Page 1 of 2

International boycott of MI:3 and even protest outside?

Posted: Fri Nov 18, 2005 4:20 pm
by $cienTomogy
On my site's Blog there's a survey about boycotting MI:3 and over
1000 participants and 85%+ keen;
http://scientomogy.blogspot.com/2005/11 ... cause.html

Perhaps organizing a worldwide picket outside the cinemas on thr
06-06-06 would be worthwhile also?

Thoughts?

Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2005 9:26 pm
by InitialsTC
No that's disgusting, it's a movie. Go to the Church of scientology, have balls!
Let the actors, directors and all the artists and extras in peace.

Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2005 11:57 pm
by touchstone
I must admit to being very torn about this.

On the one hand, MI3 is just a movie, and only a fraction of its profits are going into Tom's pocket. Furthermore, 2005 has been the year of folks already learning how whacky Scientology and its most visible spokesperson are, so any kind of picket-as-information-dissemmination mechanism could prove really redundant.

On the other hand, it might be very useful as a mechanism for raising further awareness of Scientology-- not only is it whacky, it's also destructive, controlling, deceitful, etc. Furthermore, it might be very helpful to underscore the message to Hollywood that loudmouthed advocates of cults can be bad for Public Relations-- a lesson they've already started learning this year.

Given this ambivalence, a discussion on the objectives and methods of an MI3 demonstration would probably be most helpful to assist anyone if they *do* decide to go forward with such a picket.

To begin:
Any action will produce a response, and we want our response from the average moviegoer to be a positive one. Although it might be very gratifying if MI3 were to bomb from universal Cruise-avoidance, I don't think it's appropriate for our primary goal/objective in front of the theatre to be getting people not to buy MI3 tickets. Unlike Scientologists, we need to have respect for the decisions of those who don't do what we would prefer. More harmful to Scientology than a film boycott would be inducing people to be yet more informed about Scientology. They know it's nutty. They don't know quite so well that it's harmful.

I begin to envision a pamphlet:
"It's about more than couch-jumping and space-aliens," might be the first line.

"Coming to see MI3 even though its star has some bizarre beliefs? We can respect that, but we thought you should know that Scientology's beliefs may be even more oddball than what you've heard so far. More important, however, is Scientology's *practices*, which include splitting apart families, harassing its critics with frivolous lawsuits and slander, deceiving and abusing its membership. But don't just take this pamphlet's word for it; find out what countless ex-members, judges, and court testimonies have said about the damage this destructive organization has caused in people's lives. Once you do, you might be a bit more hesitant to put money into the pocket of Scientology's biggest single donor and loudest spokesperson. To begin finding out more, go online to xenu.net or Google to find other websites critical of the so-called 'church'."

Does such a pamphlet accomplish the appropriate objectives?
By the way, I claim no copyright on my phrasing if anyone wants to use it. It's not etched in titanium, either.

Posted: Fri Dec 23, 2005 8:01 am
by Ltricha1
Sorry Tom Cruise is not a good enough actor for me to pay $20.00 to go see in a theater. I will wait till it comes out on Satalite or on DVD.

Posted: Sat Dec 31, 2005 8:36 am
by CD_label
That's a good idea - instead of a boycott, a picket, or consciousness-raising exercise (I think that's the correct sixties term? )
Hand out leaflets, information, pictures, etc.
The information on just how harmful Scientology is compared to other cults is probably some of the most compelling. The Anderson Report is excellent - have copies made available.

Posted: Sat Mar 18, 2006 7:29 am
by hbee
I'm not sure protest is the way to go. Heavy, heavy web-blitzing would work better. Perhaps an alternate event. I'm furious about this.

Posted: Sat Mar 18, 2006 7:47 am
by funkmr
Hbee,

Welcome to OCMB. I remember posting to this thread when it was first started. As you can see, there are very mixed feelings regarding this issue. I think a boycott is definitely prudent. I do not know about protesting IRL, as that may make the critics look as if they are foaming at the mouth. On the other hand, a lot of good word could get out. My impression is that people go to movies to relax and wish to be free of political influence from the moment they approach the theater. As such, I am inclined to agree with you. In any case, welcome to the boards.

Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2006 6:38 am
by admin
Quote from one of many e-mails I receive now because of the Cruise attempts to stop South Park:
On May 5th, I will be standing outside my local movie theatre holding a sign that says "The Church of Scientology Stifles Free Speech" and passing out leaflets garnered from your website.
More people who plan to do so locally?

Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2006 6:51 am
by Don Carlo
If the movie theater is on a city sidewalk, you can picket on the sidewalk as long as you keep moving. If it is a mall theater with its own parking lot and sidewalks, the space in front of the theater is private property and you might get thrown out ignominiously by security guards.

Posted: Sun Mar 26, 2006 12:39 am
by marlysfan
I don't necessarily think that protesting the movie would be beneficial. I'm not opposed to Tom Cruise making crappy movies, I'm opposed to his "religion". Besides, if I supported that protest, I kinda be bound to boycott the Simpsons. And it'll be a cold day in hell before I do that.

Just read your website

Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2006 3:25 am
by Hman
Nice going Scientomogy.

As always a bit sceptical, but after listening to your radio interview in Oz (Sea FM I think) from your site, like the rest of us in this part of the worl, you do not like a smart arse or being told what to do when you know it is wrong.

Let the bastards sue, put up the info and I am in for a few bucks towards your defence

Oh and I forgot

Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2006 3:26 am
by Hman
The coment you made about Anthony Robbins was very close to my own opinion when i read his stuff about 10 years ago.

I used to see his Billboards in Melbourne advertising shows, and just hsake my head and find the nearest pub to watch the wallabies play!!

Posted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 12:09 am
by BroadwayBaby84
marlysfan wrote:I don't necessarily think that protesting the movie would be beneficial. I'm not opposed to Tom Cruise making crappy movies, I'm opposed to his "religion". Besides, if I supported that protest, I kinda be bound to boycott the Simpsons. And it'll be a cold day in hell before I do that.
why would you have to boycott the simpsons? did i miss something?

and i am opposed to tom cruise making crappy movies

Posted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 12:34 am
by BroadwayBaby84
i never see tom cruise movies anyway on account of him being a crappy actor.

the reason i would want to boycott this film is because although only part of the movie earnings go into his pocket i believe that if he causes enough negative publicity he will get fewer and fewer movie offers. i don't know if this will work but think about it. if his movies don't make money who is going to want to hire him as an actor. plus he attributes his success in hollywood to scientology so that will be a win for anyone against it.

Posted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 3:12 pm
by marlysfan
why would you have to boycott the simpsons? did i miss something?
Nancy Cartwright, voice of Bart Simpson, has been a Scientologist since the 80s.