Response To Mr David Lame
Press Release: Anthony Timpson for the Beck's Incredible Film Festival
In response to the seemingly never-ending pollution spilling from Mr Lane's mouth, may I offer the following to his latest SCOOP excretions.
But before I do, let me point out this entire affair with the simplicity the public haven't been afforded, in something I call "how to be a bully and disrupt a cultural event".
1. Read Film Fest
2. Look at offending icons - write down film title.
3. Ask for copy of Classification Decision from OFLC.
4. Search classification report for any mention of possibly objectionable acts.
5. Write to Secretary of Internal Affairs seeking leave to seek interim injunction.
6. Send submission to President of Board of Review (attach any negative reviews from web)
7. Get interim injunction.. ruin screenings.
3 Months pass
8. Board of
Review stands by original classification. Film can play.
9. Take film to High Court and say that Board of Review was wrong (ala doing a BAISE MOI)
3 Months Pass
Court says Board of Review did not make a mistake. Film can
11. Take the matter to the Court of Appeal.
12. Court of Appeal stands by Board of Review who stands by Classification Office.
13. Take matter to High Court in UK.
Next years film festival is about to start. Start at #1 and begin again.
This is the formula that Mr Lane has found works. You ask yourself could I do this? Could I stop a mainstream film like ATTACK OF THE CLONES. Well yes, you see CLONES was cut in the UK, a headbutt was removed as they thought kids might imitate it. You could use this leverage to ask the Board Of Review to examine the film and decide whether we should follow the UK decision as we're sometime bedfellows when it comes to classification of films. But hold on... do you have a 20yr history of being someone who has issues with film censorship like the Society for the Promotion of Community Standards has? Probably not and therefore the Secretary of Internal Affairs will not give you an AUTOMATIC clearance to seek an injunction like SPCS got for the films it went after in this years INCREDIBLE FILM FEST. You see you don't have the qualifications of a professional moral guardian. You're just riff raff. You're just a regular kiwi. Will SPCS go after upcoming THE MONSTERS BALL which nearly caused a Herald critic to vomit over the disgusting rape in it? Probably not.. as Mr Lane does not have an agenda against whoever is releasing it. Will he go after any films in the Gay and Lesbian or International Film Fest, both of which contain elements similar to the films being targeted in the INCREDIBLE FILM FEST? Probably not. Why you ask? Cos Mr Lane is a true Bully.
Mr Lane states that "my jackbooted freedom of expression soldiers" distributed 100 copies of BAISE MOI to the streets of Wgtn. Not only is this totally false it again shows that Mr Lane has a personal agenda with me. If he would be so kind to offer an instant retraction regarding this matter I'll let it stand. If not, legal action will be enforced.
Mr Lane has only seen BAISE MOI of the films under review. He felt the need to view it twice. Possibly in private. On National Radio he lied about seeing the films such as BULLY, VISITOR Q and the rest he is going after. When you avoid the truth Mr Lame you lie. Why would you avoid telling the truth Mr Lame? Unless you realise what a fraud you are by not allowing free thinking adults to decide whether they want to see these films rated by a classification office and by a govt appointed censor. Or is it because you'd look like a total fool for attempting to ban films you haven't seen.
Mr Lane runs the Apologetics Society of Wgtn. A society based on the edict "Honest questions deserve honest answers". Why then Mr Lame do you refuse to publicly debate about your role in trying to ban these films? Can you spell "coward"? You say your actions are the work of The Society and that you don't want to personalise it, and don't want to comment on the proceedings til after the BAISE MOI court date. Yet you have 'your' say in written and online publications whenever you feel the need to get SPCS mentioned. Could it be that you don't like the fact that I have pointed out that you are a total hypocrite. For the unenlightened, this is due to the fact that Mr Lame stated in the Evening Post that a gay activist was "wasting tax payers money and curtailing someones freedom of expression" in releasing Christian videos with anti-gay messages? Wasting tax payers money and stifling freedom of expression is exactly what Mr Lane is attempting to do with these festival films. The hypocrisy is obvious.
Mr Lane harps on about the fact that I promised to screen BULLY no matter what the Board Of Review agreed on. Strangely he seems angered that I didn't play the film. Well Mr Lame, that's how I felt when I heard that you were trying to get this critically acclaimed banned. However unlike yourself, I'm not willing to disrupt others lives for my own personal gain. If I owned the cinema then I would have played it. Simple as that.
Some words on BULLY. The actors in the film are playing characters all 18 or older. Some of them are 25. Where is the paedophilia Mr Lane sees lurking everywhere? Young people have sex Mr Lame, it may revolt you to acknowledge this but NZ has one of the highest rates of teenager pregnancy in the western world.
Unlike the few negative internet reviews Mr Lane offers from minor critics The following established critics thought BULLY a brilliant piece of filmmaking. Where Mr Lane imagined (as he hasn't seen it) young teen flesh everywhere, most rationale adults saw it as bravura work of a talented director and a cautionary tale that hit home.
Roger Ebert, CHICAGO
San Francisco Examiner
Films In Review
San Francisco Chronicle
Los Angeles News
Sunday Star Times
Los Angeles Times
Mr Lame says the festival contains "weird and wonderful activity that degrades and dehumanises human beings". This from a man who says he didn't know of the festival until a few months ago. Mr Lame fails to acknowledge that perhaps this festival is a balanced reflection of many filmmakers views of society from around the world. The films range from G to R18. He attempts to categorise the entire festival as some sort of 'sick and twisted' event and labels all filmgoers as a 'motley crew'. I'm sure many of the people who turned up to Antonioni's BLOWUP and the children and parents who attended the Tex Avery cartoons aren't happy with being generalised as a motley crew. This again shows how out of touch the society is with the festival and most New Zealanders. The only person we see supporting SPCS and Mr Lame is the NZ First Deputy leader Peter Brown who made a total fool of himself in a interview on student radio in AK when all he could coherently say was "bullshit ...bullshit". The only supporter of SPCS; he also hadn't seen VISITOR Q but felt the need to comment on it.
Mr Lane fails to mention why the light hearted documentary MAU MAU SEX SEX has been targeted. In it two elderly gentleman reflect back about the movie business. We witness them making cups of tea and talking about their colons. Mr Lame seems to see 'SEX' everywhere and one thinks of the Bataille quote "pornography is in the eye of the beholder". And of course he hasn't seen the film.
The Japanese gangster film GONIN features some violence and has many characters who are gay. Mr Lame feels that this enough for the film to be banned. The thought of Japanese homosexuals as gangsters in a work of fiction is enough to send Mr Lame into fit of pique. Of course he hasn't seen the film.
Mr Lane continually talks about these films falling into the hands of children. I'm not sure what he leaves lying around the floor at his house but all of these films had been passed to play in an regulated adult festival environment. Mr Lame, by trying to stop these films have now given them a wider profile than ever before. When they are finally passed there will be a waiting audience for them. The films would probably have never been given a video release but now with the added publicity granted to them by Mr Lame they probably will be. And children may indeed watch them. His children even. Mr Lame must also feel responsible for the actions of the activists who distributed the copies of BAISE MOI to people in Wgtn. It was a response generated by people who felt that ONE individual should not dictate what is best for society.
Mr Lane calls me 'infantile' in the Evening Post and yet when Steven Price wrote an articulate article in the Evening Post about Justice Hammond's decision, Mr Lame calls him a bedwetter and naive due to his age, failing to acknowledge the intelligence and coherence behind the piece. This is a standard rebuttal from all fundamentalists. They cannot accept the truth when it stares them in the face.
Mr Lame accuses me of playing the man and not the ball. Well Mr Lame, does this refer to me pointing out the hypocrisy of your actions? You are more than the just the voice of the SPCS Mr Lame. You are in fact SPSC - you are the one who has taken it upon yourself to be New Zealand's moral guardian. You are right in one respect. I will always play the man and not the ball. Especially when the ball is a 1000 sheets of fax paper and grandstanding press releases. I don't have the time to sit in front of a computer replying to your inane faxes and cut and paste netspeak. It scares the hell out of me how much time and lack of real human interaction you must have. Though it does shed some light on how someone could be so out of touch with the populace.
According to Mr Lame these films are directly responsible for society going into the toilet. This is not really worth responding to as there is no basis for such a claim. God forbid that Mr Lame actually researched why people commit such heinous acts as rape and murder. That would actually be HELPING his community. Better to waste time in getting an R16 elevated to an R18 isn't it? What actual GOOD does Mr Lame and this enormous society (sometimes 1300 sometimes 3500 members depending how omnipotent Mr Lame is feeling) do in our community. Does anyone know? Does Mr Lame know? Does he really think that holding up some festival screenings he is helping his community? When his kids ask him at night "what did you do today Daddy".. he can say with pride that he typed up four 28pg press releases and cut and pasted some negative reviews. Brings a tear to your eye doesn't it? I know what I do. I don't have the genetic makeup to be a Mother Theresa but what I do do, I do well. I bring a diverse range of films to NZ that the public wouldn't get the chance to see. Mr Lame (and possibly Scoop journo Dave Crampton) think that the festival is a smut parade. Get real. Comedies, documentaries, kids films, thrillers and dramas from around the world have all played over the years. Only someone who hasn't seen any of the festival films would make such a claim. Ignorance is bliss when you have your eyes shut.
The final talley of all this is:
BAISE MOI may indeed be banned, if the Board of Review feels compelled to follow the knee jerk reactions of the Aussies. It's a 50/50 call. It would be farcical to see the Board Of Review overturn their own decision in which they LOWERED the rating but hey, funnier things have happened recently. VISITOR Q will pass with a restricted to film festivals etc R18 classification. BULLY will be passed with an R18. All other films will eventually be passed for general release and one MAU MAU SEX SEX may even have its rating lowered.
And in the end Mr Lane will still be a fraud, a bully and a total hypocrite, sitting on his high moral ground at his computer searching for material to make his pulse race, as the world turns outside his window.