Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Baby Lee
What makes you sure you have any idea WHAT happened? I'm just talking likelihoods here.
You say no director would make a movie without getting a release for the names used. OTOH, that holds as much truth as 'nobody' would sue if they had signed a release.
The case is stupid enough on the facts, why the need to suppose all this other crap?
|
WTF is your gig, Baby Lee?
I am doing nothing but merely pointing out the hypothetical in that I find it rather disturbing Richard Linklater would develop a script with factual names in the characters without at first consulting with the real people in the first place.
Writers who leave the true identity of an autobiograhpical story without the consent of the character in writing- is asking for a lot of trouble. Defamation is a serious business, and all writers, agents, directors, and producers know that....
I think the "guys" feel like they are a reason behind the success of the film, and feel like they deserve a piece of that pie....so, after all these years, they finally think they might have something. Richard makes a movie about them and goes on to be a big timer in Hollywood, while the rest of them are stuck in small town Texas selling cars and fixing computers.
I'm just saying- writers know better than to publish something of an autobiographical nature without the consent of the characters in question.
If Richard Linklater failed to get their consent before selling the script to a producer- then he's one dumbazz screenwriter....I doubt that he is.