Friday, September 08, 2006

Master Play by ABC

I think that ABC knows full well what it is doing. The publicity for The Path To 9/11 has been dramatic, inspired, choreographed and, well, damn good.


Well, it seems that they have 'edited' the version that will go to air on Sunday night. Perhaps this was the plan all along. I am no expert in film making but isnt there quite a lot of lead time necessary? I mean, to shoot the film (lets say it was shot 9 months ago) and to do all the post production stuff, normally takes a lot of effort and time. To re-shoot seens in not unheard of, but always something to avoid.

So, they probably have many, many endings to the same scenes. My point is, that they were 'on purpose'.

Think about it. No, really. I read that there are 900 screeners out there. (you know, the things that are 1.given to reviewers and tv stations, 2.copied illegally and distributed over bit-torrent clients). These screeners may have included the most inflamatory scenes and probably were delivered directly to Clinton aides, and the like.

So, they see the inflamatory scenes, make a comment on it, press goes into a frenzy, and even the Democrats ask for it to be pulled!. Can't get much better than that!!

But when the final cut is shown? The mild scenes will probably be used.

I think the public could even say that the Democrats would have gone overboard to hide it. So ABC will come out smelling like a rose, the Democtic Underground will be marginalized for their efforts (You can bet that the DU supporters will be the most active viewers; isn't that ironic?)

Now don't get me wrong, I am sure it will be schlocky (or shabby) but I will still watch it because of this publicity.

See, ABC wins.


On a another note, I wonder if you might say that some of these actors were conservative types. I mean, they have Harvey Keitel. Sure the rest are not very well know. But they must have realized they would be up for blacklisting.



Anonymous said...

So, tell me, why and what is it that would make me want to watch this special on ABC?

Don't the news folk "stick their guns" on stories they feel a gripping need to tell to us in the public??

They don't cow down to the officials then, do they?

Or, do they?

Anonymous said...

Interesting thought, except for one thing: The people screaming the loudest for censorship are not the would-be marginalized far left bloggers, they're the Dems in congress and Clinton Admin alums. The Dems are just outraged that one of their own in the MSM has dared step so far off the reservation.

Anonymous said...

Interesting thought but I doubt ABC would sell their credibility for airtime this way. Viewing numbers determine ad dollars and my guess is ad time for this show is already paid for and the dust up may actually cost them advertisers.

My guess is they followed the letter of the reports and were surprised when the Clinton folks were unhappy with it still (and in some cases said it didn't follow the report) and they caved in fear unsure where to make a stand.

With digital editing it isn't hard to chop stuff out. With Additional Dialogue Recording it isn't difficult to add in a bit of extra dialogue to make something work as long as the actors are available. With ABCs money they could make simple edits very quick if need be.

Anonymous said...

Maybe a bit too cynical, but it wouldn't surprise me if this were true... and I might hasten to add, that we will see this out for sale on DVD in the next several months. You know, the "Director's Cut Special Edition."

With scenes you were not allowed to see!!!

Rightwingsparkle said...

Patrica Heaton is conservative too.

Anonymous said...

The Dems are horrified precisely because they understand their own constituency. Namely, the logic-challenged, nanny-state-dependent masses that depend on TV to tell them what they believe. The Dems understand that this could be a fatal blow to them, just as they are about to re-take control of the Senate and perhaps the House. The success of Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9-11" confirmed to them the power of visual media to shape-shift reality.

And they are right. So, this series, they comclude, must be stopped AT ALL COSTS.

yetanotherjohn said...

One thing to consider is a) after the airing ABC is likely to see the series peeled back scene by edited scene if they make massive changes, b) ABC is airing this without commercial break, so their upside of getting lots of viewers is minmized and c) Oliver Stones 9/11 movey is having trouble breaking even because to many people expected it to be just a political message of liberal conspiracy theories.

This is starting to remind me of the CBS Westmorland report that prompted Westmorland to sue. One of the biggest gifts the democrats could give the GOP is to hype up the Clinton mishandeling of the terrorist threats in the 90's. An even bigger gift would be if they would sue ABC for liable.

rod said...

This crapfest, written by a close associate of Jabba the Junkie (AKA Rush Limbaugh), is the worst sort of dishonest propaganda. It claims to be "based on" the 9/11 Commission Report, but (according to descriptions by those who have seen screeners) in many significant instances offers "facts" which are exactly opposite of those described in that report. That's why every single one of those 900 screeners you mention went to compliant wingnut drones, but people like Bill Clinton, Madeleine Albright, and Sandy Berger - all of whom are, apparently, slandered by the lies in this steaming pile of vomit - were denied when they requested copies.

Oh, and as for the "conservative types" who appear in the thing - you may be interested to know that Mr. Keitel has real problems with the finished product (and I do mean "product," in the most cynical possible sense).