As I predicted yesterday, the usual suspects are all in a tizzy because the Reagan mini-series has been moved from CBS to Showtime.
Let’s go through what a ‘biopic’ is supposed to be, why this is not censorship, and what they hysterics are saying.
Part One: The BioPic Itself
According to the Internet Movie Database, a biopic (a Biographic picture) is defined as “A filmed story of a person’s life story.” So we don’t get lost in the words, a biography is generally regarded (at least according to dictionary.com) as “An account of a person’s life written, composed, or produced by another.” Thus, we would assume that a biopic, or at least the final product, would have some semblance of reality, and would be a semi-accurate portrayal of an individual’s life story. Did the “Reagans” pass this smell test? Not according to some informed sources.
According to Michael Reagan, someone we would presume to have a little bit of knowledge on the topic, the picture was a smear job and had no basis in reality:
“I’ve seen eight minutes of the broadcast myself, and I do not recognize the two people who play Ronald Reagan and Nancy Reagan in this TV miniseries as anybody I’ve ever come in contact with,” Michael Reagan said in the Fox News interview.
Reagan added that California liberals “have always seen my father as a buffoon,” and he said their outrage only grew as Ronald Reagan became governor and later, president.
Michael Reagan said he was particularly upset about CBS putting words in his father’s mouth – including profanity – and making him look like he’s not compassionate. “That’s not the Ronald Reagan I know,” Michael Reagan said.
Another individual we would assume knows something about the personal lives of Ronald and Nancy Reagan also stated the portrayal of her parents did not even resemble the people she knew:
Reading the script actually made me feel better in some ways. It is, quite simply, idiotic. Everyone is a caricature, manufactured and inauthentic. My father is depicted as some demented evangelist, going on about Armageddon every chance he gets. My mother is cast as a female Attila the Hun, and I and my siblings are unrecognizable to me. There are absurdities, like depictions of Mike Deaver and political aides camping out at our house during my father
Dean
It seems that the only apropos comparison would be the outcry regarding Mel Gibson’s movie about Christ.
If it is right to wait for that to come out to see whether it’s slandering the Jews, or outrageous to Christians, possibly it would be appropriate to withhold judgement on “The Reagans” as well.
But, on the outrageous to Christians part, the comparison would seem to fit only if Gibson were himself Jewish (or an atheist, or some other non-Christian), and those funding him were renowned for disliking, if not hating, Christianity.
Still, something of a parallel, FWIW.
greg
So now it’s censorship if it’s moved to Showtime because not as many people have access to it?!
Hey, James Gandolfini, you’re being censored due to the fact that “The Sopranos” is on HBO and not NBC!
HH
The show will air, almost completely uncut. Words like “censorship” shouldn’t begin to enter the conversation, unless you think the Sopranos is being censored, or that Stargate was finally being uncensored when it moved from Showtime to Sci-Fi Channel.
HH
greg – GMTA
HH
Dean – The general public hasn’t seen anywhere near as much of Gibson’s film as they already had of The Reagans. Matt Drudge and Chris Matthews have put portions of scripts, audio and video out to the public. You don’t have to see the entire film to know that portraying Reagan as a doddering fool already suffering from Alzheimer’s in the Oval Office is not based in fact. You don’t have to see the entire film to know that calling Reagan a homophobe is incredibly unfair, considering how he handled Rock Hudson and called AIDS a great enemy.
Jay Caruso
Good work John.
HH
As much as I respect Jeff Jarvis, he seems to be terribly misinformed on this issue, framing it as people being “offended.” Well, let’s throw all libel laws out now, because they’re about people being offended and nothing more, right?
Stephen
Censorship happens in one way only–at the point of a gun. First amendment issues pertain solely to government action.
Daschle’s right about one thing though. This does indeed smell.
The Mighty Reason Man
Just for clarification, am I to understand that “wave of censorship hysteria” is an appropriate description of two relatively mildly worded opinions from Tom Daschle and Barbera Streisand?
Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for lowering the threshold of justification for saying unkind things about my ideological opponents, but this seems to be a bit much.
“There are more responses, but why bother.”
Given the fact that you bothered to write what looks like about 2,500 words (including quotes) mocking the Left for their hysteria, I would think that you’d be able to show us a few dozen words worth of actual, you know, hysteria.
“This is already too long, and by now you get the point.”
It is, and I do: The hysterical cries of censorship coming from the Left are foolish, and so omnipresent as to negate the necessity of proving they exist as more than a dull murmur.
You’ll excuse me if I dismiss your point as nonsense.
Sidenote: “You forgot the Bill Maher quote, dumbass!” No I didn’t. You’ll notice he didn’t actually call anything censorship; he merely said it “looked bad” – and regardless of whether or not pulling the show was good or bad, the RNC taking CBS aside for a little chat certainly DOES “look bad” – something with which even Andrew Stuttaford agrees. Imagine that.
John Cole
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&edition=us&q=censorship+reagan
The Mighty Reason Man
Cole-
Cute, but when one takes the time to actually glance through the list your little search produces, one sees that:
1. At least half are articles dedicated to saying that this is not a case of censorship, while refraining from giving examples of people calling it censorship. Sound familiar?
2. Several are articles that claim that liberals and democrats are calling it censorship, again without giving a single example.
3. Several have no connection or merely a tangential connection to the Reagan biopic.
4. The only examples of your “wave of hysteria” are:
Neal Gabler, author
Jeffrey Chester, executive director at the Center for Digital Democracy
An “anonymous source” talking to NewsMax
and
Judith Polone, president of movies and miniseries for Lions Gate Television (although it is not clear that she is calling it censorship; she thinks it is a question that should be raised, but also says “if a network doesn’t like your movie and doesn’t want to air it, that’s their choice. They’re the ones who pay for it.” Pretty ambiguous accusation, if you ask me.)
Try again.
John Cole
I guess I missed where I said everyone on the left as calling this censroship. For the ones who say it isn’t, I say GREAT! They are right. I am not sure how you disprove my case that this wasa hitpiece, was not censorship, and that certain people on the left would seize upon it as an example of jackbooted mobs on the right shutting down freedom of expression.
drew
Cole-
Did you go off like this when the right was calling the Rush-ESPN flap censorship???
Rush, on his website, was talking about his 1st amendment rights. Any idiot knows the first amendment refers to the relationship between the government and its citizens.
Did you point out this mistake the Right made?
HH
Rush got a complete bum rap on that but his 1st Amendment complaint was BS… doesn’t change the fact that the left’s whining over this is BS too.
Andrew Lazarus
John, you may be amused to know that Hesiod agrees with you for the most part.
I gave up TV years ago so I don’t really care. However, I think it is pretty clear that RR’s Alzheimer’s symptoms began in his presidency. By the time he was deposed in an Iran-Contra court case shortly after, he seemed genuinely not to remember members of his own Cabinet.
drew
This Reagan special is getting a complete bum rap…Reagan’s AUTHORIZED biographer wrote about sentiments expressed by Reagan that are similar to the infamous AIDS comment from the mini-series.
Might I remind people about Reagan, the man responable for countless deaths in Central America (supposidly under the label of ending the Cold War but any idiot knows peaceful people like Lech Walesa and the Pope had more to do with the end of the Soviet Union that Reagan)
Reagan married his second wife less than nine months before the birth of their first child it is possible the king of morality had premarital sex?
Reagan also failed to recognize his son at his high school graduation. If my father did not recognized me at my graduation I wouldn’t stick up for his ass, ala Michael Regan.
John Cole
I thought Rush was an idiot for his remarks, and, as this post should make it clear, I understand when corporations decide to fire someone because it is in their best interests.
The Mighty Reason Man
Cole-
“I am not sure how you disprove my case that this was [1] a hitpiece, [2] was not censorship, and that [3] certain people on the left would seize upon it as an example of jackbooted mobs on the right shutting down freedom of expression.” [numbers added for reference]
1. From what I’ve read, “hitpiece” is far too strong – but it’s not something I care about enough to argue about, hence I didn’t address it.
2. We are agreed here. Caveat: It does LOOK bad.
3. To quote one of your favorite Democrats, that is a reassuring change of position. “Certain people” is quite a few short of the “wave of hysteria” you claim occured/is occuring – especially when, so far, I’ve seen evidence of only four people hollering about “censorship” – two of whom so insignificant they may as well be guys off the street, and one who has a stake in the biopic doing well (by being married to the lead actor).
You’re not wrong about it not being censorship, John, just about the Left’s supposed reaction to the whole thing.
Steve Malynn
Drew, Morris’ “Dutch” was fiction, and panned as such from the first review, even by the NY Times Review of Books. Either you did not read anything John wrote or linked, or you are so full of Reagan hate the truth does not matter. Wait, your post shows that the truth does not matter to you.
MRM – see above.
M. Scott Eiland
On the bright side, Babs managed to finish her whine without visibly spelling any words wrong or forgetting what country the people she was talking about were from. Kudos!
drew
if Dutch was fiction why did the Reagans sign off on it? are they stupid enough to sign their names to a work of fiction?
David Perron
They signed off on it? Got a cite?