I am an investor, that is a fact. You know that because I have said it on these boards multiple times in the way of disclosure. So there is one more time.
Given the amount of traffic here it would be a mistake to think that I could influence enough people to see it to even buy myself a cup of coffee now and then. It would not be worth my time financially.
On the other hand I would be interested in discussing the film with a few people who have actually seen all of it which you and dude1 have not. I have also said as much in previous posts. So yes, I definitely do have a motivation to have a few people drop by, see mixed reviews, decide if it is right for them and then come back and talk about it.
I recognize the movie has flaws and I recognize that style, language and subject matter are not for everyone and I would not say "everyone should see it".
On the other hand I think your position is "no one should see it" and when you and dude1 dig up year old posts to create a top five "bad" list I believe that is the effect you are trying to have.
I don't think that you and dude1 can separate your feelings about the movie from your feelings about Big Sky since you had issues with their promotions before you ever entered the bar to see the movie. And Big Sky has conducted themselves in ways that justify attacks on them and I have not gotten involved in that other than to acknowledge the ways they have been dishonest with me.
In a similar way I can not be objective about the movie in the normal way because I did pay a lot more than $9.50 to see it. One of the reasons I would like to be able to discuss it with others.
As far as boycotting this movie to punish the production company, you should be aware that they mainly took their money up front. Most of the proceeds generated now will go back to investors so they are the ones you are primarily punishing and while I know you and others have expressed distain about investors I suspect that you are talking about a group of people a little on the naive side who got caught up in a good story and many of whom invested more than they should have. I am not suggesting charity (that will come later) but neither would I say that you do any service in avoiding this movie on principle.
As for the name; words are an amazing creation and amazingly powerful. They can be used for great truths and viscious untruths, the same bits moved around to foster huge gains or to spawn awful destruction. Interestingly, WLI is primarily a movie of words, some of which are combined in ways I find quite interesting and thought provoking, some of which I find disturbing and some of which do not quite resonate for me.
When you suggest that the name of storyteller is somehow a sign of deceit I would have to disagree although I recognize the accusation serves a purpose for you. If you want to take a stab at me I suggest you say that I am not worthy of it.
I do want to thank you as the original suggestion that I do all this for the money did give me pause to think about all the financial ramifications of my investment in this movie and out of that will come at least a bit of good. Can't say more on it just yet but I hope to be able to soon.
reply
share