Another 'Push' post

And this time a long one!

Below is a transcript from Reuters about the 'Push' lawsuit. It is a long but interesting read goes into the slippery and shady dealing of the festival circuit.

I am at a cross roads on this though. I think Lionsgate is not a heavy enough player alone to get this film seen, however with Oprah's stamp of approval and her name attached as a presenter will certainly help get this film seen. Also the involvement of Tyler Perry, who Lionsgate are distributors of his films and therefore understand the 'urban market' will help greatly. Would Oprah and Tyler Perry still support this film if it was being distributed by The Weinstein Company?
Lionsgate has proven successful with the 'urban market' but can they get this film to branch out? Can they get the non urban market to see it? (Am I therefore urban since I want to see it?... so confuzzed!)

If TWC wins the lawsuit and gets distribution rights on the film, things could go so many different ways. Sure Harvey is capable of buying awards and media attention for his films, but he is also well known for dumping films with difficult promotion onto the back shelf.
He is also incredibly arrogant and insists on playing editor with his movies...hence the nick name' Harvey Scissor Hands'.
He edits them down to the most conservative and Academy Awards friendly version the film could possibly be which, in the case of Push, would make it only eligible for the short film Oscar.

However should he win, enough people have seen the film that he would be idiotic to cut it, or shelf it. This film is very anticipated now, although by those few in the know.
So perhaps The Weinstein Company is the best distributor for the film, although I doubt it. I cannot see Winfrey jumping ship without Perry who will not leave Lionsgate.

With overseas distribution set all they really need to worry about is domestic. Whatever the outcome, TWC or Liongate, or even a joint venture, it needs to get sorted. This type of public sh*t slinging can only end up hurting the movie and the people who created it.

It seems everyone has something to say about this. NY Mag is arguing from the stance of who really cares as no one is going to see it (they are now added to my list....calling me a no body! The nerve!).

The New York Times talks about the marketing challenges but is much more fair and open minded than others have been, but I have to wonder if the people saying things like "Maybe Weinstein should just count his blessings and cut n' run." are they type of people who pass by a film about a poor obese black girl no matter how critically acclaimed based solely on subject matter?

On the other side of the argument, Defamer makes some witty but oh so true observations about the marketing potential of the film while questioning the NY Times article. It seems the movie has some people really rallying for it to be seen.
Also letting their voices been heard is Cinematical who I am echoing by saying the only real winner here are the lawyer, and Nikki Fink who sounds very angry by all this hoopla but who also (rather depressingly) sides with the stance that no one will go and see this film.
Pity this seems to be the case with a lot of journalists. They seem to like the film, but the minute they write 'no one will want to see this' they can immediately turn off those who might.
Instead everyone who likes/loves this movie should really be 'Push'ing it and not focusing on how they assume it will make no money.

For more details about the lawsuit check out this from The Hollywood Reporter.

For those of you who simply just care about seeing the film, here are scenes featuring Gabourey "Gabby" Sidibe, Mo'Nique and Mariah Carey:



I am so excited to see this!!!