that person is still alive

    what if a major network made a mini series on kobe bryant right now depicting him as a brutal rapist and thug? the issue is in trial right now and it would be wrong and i think, illegal

    or what if they aired a mini series on the man that was originally thought to the be olympic bomber? and then find out all along it was somebody else?

    the networks simply need to let the person in question pass away, or at least let the trials be commenced with a final verdict coming down...i believe in freedom of speech, but i also believe in a person's right not to be slandered while they are alive

    you can make all the mini series you want on hitler or stalin and how bad the men were, and if the network added some enhanced stories to illustrate a point, i would certainly not lose sleep over the matter


    _________________


    also a fictionalized, purposely unflattering mini series on someone like yassir arafat could cause more violence in israel and people could end up dying over that one
     
  4. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #4
    History has a way of filtering out the excesses and I think it is way too early to show any kind of historical docu-drama on Reagan and have it carry any real weight. However, the same goes with the gw 9/11 movie and the upcoming Jessica Lynch docu-drama, both of which are supposed to have totally distorted the truth. These two movies will be little more than government propaganda.

    Where does censorship end? Does a political party have the right to preview and censor a movie because they don't like the less than positive light thrown on a former president?

    Reagan's alzheimer's probably played a role in the last few years of his presidency and should be explored more fully. While his body still functions, it is doubtful at this point whether his brain functions in any way that would define him as a person. So disrespecting him is probably a moot point.
     
  5. jefhatfield thread starter Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #5
    as far as a mini series being too early, one on the grateful dead, or the dead, would be premature

    i just found out not too long ago that the remaining members of the dead, minus the deseased jerry garcia, want to do more touring for perhaps years to come

    there is still music history in those old bones:p

    at the same time, i don't dislike the mini bios on vh1 like the diary of anna nicole smith, britney spears, or christina aguilera...it was thru one of those mini bios that i discovered the real talent and music of christina agualera and before that all i thought of her was that girl who sings "genie in a bottle" and i thought she was a forgotten one hit wonder

    i would love to see a full on hollywood big budget film on the life and work of jimi hendrix and at one time i heard there was something that was supposed to happen with lawrence fishburne

    i did however like clint eastwood's production of bird, on the life of charlie parker...he did not hide the dirty parts about parker's addiction, but taken as a whole, it was an interesting biography
     
  6. tazo macrumors 68040

    tazo

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2003
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest, Seattle, WA actually
    #6
    I have read a few articles about this and if I understood them correctly, a lot of lies and libelious statements will be implemented into the movie, such as Reagan saying that people that have aids "lived in sin and shall die in sin", despite there having been no such record of him ever saying it. I think this is a bunch of bunk propogated by some individuals with a personal agenda to accomplish (Streisand and Brolin anybody?)

    Simply put, don't believe everything ya watch, especially when its right out Streisand's mouth ;)
     
  7. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #7
    I don't know about the quote regarding aids and sin, but I do know Reagan ignored the aids epedemic until Hudson's illness was made public. Of course, I could be repeating things I learned from those subliminal tracks encoded in Streisand's cds. Got to watch out for those divas and their diabolical schemes! ;)
     
  8. tazo macrumors 68040

    tazo

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2003
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest, Seattle, WA actually
    #8
    It has been fairly well-documented that there is no evidence of Reagan ever saying such a horrible phrase like that [aids, sin] and yet the people producing the CBS movie seem to be intent on including it in the movie. Not to mention that the producers of the movie are also trying to make it seem throughout the movie that Reagan is homophobic and anti-gay, which if you read the multitude of articles from various sources, is at this point untrue.

    Sayhey,

    go to the online newspaper or news source of your choice (I happen to like drudgereport, although the Washington Post is fine too) and read about the horrible light in which Reagan is portrayed.

    -tazo
     
  9. ColoJohnBoy macrumors 65816

    ColoJohnBoy

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2003
    Location:
    Denver, Colorado
    #9

    Dude. What gives. The topic clearly said "Political Views Aside". Give the cliche stereotypes a rest.
     
  10. Vector macrumors 6502a

    Vector

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2002
    #10
    This film, from what i have read, is completely tasteless and mostly unfounded. It is rediculous that two very liberal actors (Judy Davis and James Brolin) are playing the Reagans, especially since Brolin and his wife streisand have been openly critical of Ronald Reagan.

    Most of the lines that have received the most attention are not true, and it is sickening to me that cbs approved the script that for the most part has little to no factual truth either through documentation or corraboration.

    For anyone who hasn't, they should read the articles by Matt Drudge: http://www.drudgereport.com/
     
  11. wdlove macrumors P6

    wdlove

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    #11
    I think that it is wrong to do this to a person when they are ill. It would also be wrong to do this is Bill Clinton is he was on his death bead. It would be nice to see a historical film on Reagan. Many have been done on such men as Winston Churchill, FDR, & JFK.
     
  12. Vector macrumors 6502a

    Vector

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2002
    #12
    I agree and Matt Drudge said something similar in a recent intervies with Scarborough. With Reagan the point isn't just that he is ill, but that he has a severe case of Alzheimer's and cannot even defend himself against the erronious lines in the film. From what i have read there is very little mention of the good things that Reagan accomplished.
     
  13. SPG macrumors 65816

    SPG

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2001
    Location:
    In the shadow of the Space Needle.
    #13
    Don't you think we should move this thread over to Politics?

    It's funny that everyone is getting all hissy over this. There was a Bush 9/11 movie that could have been made by Leni Riefenstahl herself that drew no ire for being about a current sitting president who is about to face a tough election. Maybe because the misrepresentations in that one made bush look better than the truth?
    What about a biography of Carter? Would that upset you jef?
    Let people make their miniseries and movies and then after they air feel free to condemn it for misrepresentation or award it for it's unbiased look at the naked truth, whichever is appropriate.
    To hide behind "oh poor Reagan's ill, take it easy on him" is a laughable argument. Ronald Reagan was a politician who held the highest office in this country for two terms. Now his presidency is being pushed to create some sort of legacy and mystique, and anyone who dares question the cult of Reagan must be silenced.
    We live in a free society that is supposed to welcome the free exchange of ideas and opinions, so let's do that. Has anyone seen this mini series yet? I doubt any of the people calling for it being shelved have.

    BTW For the record, Reagan did make remarks about AIDS to that effect:
     
  14. SPG macrumors 65816

    SPG

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2001
    Location:
    In the shadow of the Space Needle.
    #14
    Oh yeah, one more piece on this:

    Mr. Leslie Moonves
    President and CEO
    CBS Television
    51 West 52nd Street
    New York, NY 10019

    Dear Mr. Moonves:

    I write to you with regard to your upcoming mini-series "The Reagans." I share the concerns expressed by others that it may not present an accurate depiction of the Reagan administration and America during the 1980s. I trust that CBS will not be a party to a distorted presentation of American history, and that the mini-series will present a fair and balanced portrayal of the Reagans, the 1980s and their legacy.

    As someone who served with President Reagan, and in the interest of historical accuracy, please allow me to share with you some of my recollections of the Reagan years that I hope will make it into the final cut of the mini-series: $640 Pentagon toilets seats; ketchup as a vegetable; union busting; firing striking air traffic controllers; Iran-Contra; selling arms to terrorist nations; trading arms for hostages; retreating from terrorists in Beirut; lying to Congress; financing an illegal war in Nicaragua; visiting Bitburg cemetery; a cozy relationship with Saddam Hussein; shredding documents; Ed Meese; Fawn Hall; Oliver North; James Watt; apartheid apologia; the savings and loan scandal; voodoo economics; record budget deficits; double digit unemployment; farm bankruptcies; trade deficits; astrologers in the White House; Star Wars; and influence peddling.

    I hope you find these facts useful in accurately depicting President Reagan's time in office.

    With every good wish,
    Sincerely yours,

    John D. Dingell
    Member of Congress
     
  15. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #15
    Its really a matter of CBS who made the thing of using poor judgement,having bad timing and having no class, but i guess that is CBS. I think i may watch CBS when my football team is on but thats it.
     
  16. tazo macrumors 68040

    tazo

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2003
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest, Seattle, WA actually
    #16
    That is an extremely persuasive letter, had it not been for star wars I dont think the member of congress could have made his point ;)
     
  17. Frohickey macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Location:
    PRK
    #17
    There is only problem with this idea...

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

    Ah... I love this country.
     
  18. Vector macrumors 6502a

    Vector

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2002
    #18
    Thats not a problem. We'll just have to have that part amended. I will call up a few congressmen and senators and see if they can get the ball rolling.:)
     
  19. tazo macrumors 68040

    tazo

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2003
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest, Seattle, WA actually
    #19
    lol vector.

    And although we still 'have' our first amendment rights, the Patriot Act has legally eradicated many of those rights, not to mention the other constitutional rights the patriot act has eviscerated...
     
  20. Vector macrumors 6502a

    Vector

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2002
    #20
    i am sure that if i cannot get a movement started to repeal the 1st amendment the government can find some way around it. i think these miniseries might be a threat to national security.

    Actually, on a more serious note, there are already ways around it. If it were proven that this miniseries was filled with erronious information that portrayed reagan or anyone else in a false and malicious manner then it could be considered slander or defamation and would not be protected by the 1st amendment.
     
  21. jadariv macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2002
    #21
    I don't think you can make a blanket statement that you should make a law banning making movies on people who are not dead yet. That sounds an awful lot like censorship. Maybe we can make an amendment to the Patriot Act. ;)

    As for the story, does anyone here even know what its about or have you been basing all your opinions by watching Bill O'Reilly or reading the Drudge Report.

    This movie is portraying the love story between Ron and Nancy. It's not a documentary or was it supposed to be used to put forth all of his political accomplishments.

    Yes, I agree that the "AIDS" comment is harsh and it was probably put in for some dramatic effect. This comment may not have been documented but it has been well documented in countless books and articles that Reagan ignored (for whatever reasons) the AIDS crisis in the early days.

    And everything I read or hear about this movie always quotes the 'AIDS' line and then goes on to say 'among other things'. What are the other things? If they are so bad let's see what else there is?

    I'm an adult. I've watched many historical dramas over the years. Some were good and some were bad. Some stuck to the facts and some fictionalized too much. But in the end, they all embellished a little bit to keep dialouge and action dramatic for the sake of making it interesting.

    I have a feeling (and I wanted not to be political, but...) if Brolin hadn't played the Gipper, I doubt we would have this thread going right now. I could just see the hate lust in O'Reilly's eyes that the husband of Streisand was playing Ronny.
     
  22. 3rdpath macrumors 68000

    3rdpath

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    Location:
    2nd star on the right and straight till morning
    #22
    anyone expecting to get much worthwhile/historical information from tv is sorely misguided.

    kill your tv and read a book.
     
  23. Vector macrumors 6502a

    Vector

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2002
    #23
    CBS ordered the miniseries as such, but the producers took control and added in their own views on the reagans. Maybe i am blind, but i do not see how lines about aids, the anti-christ, nancy hitting the children and nancy being a pill-popper add to a "love story".
     
  24. crookedcharlie macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2003
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA USA
    #24
    Well, thank God you're not a TV producer. Your way sounds boring as hell, nothing but praising a man who spent eight years robbing the poor to give to the rich...
     
  25. Vector macrumors 6502a

    Vector

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2002
    #25
    You forgot to mention Star Wars, ilicicit arms deals, financing the overthough of a democratically elected leader, giving weapons to iraq, ...

    I said that what CBS ordered was supposed to be a "love story", but the producers interjected their own political views, defaming Reagan on several instances by inserting colorful remarks that lack substantiation. if they had made a movie that portrayed reagan negatively for the iran-contra affair, star wars, the iraq-iran war, trickle-down economics, or another factually based political faux-pas then i wouldn't mind. it is the fallacious way that that the views of the films makers are introduced that bothers me.
     

Share This Page