Comments on: Comments on 13524

Post number 13524

owillis — Thu, 03 Jan 2002 18:38:04 -0800

Nothing So Strange is a mockumentary about the assasination of Bill Gates. This Gates doppleganger plays the Chairman, while Microsoft isn't happy.

By: Mack Twain

Mack Twain — Thu, 03 Jan 2002 19:11:57 -0800

This seems strange and sort of, well, rude. I saw an interview/review with a woman about this flick today, and when she was asked why a real, living person and not a fictional character in what is, afterall, a fiction movie, she just said it would be 'too coy'; she said the same thing to several similiar questions. It struck me as off the wall, and I am still wondering what in the hell she meant.

By: cqny

cqny — Thu, 03 Jan 2002 19:25:05 -0800

""But when you're a public figure who also happens to be the richest person in the world, you need to get used to people playing around with your image," Pike [who stars in the movie] said." If you are an independent film producer making low budget cheap flicks making fun of death of the richest person in the world, you need to get used to this person suing you ass.

By: whatnotever

whatnotever — Thu, 03 Jan 2002 19:25:42 -0800

I think she meant, "That wouldn't get any press."

By: raysmj

raysmj — Thu, 03 Jan 2002 20:09:17 -0800

cqny: It's far from clear as to whether Microsoft could sue for any reason at all, without being charged with filing a frivolous suit. I'm sure the lawyers could think of something, but whether the company would have a snowball's chance in hell of winning is doubtable. It also sounds like satire here, in which case the filmmakers are certainly protected. You can't win a suit over aesthetics or taste.

By: Steven Den Beste

Steven Den Beste — Thu, 03 Jan 2002 20:31:31 -0800

Ray, Microsoft doesn't have standing. Gates, on the other hand, could probably make a damned good case for libel.

By: Vetinari

Vetinari — Thu, 03 Jan 2002 20:35:57 -0800

Legal question: on what grounds could a clearly satirical mockumentary be considered libel?

By: robzster1977

robzster1977 — Thu, 03 Jan 2002 20:51:56 -0800

I don't know about the US, but if that was the case in the UK then the wonderful Spitting Image wouldn't have lasted very long. Indeed: "How Spitting Image went on for as long as it did God only knows" Some of the sketches were so cutting it made you cringe...

By: MegoSteve

MegoSteve — Thu, 03 Jan 2002 21:13:12 -0800

This film used to be known as MacArthur Park. There are a few related web sites; the creepiest is probably Bill Gates Is Dead.

By: cqny

cqny — Thu, 03 Jan 2002 22:43:16 -0800

Doesn't there some sort of laws preventing a commercial (or film, whatever) uses of your name and reference to you if you don't want it? I mean, such as defamatory.

By: Fofer

Fofer — Fri, 04 Jan 2002 00:25:22 -0800

The last link, about Microsoft not being happy, has recently been updated to the following day's story. Instead, here's the link to the relevant article (now archived.) (I thought Webmasters figured this out years ago.)

By: raysmj

raysmj — Fri, 04 Jan 2002 00:56:27 -0800

cqny: Defamation? Absolutely not. If the image of a celebrity is used for commercial purposes in a spoofy way, though, the law seems to be a bit trickier. A movie, however, differs substantially from a nightclub, even if both may be (or may want to be, rather) profit-making enterprises.

By: Taken Outtacontext

Taken Outtacontext — Fri, 04 Jan 2002 05:50:20 -0800

All of this sounds fine. But what if your last name is the SAME AS HIS??? What rights do I have?!! I've been asked if I'm related to HIM so often I've put his photo on my business card. Gets a laugh and moves the conversation on.

By: bclark

bclark — Fri, 04 Jan 2002 06:23:49 -0800

Hey, folks ... long time MeFi-er here, if only an occassional poster. I also happen to be Executive Producer of "Nothing So Strange", so kind of a tickling affair to make my morning trip to MeFi and see this thread. Wanted to pop in a couple of notes on your discussion. Mack Twain started the discussion on Laurie Pike's use of the phrase "too coy" and wondered what she (we?) meant. I thought I could describe that for you in a bit more detail. If there was any film in cinematic history that we drew creative inspiration from, it was Haskell Wexler's "Medium Cool". We frequently use "real life textures" in the fictional setting (like filming at Rampart police commission hearings, protest marches at the DNC, etc.) Since the starting point of the "what if?" is "what if the richest man in the world were murdered in most scandal-ridden police department in America?" creating a character like "Gill Bates" would have been ... well, coy. By the same logic, we could have set the movie in "the biggest city in the Western state of the most powerful nation on earth" ... but why, when it's much easier for an audience to accept that it is happening in Los Angeles? And, of course, MeFi's discussion of the legalities ... something that, as you can imagine, we have a lot of discussions about here as production company. Essentially, our stance is the same that many artists take -- that some people become "so famous" that they enter the public sphere, and that in those situations the First Amendment rights of artists bear equal weight to the "right of publicity" of that person. Absolutely it's a thin murky line, but it is one that (as artists) we're trying to approach in a meaningful way, not as as a "low budget cheap flicks making fun of death of the richest person in the world." The assassination of Bill Gates' isn't the point of the movie, it's the catalyst for a far more interesting story about the public's need for closure, the distrust in law enforcement officals, and the issues of class conflict in America.

By: Fofer

Fofer — Fri, 04 Jan 2002 08:14:52 -0800

Yeah, but is the movie any good?

By: eckeric

eckeric — Fri, 04 Jan 2002 09:32:03 -0800

Hmn, it seems to me that in looking for an event that would touch on the issues that they want to touch on, they would be hard pressed to find a different person or situation that would work. I mean, I guess they could have used a political figure, but for good or ill Gates is one of the major icons of the turn of the century. Because of that, different groups in society are going to see Gates the Icon as a being infused with different types of meaning.

By: mdn

mdn — Fri, 04 Jan 2002 16:33:52 -0800

looking at those clips left me unable to really discern the tone of the film - one of them was seemingly a serious history of corruption in the LA police dept.; another one seemed kind of silly, the man playing with his little model of the park - but that was the most spoofy one actually. Maybe the term "mockumentary" isn't quite right for this one? Usually fake documentaries are funny, but perhaps they're trying a new angle...

By: quonsar

quonsar — Fri, 04 Jan 2002 21:04:58 -0800

gates isn't dead. he's in missouri.