Apple always have these convenient excuses in their back pockets. Makes much more sense to me that DeNiro was telling the truth, especially given recent events.
Comment on Robert De Niro accuses Apple of censoring awards speech
kirklennon@kbin.social 10 months ago
Variety reports that De Niro’s accusations regarding censorship have been denied by “a source close to the film,” who instead claims the incident was a miscommunication. The insider alleges that multiple versions of the speech had been created, and that both Apple and the filmmakers were unaware that De Niro had not approved the final draft. We have reached out to Apple and the Gotham Film & Media Institute to clarify the situation.
I can't rule out a dumb employee trying to make a unilateral change to a speech almost nobody would have known about otherwise, but a miscommunication over multiple drafts certainly strikes me as highly plausible, and I can also understand why the filmmakers would have been encouraging a draft that was more focused on the film than tangential contemporary political issues.
helenslunch@feddit.nl 10 months ago
kirklennon@kbin.social 10 months ago
Makes much more sense to me that DeNiro was telling the truth
Nobody ever said he was lying. He made a statement, live, based on his current understanding of the situation. Later, someone else offered a perfectly plausible explanation.
long_chicken_boat@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
it’s too much of a coincidence that the removed parts were the most controversial ones. that’s a pretty weird change for allegedly an “older draft version”.
additionally, it’s not the first time Apple has removed controversial topics in a short period of time. I might not agree with DeNiro at all, but I’m convinced that those parts of the script were removed purposefully by Apple.
CmdrShepard@lemmy.one 10 months ago
What’s plausible or reasonable about independently editing someone else’s speech and not even bothering to make sure they knew about it?
Haha@lemmy.world 10 months ago
It’s not perfectly plausible when it happened earlier lmao keep shilling
PeachMan@lemmy.world 10 months ago
The person you were replying to also didn’t say he was lying?
kirklennon@kbin.social 10 months ago
I'm aware, but at the moment on stage, it wasn't possible for him to know the truth in the first place so it's not about whether we think De Niro was "telling the truth." He was speculating.
SuddenDownpour@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
Regardless of whose idea it was to cut the speech, the fact remains that someone made a censored draft, the organizers received it along with the full speech, and the censored version ended on the prompter without De Niro’s consent. Perhaps Apple wasn’t responsible, but then who?
kirklennon@kbin.social 10 months ago
someone made a censored draft
I don't think we can quite say that. Speeches usually have a time limit. It would be perfectly normal to write more than you can actually say and then start cutting back or rewording parts to make it shorter. That's not "censorship." If you're cutting down an acceptance speech, the more off-topic stuff is naturally going to be looked at critically. I'd expect there to be multiple drafts with different portions cut out so it's not so much as a "full" verses "cut" speech but which version of cuts was the final version.
UsernameHere@lemmings.world 10 months ago
I don’t buy it. Those decisions always include the actor for obvious reasons.
“Oops! We aCciDeNtLy cut out the part that might cause insurrection supporters to not watch our award show! Aww shucks our mistake increased our ratings.”
wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one 10 months ago
Or a former version of his speech didnt have any politics in it because it was a draft, and he passed it to someone for review on what he had already written.
Then that copy somehow got mistaken for a, if not the, final draft.
I do that when writing. I ask for review on what I have written down, even knowing that I have more to add but just dont know how to start putting to words yet.
CmdrShepard@lemmy.one 10 months ago
I don’t buy this theory as he should have easily recognized it was an earlier copy of what he wrote rather than stopping and stating that someone edited his words as if he’d never seen the speech in this form.
NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world 10 months ago
the filmmakers would have been encouraging
Yet this kind of encouragement seemed a tiny bit… unwelcome maybe? 🤣
kirklennon@kbin.social 10 months ago
I think he's experienced enough to know that when your movie is out in theaters right now, the studio always wants you to use every possible opportunity to talk up the film, and would prefer you not go off on tangents. If nothing else, that's a reasonable request.
CmdrShepard@lemmy.one 10 months ago
Yes, lets not talk about modern racial issues and instead focus on this for-profit film we based off of classic racial issues. We want revenue not awareness!
harry_balzac@lemmy.world 10 months ago
I wouldn’t say that contemporary political issues are tangential to the movie. The same thinking and greed behind those murders still drives American capitalism.
I can see Apple and the filmmakers wanting people to not draw comparisons.
kirklennon@kbin.social 10 months ago
I think there's a time and place. Trump is a criminal who should be in prison, but his casual racism against Native Americans is still quite tangential to the Osage murders. I think most filmmakers who made a movie about bad things in the past do indeed want to draw contemporary comparisons (because we should try to avoid repeating past mistakes), but that doesn't mean every comparison is appropriate in every circumstance. Nobody wants rambling acceptance speeches, perhaps even more so at obscure awards shows where there isn't even a large audience who might need to hear the message. The speech as given just wasn't very good. It veers progressively off-topic.
UsernameHere@lemmings.world 10 months ago
If they didn’t want to hear what HE had to say then why give him an award and a mic?
It is very common for actors to use their speeches as a chance to speak about issues important to them. From Joaquin Phoenix all the way back to Marlon Brando.
This is an obvious attempt from Apple to censor a speech they asked for.
kirklennon@kbin.social 10 months ago
To hear him talk about the film?
Indeed it is, and the result is lots of eye-rolling and complaints. De Niro has many opportunities to express himself on a variety of issues. That doesn't mean every sentence he could possibly say really belongs there whenever he's given a microphone.