One of the most disturbing stories I’ve seen in a while was reported in a brief piece Monday by The Chicago Tribune’s Sam Smith.  Alt-weekly The Boston Phoenix decided to run a graphic photo from the tape of Daniel Pearl’s execution as well using its website to offer a link to the entire tape that is being circulated in the Middle East.  This has caused a rash of discussion, particularly among journalists.   Is there journalistic value in showing that tape?  Is running a picture of Daniel Pearl’s severed head just an attempt to get attention or is the effort sincere?  Do the feelings of the family supercede all of the above?

My opinion is in the minority, at least among journalists.   I believe, particularly after seeing the video, that it has remarkable impact and, while it has been edited by the terrorists involved to act as anti-American propaganda, there is a lot to be learned in its viewing.  Nothing happy.  Nothing nice.  Nothing comforting.  But it offers much to be learned. 

I do not believe in keeping any images hidden in this world.  Some people will “get off” on seeing Daniel Pearl murdered. Some people will be deeply scarred by seeing this video.  I would prefer that neither group see the video.  But if we censored everything based on potential harm or misuse (by our definition), we would live in a G-rated world. 

More to the point, I believe that we all should be responsible for understanding the reality of the choices that we make.  Flag waving is lovely, but very few of us see or understand the true thirst for blood, in this country and in others.  Even 9/11… it was so dramatic that it was almost unreal… it was and is almost beyond comprehension.  (The exceptional HBO documentary did the best job of bringing it home, I thought.) 

If we vote for the death penalty and choose, as a nation, to execute people, I believe that the executions should be televised… not because I need a stronger fix of violence.  Quite the opposite.  I believe that it is too easy to demand murderous retribution and then to not have to look at the consequences.  

Daniel Pearl’s execution was retribution against this country.  I can’t imagine many people here in the U.S. feeling that the murder was warranted.  I certainly do not.  But in the Middle East, it was cause for celebration.  Hearing Ted Koppel tell us that… it’s good, but it simply will never have the impact of this short videotape.  Picture… 1000 words… etc.

That said, I do not believe that the image of Daniel Pearl’s severed head, run by the Boston Phoenix in print, was informational.  It is a ghastly, horrifying image, but it is out of context.  Seems to me that one of the hallmarks of a fetish is to narrow focus down to very specific things.  That image feels fetishistic and I think it was a mistake of the Boston Phoenix to print it in its pages. 

As for the family, I understand their pain.  But this tape is not a private item.  It is not an invasion of their personal privacy.  This tape is being shown all over the Middle East as a call to arms.  If you judge the footage of the World Trade Centers falling or of a bomb going down a smokestack in Iraq or of people running from the terror on either side of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict to be news, I don’t see how you can not see this as news.  It is more than a document of Daniel Pearl’s murder.  It is a declaration of war, every bit as much as an American President giving a speech in front of Congress.  And the argument that the editing makes the tape propaganda and that it therefore should not be seen… it is the editing that makes this newsworthy.  I would actually be on the other side of this issue if it were a simple tape of Daniel Pearl being beheaded.  Then it would be nothing but a snuff film.  This is more than that.  Knowledge is power.  This tape offers a horrible, horrible truth.  And sadly, one man – and now his family, by extension – has suffered to become a symbol of that truth. 

Finally getting to the point of the Chicago Trib piece…

Last week, DreamWorks disinvited the Boston Phoenix’s film critic from the Road to Perdition junket in Chicago.  On Friday, they reinvited him.  Then they explained, “We wanted to express our concern that their handling of the Pearl matter was inappropriate,” a Dreamworks spokesman said. “But we shouldn't have tried to interfere with their editorial effort. We actually meant to protest by means of where our advertising dollars will go.”

I know it will sound naïve of me to say it, but since when do choices about display ads for movies have anything to do with the editorial judgment of a paper about non-movie issues? 

Would we accept a studio owned by a conservative pulling their ads from The New York Times for publishing The Pentagon Papers?   And would any studio pull their ads from any city’s top media outlet over an editorial issue that did not speak specifically to the relationship of that studio and that paper?  How about the TV show Politically Incorrect?  They were boycotted by some advertisers after Bill Maher made what was deemed to be an inappropriate comment about the last skirmish with Iraq.  But how would you feel if one of those pull-outs came from a fellow artistic enterprise… a movie studio?  Isn’t that different than the judgment of someone selling detergent?

Remember, this is an alt-weekly.  DreamWorks and every other studio is in there each week just 40 pages (or less) away from dozens of semi-explicit ads for sex services.  These papers are inherently controversial.  And even more, they are far more vulnerable to self-censorship due to demands from major advertisers.

It’s weird, because DreamWorks has the right to express itself, just like everyone else.  But why so stealthy?  If Steven Spielberg or David Geffen or Jeffrey Katzenberg or all of the above feel strongly that the Pearl video should not have been made accessible or that the photo should not have been run, why not speak directly to that issue?  Why not send a letter to the editor of the Boston Phoenix saying that the studio heads feel that a wrong has been done and that DreamWorks will not run display ads for the rest of the summer in protest?  That, I would have respected.  I would have disagreed.  But I would have honored the studio’s commitment to that which they believe.  It’s unlike Terry Press not to be bold, but even in Sam Smith’s article, noone’s name is attached to this decision by DreamWorks. 

In any case, there was a huge disconnect for me between a paper’s non-entertainment editorial choice and a movie studio’s quiet, damaging protest.  Please let me know what you think.

The Sam Smith story is on line.  Of course, both the Chicago Tribune and the L.A. Times (which is owned by the Trib and which ran the story yesterday) require sign-ups.  But you should probably be signed up for free access to all 10 of the country’s top papers and more after that.  Here’s the link.

BOX OFFICE TUESDAY:  So, all the numbers were wrong, but the result ended up being the same.  Hmmm…  Fox’s estimates and public comments suggested that Minority Report would come in second to Lilo & Stitch when all was said and done, based on the idea that Lilo was underestimated by more than a million.  As it turned out, Disney’s final was actually lower than the estimate.  So even though Minority Report dropped $1.2 million, Lilo dropped $500,000 and Report remained on top. 

The real question is, I suppose, does any of this matter?  Well, it’s just another part of the puzzle of real and false pieces that make up the industry these days.  Separating marketing from filmmaking from corporate earnings… oy!

There is a letter in ROTD from a guy from boxofficeprophets.com, looking very specifically at the history of Disney animation and opening weekends.  Interesting, if you are interested.

SONNENFELD’S STORES:  As I mentioned last week, Barry Sonnenfeld spins funny, interesting stories about his work… some would say that the stories are better than the work lately.  We’ll know more about that when we actually see MiB2.  But on Page Six today, Sonnenfeld answers the question put to him by the oh-so-subtle New York Post:

“HOW did stick-thin Lara Flynn Boyle's breasts get big enough to play a Victoria's Secret model in "Men In Black II?" Easy. "Every morning there were two people who would start at Lara's ankles and just squeeze flesh and push it up, past her thighs," director Barry Sonnenfeld joked to The Post's Megan Turner. "By the time it got to her chest, there was just enough flesh taken from below that we shoved it up into that one area, and created those lovely firm and supple breasts."

ONE MORE:  Speaking of Sony-based breasts, I heard a story last night from a well-respected journo who was at a Spider-Man roundtable and asked Kirsten Dunst about the hardest scene for her to shoot in the film.  She said that it was the kiss in the alley because it was cold and wet.  He told her, “You looked cold.”  She said, “Yeah, it was cold and… wait a minute, I know what you are talking about… next question!”  Obviously, they had both made their point.

DIAMOND HARD:  Terrific Newsweek interview with Angela Bassett for Sunshine State.  Bassett reminds us why she is one of the great actresses of her generation… she is more than someone just looking to get by… she honors herself and her craft.  Of course, that has led her to make very few films.  Sad.  One of my favorite roles of hers happened to be in a deeply flawed film, Strange Days.  Bassett was the toughest guy in the movie… yet, still clearly a woman.  I wish she had played Storm in X-Men.  No offense meant to Halle Berry, but the combination of earth mother and extreme power is something that really fit Bassett to a T and it was definitely missing from the movie.  Anyway, read the story here.

FAMILY CIRCUS:  A reader sent this along…. in the end, I consider it an honor to Harry Knowles that someone is counting.  There isn’t a critic in the world about whom the same could not be said as in this cartoon.  Take a look.

READER OF THE DAY:  Returning Deb writes: “The movie I'm really looking forward to is "Signs". I have thoroughly enjoyed M. Knight's director's "talk" on the DVD's of his previous movies and it's always fun to be scared in an "Exorcist" sort of way. I read recently where Spielberg mentioned that "Jaws" would not have been as successful now because the audience wouldn't wait so long to see the shark for the first time. Perhaps, it's my age, but I think Hollywood underestimates what an audience would do for a good movie.  Anyway, hopefully "Signs" will be that good movie. (And, I loved the Mel Gibson's quote that he's playing the Bruce Willis character).”

And this animated numbers crunch comes from D2 – The Mighty Duck @ boxofficeprophets.com:  “While the family film trend you discuss (big jump Friday to Saturday) is certainly evident in most animated fare, Disney animated summer releases are in fact an anomaly and the estimate for L&S is in keeping with that phenomenon.

Consider that the average non-seasonal specific internal multiplier for a movie is 3.15. Compare that 3.15 average number against the last 4 Disney animated releases in the summer.

Hercules made 21.45 million in its first 3 days vs. 7.09 million on its first Friday. That's an internal multiplier of 3.02.  Mulan made 22.75 million in its first 3 days vs. 7.98 million on its first Friday. That's an internal multiplier of 2.85.  Tarzan made 34.22 million in its first 3 days vs. 11.49 million on its first Friday. That's an internal multiplier of 2.98.  Atlantis made 20.34 million in its first 3 days vs. 6.50 million on its first Friday. That's an internal multiplier of 3.13.

Compare that to various other family/animated films that are recent June/July releases.

Disney's The Kid made 12.69 million in its first 3 days vs. 3.89 million on its first Friday. That's an internal multiplier of 3.26. Thomas and the Magic Railroad made 4.15 million in its first 3 days vs. 1.10 million on its first Friday. That's an internal multiplier of 3.77.  Chicken Run made 17.11 million in its first 3 days vs. 5.12 million on its first Friday. That's an internal multiplier of 3.34.  Adventures of Rocky and Bullwinkle made 6.81 million in its first 3 days vs. 2.12 million on its first Friday. That's an internal multiplier of 3.21. Inspector Gadget made 21.89 million in its first 3 days vs. 6.65 on its first Friday. That's an internal multiplier of 3.29.

As you can see, the worst internal multiplier for a non-Disney animated family film released in the summer is still better than the best internal multiplier for a Disney animated summer release.

I am in no way advocating that Minority Report won this weekend as the studio's current estimate appears to call for Sunday box office almost equal to Friday box office (11.9M Friday, 13.4M Saturday, 11.6M Sunday) though the internal multiplier would be normally quite reasonable at 3.10. I'm simply pointing out that Disney animated films are their own box office entity in the summer so it's not at all unusual for L&S to have a multiplier estimate of only 2.90 (35.8M estimated for the weekend on a 12.3M Friday). Kids are out of school so they exhibit the same first day rush on Friday that would be behavior we would normally witness for a fanboy, horror or teen film. People are less enthusiastic to see a film on day two and when it comes to Disney animated, kids are surprisingly uniform in this behavior.

Instead, I'm confident what we've witnessed here is that Fox expected Disney to ignore this trend somewhat independent of what Saturday numbers said and inflate their estimate. For this reason, they boosted Minority Report in order to make the race appear to be a draw. It's not a coincidence that the Minority Report estimate is exactly a 3.0 multiplier of Stitch's Friday 12.3M box office imo. Snyder's quote that he was "happy to call the race a tie" is even a smoking gun for this. Fox got what they wanted in tomorrow's newspapers and magazines and saved themselves further embarrassment after the Spider-Man/Star Wars situation. When Viane didn't do this, it raised a significant amount of eyebrows such as yours even though none of the data pulls is that outlandish on its own.”

E ME:  Sorry about the late column.  Major technical problem, which will be resolved by week’s end … but not to worry, no new URL.  Where’s the line between the movie business and real news – and who gets to draw it?