rec.arts.movies.past-films

wrote in message
news:a94c2fc4-7068-4396-9b2b-180d7fb5ed9f@...
On Feb 26, 10:02 pm, "Kingo Gondo"
wrote:
> Did you read the ZP thread, as requested? If so, then there is some
> "density" here on your part.

Yes, I read it. And I did ask you to "forgive" my density.

> TCM tossed ZP off the schedule in an act of self-imposed censorship. And
yet
> next week they will be presenting to us a documentary which will laud
(quite
> justifiably) an era when censorship was relaxed, and mature moviemaking
> flourished.
>
> How hard was that to grasp?

Right. TCM first said it would air "Zabriskie Point," then it said it
wouldn't, and that's some kind crime against the First Amendment. Of
course, if TCM hadn't scheduled the Antonioni film in the first place,
we wouldn't even be having this (charming) discussion.

The connection with pre-Code Hollywood still seems tenuous. (I'm not a
regular viewer of TCM - has it shown pre-Codes in the past? Is all
that rendered irrelevant by the Zabriskie flap?)

Reply:

Nobody mentioned the First Amendment. Neither TCM actions nor the Production
Code was imposed by government action, which is the only time the First
Amendment is implicated. Both were the result of self-censorship. However,
self-censorship often is driven by a fear of eventual government action--and
that was indeed involved with the sudden enforcement of the Code in the
summer of 1934. TCM, alas, has no such excuse--no one can credibly argue
that showing ZP would put TCM in peril of any governmental authority.

Apparently the concept of self-censorship is beyond your grasp, a fact which
is surprising me less and less with each of your posts.

Go back to sleep already. I am in no mood to suffer fools on this one.