LaxTV Forums | A Forum About The MCLA

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14608725/

all i can say is wow....pushing the envelope...

** crickets **

If an non-GOP president was in the White House and the roles were reversed, I'm sure the outcry would be a tad bit different.

Sonny wrote:** crickets **

If an non-GOP president was in the White House and the roles were reversed, I'm sure the outcry would be a tad bit different.

Being a non GOP type person, I still think it is a little tasteless to do while a president is sitting in office, regardless of their politics. Especially since the threat of violence against a US president is a very real concern, for any president. If it was totally fictitious, in that real people were not the subject of the movie, then it would just be another movie. But, hey freedom of speech.

i simply brought up because i find it intresting that they would even do something like that...no political attachment on my part...just some info...

horn17 wrote:i simply brought up because i find it intresting that they would even do something like that...no political attachment on my part...just some info...

On this particular topic, "Interesting" is most likely illegal.

Is he getting paid for this? I'm sure he isn't. How the heck can they use his face (digitally manipulated or not) and not get approval from the person in the movie. You're still using their likeness.

that was my thought....couldnt he sue for likeness rights and all that fun stuff.....

If they use a fictitious name there is a motion picture work-around that goes something like this..."The characters and events depicted in this photoplay are fictitious. Any similarity to actual persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental."

"The characters and events depicted in this photoplay are fictitious. Any similarity to actual persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental."

Isn't that how South Park gets away with all their stuff?