It seems disingenuous to claim that only Christian right felt that this movie's lack of distribution was due to realities of studios decision-making (rather than a controversy suggested by the film's producer). After evaluating all the facts it seems that the financial fears are the most likely explanation. There are plenty of good foreign movies that don't get US distribution because they're not expected to be blockbusters (note: not being a blockbuster is not the same thing as 'no one wants to see it'). Controversy is actually a good thing for movies -- Religulous, for example, remains one of the top-grossing documentaries of all times. OTOH, three top-grossing British exports are all romantic comedies with Hugh Grant in them.
On another note, the invites were sent to people who were interested in seeing this movie -- I'm assuming it was not a random mailing. Which shows only that people who want to see this movie want to see it.
Are there people who want to see this movie? Of course; no one argued otherwise. Are there enough of them to justify the risk (from the sudio's perspective)? We'll see; but note that the US distributor was found only after the controversy had started.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2010-01-09 03:50 pm (UTC)On another note, the invites were sent to people who were interested in seeing this movie -- I'm assuming it was not a random mailing. Which shows only that people who want to see this movie want to see it.
Are there people who want to see this movie? Of course; no one argued otherwise. Are there enough of them to justify the risk (from the sudio's perspective)? We'll see; but note that the US distributor was found only after the controversy had started.