Well..... huh.

[ladyrogue79.livejournal.com]

Hey guys, I'm on Neil Gaiman's LJ feed and he posted a letter he received from an actress who purportedly was in the Innocence of Muslims. Except she claims that the filmmaker told the actors that they were acting in an action adventure film or something and then dubbed over the voices. Here's the post from Neil's journal.

I don't know exactly what to think though I still feel that this was an important film to make. Any thoughts on the actress's letter? Do you think she's a plant?

Comments

[rainpuddle13.livejournal.com]

I just saw something on Inside Edition with the actress claiming she was duped and all of the actors were complaining because the director duped them as well.

[theidolhands.livejournal.com]

Yeah, but Inside Edition is a gossip show that pays people for stories, so...

[lazypadawan.livejournal.com]

Geraldo Rivera showed a clip of this actress complaining last night on his show before I got annoyed and changed the channel.

As for the actors' protests, bullpuckey. They're trying to save their henies, figuring they're next on the jihad hit parade and they've just nuked any hopes of a career in Hollywood.

[mosinging1986.livejournal.com]

Funny how none of this came out until Muslims start rioting and killing.

[ladyrogue79.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that's kind of what struck me as odd. The other thing is it would probably be obviously if the film was dubbed over (especially since his budget wasn't huge so dubbing wouldn't be very professional I would think). I also find it odd that the actress came out to Neil Gaiman so he could post it on his blog instead of say... the media?

[spikedpunch.livejournal.com]

It seems to follow what has been said so far about the film in question.

[kelincihutan.livejournal.com]

Whether they were or weren't is irrelevant, at least in terms of what happened in Libya. Obama's only saying this attack wasn't preplanned to try and save his campaign. This film had nothing to do with that.

[farchivist.livejournal.com]

So they are saying, yes, (articles.cnn.com/2012-09-12/world/world_anti-islam-film_1_movie-islamic-film) Although this was reported on Free Republic last week.
Another article here (latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-crawley-innocence-of-muslims-actor-20120918,0,6570528.story)
As all 80 of the actors AND crew have issued a collective statement saying that the script did not have Mohammed in it and that it was added post-production by dubbing, I think we can safely assume all 80 aren't lying. Especially as we now know the original script, as was released by those same people. (gawker.com/5944290/here-is-the-original-script-for-innocence-of-muslims) To quote the article:

Joseph Nasralla, the CEO of a Coptic Christian charity called Media for Christ that took out the permits to shoot the film, now claims that he was duped by Nakoula. He said he thought the movie was a generic adventure story set in the ancient Arab world. "The final product ... bore no resemblance to the film I thought he was making," Nassralla wrote on the blog of right-wing anti-Islam activist Pam Geller. "Nakoula altered the film without anyone's knowledge, changing its entire focus and dubbing in new dialogue."

You can read the whole script at the Gawker link anyway. And now the actors are planning to sue. (weeklyblitz.net/2578/actors-suing-maker-of-innocence-of-muslims)

[steamage.livejournal.com]

I can understand her ire at being deceived, but what I don't understand is why she's bending over backwards to lick the heels of people who are threatening to kill her. Perhaps it's just me, but I never suck up to people who want me dead and make terroristic threats. :S

I think that the whole debacle is ill-advised, and I'm relying on summaries (I don't have the time or will to slog through the movie)... But:

1. Freedom of speech is freedom of speech. We wouldn't NEED IT for things people approved of. No one's tried a ban on stories about cute kittens.

2. Remember when the Mormons rioted and burned down our cities of the "Book of Mormon" musical? Or when the Catholics firebombed Denver over "The Da Vinci Code"? And let's not forget when the Jews DESTROYED MANHATTAN over unfavorable book depictions! ....wait.

3. According to the Koran and Haddith- sacred Muslim writings- Muhammad DID have a 9-year-old wife (Aisha! tragic, I-cry-for-her Aisha...), he did have homosexual tendencies (he liked other men kissing his shirtless chest) and he DID love to rape and murder. (He even advised his men on proper rape techniques- without wanting to be too graphic, he basically said not to bother with trying to avoid pregnancy, even though pregnant captives would sell for less. I think he ended it with something along the lines of "If a life is meant to be, by Allah it will be.") The problem isn't that someone's saying he did those things (the SOURCES for those claims are the Islamic writings themselves!)- the problem is that dhimmis are now realizing it. Muslims already know, and the tragic story of Aisha was used as a legal precedent for lowering the Saudi age of consent to NINE.

4. Movie promulgates stereotypes of Muslims of violence? Solve it by Islamic violence! That'll learn 'em.

I swear, Islam has the worst PR division ever. :S And the moderates can't come out and condemn the nuts, or they'll lose their heads. Despite the "if they exist why aren't they speaking up?!?!" some Rightists harp on, there are scads of peaceful Muslims- but, there's a huge risk of rape torture and death for anyone who criticizes the wild ones. I'm not sure I blame the moderates for being a little bit quiet.

I think that Islamic riots are just a part of the world; it's not likely to change. Get used to it, and try not to live near the Middle East. :(