Hollow Men film to premiere next month

108 comments on “Hollow Men film to premiere next month ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Lukas 1

   20 June 2008 at 5:02 pm

   Should be a good piece of fictional film… cant wait to see the documentary that they make out of Absolute Power though
2. Tane 2

   20 June 2008 at 5:08 pm

   You keep telling yourself primary source materials like emails, memos and diary entries are fictional Lukas. If it gets you through the night.

   Oh, and Absolute Power? You’ll be waiting a long time to see anything made out of that. Last I heard it was being peddled in the Warehouse bargain bin next to Paul Holmes’ CD.
3. Lukas 3

   20 June 2008 at 5:10 pm

   Actually Tane, I believe that is still close to or at number 1 on the NZ best seller list… but if you want to think that it is in the Warehouse bargain bin go ahead… I know for a fact that the Warehouse only a couple of days ago received a shipment of 800 copies of the book.
4. higherstandard 4

   20 June 2008 at 5:10 pm

   Will this be captured under the EFA ?
5. T-rex 5

   20 June 2008 at 5:12 pm

   Love that photo.

   Look at Key, Smiling away as he goes in for the ASSASSIN STRIKE!!!!!!
6. Lukas 6

   20 June 2008 at 5:13 pm

   HS no.. common sense will prevail…
7. gobsmacked 7

   20 June 2008 at 5:15 pm

   Lukas

   Give us a page number from ‘The Hollow Men’ with “fiction”. You’ve got hundreds of pages to choose from.

   Over to you.
8. Monty 8

   20 June 2008 at 5:16 pm

   While I would not bother with a leftard anti National (because that is what it will be) so called documentary, I do agree with Lukas that a study of the Clark years will be very interesting. As Labour continue to slump in the polls, the demise of this Labour Government will soon be complete.

   Once Clark has no power (and the UN do not want her) she will as her legacy leave a destroyed Labour Party. It will not take too long for someone to undertake an examination of the Clark Years and what went on behind the scenes. A lot of information is already out there, but more will come and none of it will be nice.

   As for the New film – well who cares about something that happened three years ago when Brash is no longer around. The future is now John Key, who will be sweeping to power and destroying Labour in the process in about four months.
9. Lukas 9

   20 June 2008 at 5:18 pm

   gobsmacked… I wouldn’t know where to begin… It would take me too long to even think of where to start.

   Would you like to have a go at dismantling Absolute Power?
10. T-rex 10

    20 June 2008 at 5:20 pm

    Monty – “the demise of this Labour Government will soon be complete.”

    .

    .

    .

    I find your lack of faith disturbing.
    I’m your FATHER! You KNOW it to be true!
11. Lukas 11

    20 June 2008 at 5:22 pm

    http://www.booksellers.co.nz/bk_bst_current.htm there you go Tane, incase you needed the link?

    [Tane: Lukas, it seems my attempt to take the piss has touched a nerve. Don’t worry son, I’m sure Ian’s stoked to be leading 100 Ways to Use Slow Cookers and Crockpots and Short Fat Chick to Marathon Runner.]
12. gobsmacked 12

    20 June 2008 at 5:23 pm

    Lukas

    So you’ve got nothing but smears. Asked for evidence … you instantly cave in.

    Apology accepted.
13. lprent 13

    20 June 2008 at 5:26 pm

    Oh dear, monty. It seems to me that I heard exactly the same song from the right in 2005 – but about Brash and trashing English.

    What is it with the right and their favourite brown-nose target for a year (to discard before the next election). How many leaders of the opposition has Helen faced so far? 4 or is it 5 yet? Here this year, gone next year.

    The only one I had any respect for was English (and he is notably the only persistent one). Well I did have respect up until the time he released a dickhead press release about the funding on this site. But he is persistent….
14. Lukas 14

    20 June 2008 at 5:28 pm

    …sure mate.

    I can assume your rebutal of Absolute Power is in the works then?
15. travellerev 15

    20 June 2008 at 5:30 pm

    Bugger, I would have liked to have seen the film, I really liked Hollow man. Sometimes( only sometimes though) living in the sticks sucks.
16. Quoth the Raven 16

    20 June 2008 at 5:32 pm

    Lukas – Have you read the Hollow men? A simple yes or no answer will suffice. Before you say anything I have read both books and absolute power is absolute bullshit. As for the EFA, in another attack on free speech National tried to shut down the play of Hollow men and all they succeded in doing was drawing attention to it. If they try to use the EFA against this documentary all they will do is provide a lot of free publicity for the makers.
17. Lukas 17

    20 June 2008 at 5:33 pm

    Tane- how long was the bible to the left in the best sellers list?

    [Tane: wtf???]
18. Lukas 18

    20 June 2008 at 5:38 pm

    QtR- Yes I have. What part do you think is BS?
19. Robinsod 19

    20 June 2008 at 5:56 pm

    I’ll answer that. Every single demented line of the damn thing Lukas. In fact the only retards like you believe it shows exactly how demented it is.
20. Lukas 20

    20 June 2008 at 6:06 pm

    Sod thats pretty funny coming from someone who probably lists animal farm as in their top ten movies… bet you like the pigs the best huh?
21. Robinsod 21

    20 June 2008 at 6:14 pm

    Y’see lukas – You lack the wit to even make a decent pigfu*king joke. Why don’t you crawl back to your dirty little corner of the web and contemplate why it is that nobody likes you.
22. Lukas 22

    20 June 2008 at 6:16 pm

    typical of you to make it personal eh? play the man not the ball
23. Robinsod 23

    20 June 2008 at 6:21 pm

    You’ve not got any balls mate – so what else am I gonna play?
24. Lukas 24

    20 June 2008 at 6:24 pm

    does that make you feel better mate? or are you pitching for another week in solitary at sodblog?

    Id love to stay here and be the victim of more of your great “wit” but I have to go and run a youth group… have a great night sod
25. Robinsod 25

    20 June 2008 at 6:29 pm

    does that make you feel better mate? or are you pitching for another week in solitary of at sodblog?

    “of at”?

    Your syntax is collapsing there, lukas. Feeling ok?

    Run a youth group? I guess that means you’re one of those luddite christian righties. What a freakshow…
26. outofbed 26

    20 June 2008 at 6:30 pm

    Is it true that the new film of the play of the book of the attempted rort, will show Mr English (the Nat leader in waiting ) as the email leaker ?
27. Lukas 27

    20 June 2008 at 6:35 pm

    sure ‘sod…

    helping out troubled youth in Auckland… what a freak show I am… I pity myself.
28. travellerev 28

    20 June 2008 at 6:36 pm

    Ah, Robinsod you’re back, wonderful
29. coge 29

    20 June 2008 at 6:42 pm

    Back O/T. All this is is preaching to the converted. So no fresh political traction for Labour. No one is listening, so whats the point?
30. andy 30

    20 June 2008 at 6:49 pm

    Lukas/monty

    I am still waiting for ‘absolute power’ to bring down The Prime Minister! When do you predict the accusations from Mr Wishart to stick?

    OTOH, What happened to Mr Brash? Oh that’s right he resigned because the truth came out, and then he has a little Mea culpa to ice that cake.

    We are sitting in Brash’s rented Auckland waterfront apartment where he lives alone, six months after separating from Je Lan, his wife of 18 years. Although one gossip columnist has called the apartment, with its polished blue mock marble floors, a “chick magnet”, the overwhelming impression is less of a bachelor pad than a lonely bolthole.

    Eighteen months after Brash stepped down as National’s leader in a blizzard of controversy over leaked emails, an alleged affair with businesswoman Diane Foreman, and a looming challenge from then finance spokesman John Key, Brash is looking back on his sensational political rise and fall.

    so I call your bulls*^t, Hager scored a scalp and Mr Wishart looks a fool for his predictions of Ms Clark’s imminent demise because of his gutter allegations, I hope you have enough in betwen the ears to notice the difference.

    coge said:

    Back O/T. All this is is preaching to the converted. So no fresh political traction for Labour. No one is listening, so whats the point?

    Your right no one is listening to Mr Wishart….

    OT

    Is it just me or are the kiwiblog right coming over to the standard because the echo chamber is getting to dull for them?

    Have also noticed a real trend toward calling the Prime Minister a maggot over there. WTF, I may dislike someone personally and dislike the policy but that type of language just reflect poorly on the commenter…
31. Robinsod 31

    20 June 2008 at 6:50 pm

    helping out troubled youth in Auckland what a freak show I am I pity myself.

    I thought you weren’t gonna stick around to get ridiculed mate. As for troubled youth – I know the sh*t you fill their heads with mate and they are only gonna get more troubled from contact with you.

    coge – then you wouldn’t mind it being broadcast on TV then?
32. barnsleybill 32

    20 June 2008 at 6:53 pm

    Order restored, where have you been hiding Rob?
    Have we seen any comments on who funded the making of this film yet?
    I would have to say the whole saga just keeps giving doesn’t it?
33. andy 33

    20 June 2008 at 6:55 pm

    outofbed

    I thought it was Mr Ambitious, he seems to have had a teflon suit for a while..
34. Dan 34

    20 June 2008 at 7:26 pm

    There is an authenticity about the Hollow Men that cannot be denied. All the attempts by the right to refute the allegations simply add to the substance of Hager’s very straightforward journal of duplicity.
    Duplicity: I guess that sums up the Nats.
    I hope the film gets seen by a wide audience.
35. T-rex 35

    20 June 2008 at 8:33 pm

    F*ck it’s great having you back Sod 🙂

    I think the big point that the ‘Absolute Power’ proponents miss is that a labour government is actually IN POWER at the moment. So if they did have a big super secret evil agenda aiming to take over the country and make us all dance like cossacks and try to equal the steel output of great britain and stuff then they’d be doing it. Instead they’re just carrying on with running the country and improving average peoples lives and telling special interest groups who are already far ahead of the curve to sod off. I was so proud when they told Rio Tinto to get bent over their Tiwai Point posturing.

    Empirical evidence shows absolute power is a load of total crap, and equally shows Hollow Men to be largely truth.

    Suck it up, righties…
36. ak 36

    20 June 2008 at 9:52 pm

    Suck it up, righties

    They don’t need to be told Tyrannosaurus – when they lean closer you can smell the mitukeyranium on their breath….

    Just a pity that they haven’t quite fathomed that the fallout from their November orgasm fantasia would be identical to that from a Labour victory. Poor sweet tory boys! All a-gnash and amok with frenzied attempts to destroy Labour, in order to usher in…..Labour policies!!!!

    Yes! I’m a Slippery man,
    A fan of the Slippery cant –
    I’ll back the tory plan
    To feed the bosses want

    I’ll ride the slippery wave
    And lick his slippery shoes
    I’ll dig old Helen’s grave
    And read the bosses’ news

    I’ll bash those lazy crips!
    And blacks and poofs and shits!
    Who took my cook and FUCK!
    They even fucked my truck!

    And when nice John is in
    He’ll absolve us from all sin
    And take us back to mum
    And cheese and roasts and chum

    And me and dad’ll yarn
    In the bush untill the dawn

    Yes! I’m a Slippery man!
    And I live in a slippery land
37. dad4justice 37

    20 June 2008 at 9:53 pm

    What a waste of tax payers money. This is not prudent as such a time as this . Fuel is the new Fuck word.My brain hurts SIR.
38. T-rex 38

    20 June 2008 at 10:06 pm

    ak: mitukeyranium – lange would be proud, well done!

    dad… seriously, what the F*CK do you smoke?
39. dad4justice 39

    20 June 2008 at 10:09 pm

    Port Royal thank you, 50 gram would be nice.
40. T-rex 40

    20 June 2008 at 10:16 pm

    That’s a weird coincidence! 50grams is about how much heroin I’d have to inject to think like you!

    Stranger than fiction…
41. dad4justice 41

    20 June 2008 at 10:30 pm

    That’s why T -rex is behind bars.
42. ak 42

    20 June 2008 at 10:34 pm

    dad! Howzit! I don’t visit the blogs as often as I’d like to (other stuff to do, y’know, yeah I’m a ‘baiter too!) but maaaaate, good to see you still pushing the buttons and so forth.
    I’m like ‘sod, dad – I think you’re basically not a bad bloke (heck, talk about persistent and consistent eh what – top marks for hangin in there bud) – and I’ve never seen you tell a deliberate lie (unlike a lot of your tory mates) but anyway dad, onya for stickin to your guns and all that. But seriously mate, you’re backing a loser. The tories have always been the party of the rich and always will be. Face it dad – I’ve been around since way before the ’51 lockout and I’ve kept a pretty good eye on things ever since. Every single move to help the worker or the hard-done-by (like yourself bro)_ has been opposed tooth and nail by the bosses’ party, and even though Slippery John has agreed to nearly all Labour’s policies, I wouldn’t trust the greasy prick for a second mate. For a kick-off, where the fuck has he been for the last twenty-odd years? If he was so concerned for this country, where the hell was he? And if he’s got 50 million bucks, how much haes he give n to charity (or to fathers’ Rights for example?)
    No, dad, I was a sucker for Lange a way back – but at least he’d been a freezing worker – but don’t be suked in by this front-man mate, he’s just another greasy salesman for the winebox bastards who’ll suck the cream off us and keep us under their thumbs.
43. dad4justice 43

    20 June 2008 at 10:42 pm

    I don’t trust any of them.I have witnessed a nightmare unfold since the 1970’s !!
    Goodnight ak.
44. Swampy 44

    20 June 2008 at 11:24 pm

    Research is stuff that can be corroborated. Hager’s book does not meet any internationally accepted research standards because it cannot meet peer review standards. Therefore it is unverifiable.
45. r0b 45

    20 June 2008 at 11:34 pm

    Research is stuff that can be corroborated.

    Ahh no, say rather that corroboration is usually part of the process of research.

    Therefore it is unverifiable.

    Depends what you mean by ‘unverifiable’. Are you denying the existence or content of the leaked emails? Anyway, Brash is gone, so it sounds pretty verified to me.
46. burt 46

    20 June 2008 at 11:44 pm

    OK, so it’s been asserted that works by Hager’s are true and reliable but works by Wishhart are not. So when is ‘Seeds of Distrust’ being made into a play/movie?
47. r0b 47

    20 June 2008 at 11:57 pm

    OK, so it’s been asserted that works by Hager’s are true and reliable but works by Wishhart are not.

    Wrong. It has been asserted that a specific work by Hager is true and reliable (and brought down the deceitful leader of a deceitful party) and that a work by Wishart has had no real impact.

    So when is ‘Seeds of Distrust’ being made into a play/movie?

    I guess when anyone finds it interesting enough to do so.
48. burt 48

    21 June 2008 at 12:10 am

    rOb

    … and that a work by Wishart has had no real impact.

    Yet !

    Play writers and script writers will still be scribbling their first drafts… Be very afraid….
49. MacDoctor 49

    21 June 2008 at 12:24 am

    TRex: 50g of heroin would probably kill you…:-)

    r0b: Brash is gone, so it sounds pretty verified to me.

    I don’t think you can conclude that. Brash was naive and vulnerable and easily rolled by innuendo. Hagar’s rather paranoid mix of facts and conspiracy theory was, frankly, no more convincing than Wishart’s book – for much the same reason. However, Helen Clark is far too experienced to be even mildly effected by the variable quality of evidence in Absolute Power.
50. r0b 50

    21 June 2008 at 1:14 am

    Hagar’s rather paranoid mix of facts and conspiracy theory was, frankly, no more convincing than Wishart’s book

    Oh wake up and smell the spin.

    Journalists know what’s what. Compare the advance publicity for, and extensive coverage of Hollow Men with the total non event that was Absolute Power. I won’t repeat myself, see:
    http://www.thestandard.org.nz/?p=1741#comment-30165

    And now consider the impact of the two books. The Hollow Men brought down Brash — because it’s material was accurate and damning. Absolute Power brought down nothing (except the bank balances of those mug enough to buy it) — because it was a yawn fest.
51. Razorlight 51

    21 June 2008 at 3:44 am

    This is a classic case of readers believing what they want to believe and dismissing what they feel uncomfortable with.

    Both books were credible but hardly earth shattering.

    Hager showed how a modern political party works. But who out there did not know this is how the dirty world of politics works anyway. Lobby groups exist for a reason and many of them have money to help persuade. It was embarrassing for National but will not have changed anything. Labour and National will still be working in the same way as that book showed.

    Wishart’s book is much the same. Nothing new came out of it but everything that he did say stands up to most tests of accuaracy. Noone has really shot his arguments to pieces. Many have dismissed it due to relevency (eg sexuality) but what he says is more or less an accurate description of the PM.
52. T-rex 52

    21 June 2008 at 8:03 am

    Mad Doctor – I figured that was probably the case… but decided that was still just as consistent with my point 🙂
53. Stephen 53

    21 June 2008 at 8:57 am

    Hager showed how a modern political party works. But who out there did not know this is how the dirty world of politics works anyway.

    Me, for one. That guy was trained and spun up to his eyeballs! He was being trained on how to avoid actually answering questions (Clark too probably, but to see all this DOCUMENTED was really something, as opposed to our own speculation!) Brash has since admitted throwing his principles out like he did was wrong, see:

    `when you start you’ve got all these principles. And in the political process, you have to hide some of them’.

    “So you put them in to a box, like roses,” says Brash. There is a very long pause. He looks away, and sniffs.

    “And when you open the box. They’re dead.

    …and all that. Touching, really.

    The book, he says

    “was at least an honest attack”

    Not so much the play though, apparently.

    Absolute Power, from what I gather, is nothing new – simply a synthesis of materials that were in the public domain. The Hollow Men is something else entirely!
54. Stephen 54

    21 June 2008 at 9:00 am

    I wish people would stop looking at THM as an attack on the (current) National party, just because it’s negative towards Brash. It doesn’t matter that it was three years ago, it is interesting in its own right, and probably still will be at least several years down the line.
55. Razorlight 55

    21 June 2008 at 10:07 am

    I agree Stephen.

    I see THM as a fly on the wall account of the inside dealings of any modern political party. This could have been about the American Democrats, Australian Labor or Cameron’s Tory’s. In this case it was the National Party but could easily have been Act or Labour.

    You may have been shocked with how the system works but anyone who has been within a sniff of that dirty Beehive will unfortunatley know, for better or worst, this is how it works.
56. randal 56

    21 June 2008 at 11:39 am

    THM is symptomatic of the new breed of tory pollies who know how to run the NZ economic model through their spreadsheet and seehow much fat they can carve off for themselves without offering anyhting in return. r.o.e. is everything but fortunately new zealand is small enough for people to see where their best interests lie. just have to take care that we the people are not swamped by the right wing media and the dominate for fun gang.
57. MikeE 57

    21 June 2008 at 11:45 am

    How will this be funded?

    Did this recieve any taxpayer funds? If so, is this appropriate in election time and should it be counted as election expenses?

    Also, why is it that noone on the left takes note that in the opening paragraphs of the book, Hagar clearly states that its likely Labour was up to very similar behavior?
58. Robinsod 58

    21 June 2008 at 12:01 pm

    How will this be funded?

    Why don’t you take an EFA complaint, Mike?
59. Stephen 59

    21 June 2008 at 12:13 pm

    Also, why is it that noone on the left takes note that in the opening paragraphs of the book, Hagar clearly states that its likely Labour was up to very similar behavior?

    Maybe you need to get out more? You’ve NEVER seen or heard a ‘lefty’ mention that before???!! Keeeer-yst!

    Did this recieve any taxpayer funds? If so, is this appropriate in election time and should it be counted as election expenses?

    It doesn’t even tell you who to vote for! It’s cataloguing events that were three years ago, comprende!? Maybe we should set up a council to check that no productions made with taxpayer funding are political at all? We’ll call those who make sure that they’re politically correct ‘Commissars’!
60. T-rex 60

    21 June 2008 at 12:16 pm

    “Did this recieve any taxpayer funds? If so, is this appropriate in election time and should it be counted as election expenses?”

    Don’t be such a retard Mike.

    I guess hospitals should probably stop doing operations during election time too – afterall, that’s tax payer funded and it might give the beneficiaries the impression that the government is doing some good… couldn’t have rumours like that floating around!
61. roger nome 61

    21 June 2008 at 1:27 pm

    Razorlight:

    “Many have dismissed it due to relevency (eg sexuality) but what he says is more or less an accurate description of the PM.”

    In online debate Wishart has backed down on his “lesbian campaigns”. The fool was patently wrong all along. Davis and Clark had been living together for years before they were married. Also, a friend of mine has witnessed Clark and Davis being very “intimate” at a private function she attended.

    Then there’s the fact that Wishart cites mainly anonymous sources for his wild-eyed claims. So if he was able to be so patently one-eyed and wrong about Clark’s sexuality for so long, why should we trust him to pick credible and truthful anonymous sources, and to cite them accurately? Then there’s the point that they can’t be verified, so it’s all just conjecture.

    Then there’s Wishart’s tendency to make massive, irrational leaps of logic – i.e. Because Kay Goodard was a feminist Marxist in the 1970s, and was for some time in the early 2000s a policy researcher in the MSD Wishart takes this as evidence of a secretive communist/feminist agenda on the part of the Labour Party. It’s just bonkers.
62. Scribe 62

    21 June 2008 at 3:13 pm

    MikeE,

    Did this recieve any taxpayer funds?

    Well, we know the play got funding from Creative New Zealand.

    I guess hospitals should probably stop doing operations during election time too – afterall, that’s tax payer funded and it might give the beneficiaries the impression that the government is doing some good couldn’t have rumours like that floating around!

    Wow, comparing movies with the health system. Must have seen that poll result this morning to get that desperate.

    National 54, Labour 30. OUCH!!!
63. T-rex 63

    21 June 2008 at 3:44 pm

    Yes, that’s right Scribe, that was my motivation.

    Can you hear my knees knocking?

    Knocky knocky knocky

    I don’t really care what the polls say right now.

    At the end of the day, the significant majority of NZ’ers are far better off under Labour than they will be under National, and as those who have been misled work that out over the next couple of months they…. oh whatever, enjoy your moment.

    —

    Oh yeah, and Creative NZ??? Those partisan hacks! Call the EFA valkaryes and put an end to this injustice!

    Goddamn. I don’t know if my tolerance is just crashing or if the tory brigade has been chowing down on some dumbflakes lately.
64. Scribe 64

    21 June 2008 at 3:54 pm

    T-Rex,

    I have no idea if Creative NZ is partisan or not. I just thought it was curious that a government agency would provide funds for a production that is so political. Just as I would find it curious if Creative NZ funded a theatrical version of Absolute Power under a National government.

    Public healthcare is the sort of thing my taxpayer money should be used for, not helping bankroll politicised theatre.
65. T-rex 65

    21 June 2008 at 4:04 pm

    Ok that post was fine, it’s probably my tolerance, sorry.

    A lot of crap comes out of creative NZ in my opinion, but political commentary is probably towards the “non-crap” end of the spectrum. Still a long long way below flight of the conchords, but hey.

    I’d object if they funded this and NOT the equivalent venture based on ‘Absolute Power’, but other than that I’m fine with it.
66. Quoth the Raven 66

    21 June 2008 at 4:08 pm

    Public healthcare is the sort of thing my taxpayer money should be used for…

    That’s nice for a minute there I thought you were right wing.
67. Adolf Fiinkensein 67

    21 June 2008 at 6:19 pm

    Keep spuiking, fellers. Every word you shout just adds to National’s lead. It was this gang of fuckwits who gave National John Key. Don’t you just wish Dr brash was still leader? Are your brains dead, dormant or sclerotic? Did you ever have brains?

    [lprent: Another mindless troll? Lift your standard or stay away.
    Carry on looking like a troll and you’ll find out what I like doing to rogue programs. ]
68. Robinsod 68

    21 June 2008 at 6:35 pm

    Ah yes adolf – I’m sure everyone is keen to take PR advice from a guy who named himself after Hitler. Actually come to think of it bro, why did you name yourself after Hitler? Did you think it was funny?

    [lprent: ‘sod, I realize that you tend to get a little ummmm… obsessive about some things. But a persons ‘name’ when it is a actual name? You realize that I’m a bit sensitive about name teasing myself. After all I got regendered by the IRD for 20 years. When I tried to change my gender the buggers audited me.

    Much as I hate to say this – I think I’ll get a bit obsessive myself if you pursue this line]
69. Stephen 69

    21 June 2008 at 8:19 pm

    I just thought it was curious that a government agency would provide funds for a production that is so political.

    Like I said before, what’s up with people not wanting to fund a play because it wasn’t politically correct? I don’t like where that’s going…
70. Scribe 70

    21 June 2008 at 8:28 pm

    Stephen,

    There’s a huge difference between “not politically correct” and partisan.

    Something that wasn’t politically correct, e.g. anti-Islam, probably wouldn’t get funding.
71. Robinsod 71

    21 June 2008 at 8:31 pm

    Lynn – I think you’ll find Tane has asked this exact question many times. I have also asked it frequently without answer. If the guy didn’t use “Adolf” as a pseudonym with regard to the most famous Adolf of all time then he is free to declare why he chose it. For several months now he has chosen not to. Call it a pig fu*king argument if you want but if somebody calls themselves “pig-fu*ker fiinkensein” then what’s a fella to do?

    [lprent: Maybe it isn’t a psuedonym. He does come across as a painfully boring troll, and I’ve never noticed him elsewhere to see if it is just here…. But the name itself isn’t something directly offensive like TDS. I don’t think it is appropiate to direct criticism just on the basis of a name.]
72. Stephen 72

    22 June 2008 at 10:32 am

    There’s a huge difference between “not politically correct’ and partisan.

    It’s a historic *documentary*, I don’t see what the problem is with having a record of real events out there…would you require the production (film or theatre) to leave some bits out, make up some fake stuff so they would have to say ‘some of this is ficticious’, read out some anti-labour emails for ‘balance’ or what?

    The only justification I can think of for not funding it would be that it doesn’t fit the ‘mission’ of the funding body, but since it’s probably something along the lines of inform/confront/entertain, I’m not sure that would work. The government could tell them not to fund anything that has political parties as a significant subject within the production, but I don’t like that sort of censorship either.
73. Adolf Fiinkensein 73

    22 June 2008 at 9:39 pm

    It seems to have escaped the intellectual giants of this Labour Party blogsite that their leader’s demise in the polls is happening at about the same time as the sales of Absolute Power are taking off. Funny that.

    [lprent: You must be a total fuckwit to ignore my earlier clear warning.
    This site is run by me, it is funded by me, and the posts are by volunteers. You seem to have been unable to have read the point in policy. Personally I can’t see any point in having such a moron around. But I suppose we can be charitable – there is an outside possibility you may have a brain in there somewhere.
    Take a 2 week ban.]
74. illuminatedtiger 74

    23 June 2008 at 1:29 am

    lprent:

    I don’t know if this is the same person but we had a problem with a user who went by the name of Adolf Powell. Was some months ago now but his comments were such that I reported him to his ISP.
75. MikeE 75

    23 June 2008 at 4:38 pm

    The above Adolf is one of the bloggers at No Minister, not a troll 🙂

    My issue is this, why should mine (as in a taxpayer) money be used to fund a movie of Mr Hagars book, a book which is highly political and critical of a political party, and is likely to come out at election time, at the exact time where the ruling party have made it harder to campaign against them.

    I very much doubt that such a “film” (I’m not going to call it a documentary any more than I’d call something published by Michael Moore, or christian fundamentalists a documentary) would receive enough funding privately to make it go ahead so its a reasonable assumption its sucking off the public tit.

    Would a film that is as critical of the government, specifically the labour party (or to a lesser extent NZ First, Greens or United Future) be as deserving of public funding, and if not why not.

    I’m a support of ACT, I don’t hide it, but I wouldn’t be pushing for a pro ACT film to recieve public funding (and before you jump to it, yes I know “We’re here to help” recieved public funding as well, and I don’t agree with that on principle either).

    Would the readers of the standard support a Pro ACT and anti labour film to be taxpayer funded at election time, and if not why not?
76. Stephen 76

    24 June 2008 at 1:51 pm

    In principle, who the hell cares what it says?? In this case, as i’ve said, it’s a historic documentary of events 3 years ago, so again its political content should not matter one iota. The sources for the book were primary sources, not the secondary stuff that Moore and Wishart, so I don’t have a problem with those either.

    As long as it’s good enough i.e. meets the criteria for funding, whatever that is, a production should be funded. I think your larger point is really whether the arts should get public funding, and I think the world would be a much duller place without the arts, but I do also tend to regard it as a bit of a waste.
77. T-rex 77

    24 June 2008 at 1:59 pm

    “and I think the world would be a much duller place without the arts, but I do also tend to regard it as a bit of a waste.”

    That’s a really odd sentence. You think money spent on preventing the world from being a much duller place is money wasted???
78. G 78

    24 June 2008 at 6:51 pm

    People who fence stolen goods shouldn’t be allowed to make money off them… Nicky Hager… Pay it back!
79. Tane 79

    24 June 2008 at 6:58 pm

    G, nice attempt to distract from the real issues, but all indications are that it was a leak from inside National.

    http://www.thestandard.org.nz/?p=1682
80. dad4justice 80

    24 June 2008 at 7:14 pm

    G – Nicky Hager makes his money by causing misery for others.
    He is a wimp of no credibility.
81. Matthew Pilott 81

    24 June 2008 at 7:26 pm

    If you want to see this, check out the NZ Film Festival guides. Looks fairly interesting, but I imagine it will also be in theatres briefly, and on DVD.

    Dad4Justice- wasn’t that what Key did as a speculator (of the ilk currently increasing fuel prices by a not insubstantial amount) before buying his Nat Party job?
82. dad4justice 82

    24 June 2008 at 7:37 pm

    Matthew Pilott – the whole bloody saga leaves a sour taste in my mouth.
83. randal 83

    24 June 2008 at 7:42 pm

    tough titty d4j. you just a sour old nobody anyway!
84. illuminatedtiger 84

    24 June 2008 at 7:46 pm

    Dad if you’re such a great parent why are you here night after night?

    [no need for that. SP]
85. G 85

    24 June 2008 at 9:53 pm

    So what, Tane? These emails were stolen ~ doesn’t matter by whom ~ and Hagar the Horrible shouldn’t be allowed to profit from it; end of story.
86. r0b 86

    24 June 2008 at 10:14 pm

    So G, there’s a certain argument that businesses that externalise their costs (e.g. don’t pay the full costs of the environmental damage that they cause) are stealing from the common good. I reckon they shouldn’t be allowed to profit from it; end of story. What do you think G?

    There is another argument that businesses that don’t pay fair wages are stealing their employees’ labour. I reckon they shouldn’t be allowed to profit from it; end of story. What do you think G?

    There is another argument that businesses that exploit their monopoly position to extract excess profits are stealing from the public. I reckon they shouldn’t be allowed to profit from it; end of story. What do you think G?

    There’s even an argument that currency speculation is stealing from the economically vulnerable. I reckon they shouldn’t be allowed to profit from it; end of story. What do you think G?
87. Pascal's bookie 87

    24 June 2008 at 10:29 pm

    These emails were stolen

    Says Don. Hager says otherwise.

    Hager knows how Hager got them . Don wouldn’t have any idea.

    Hager would be running a substantial risk if they were stolen. Don risks nothing and stands to gain by making the baseless theft accusation.

    Let Occams useful razor do the rest.
88. Phil 88

    24 June 2008 at 10:49 pm

    “There’s even an argument that currency speculation is stealing from the economically vulnerable”

    That argument seems to come from the economically illiterate and financially ignorant. I do not consider you, r0b, to be either of those. I would be disappointed to be proved wrong.

    PB,

    Emails are property of their writer (or, the organisation they represent). They are not the property of Hagar, or any other individual.

    They certainly didn’t come directly from Brash. I doubt they came from, say, the BRT or the Bretheren. Therefore, by definition, they are stolen.
89. Pascal's bookie 89

    24 June 2008 at 11:04 pm

    Phil, maybe so, but I seem to remember a bit of discussion about whether Emails could in fact be ‘stolen’ in terms of the crimes act.

    In any case you set up a false dichotomy because if Hager is telling the truth, (and we have no reason to doubt him beyond Don’s self seving assertion), then the Emails could have been given to him by individuals within the National Prty organisation who had legitimate copies of their own. Therefore, not necessarily stolen.

    Or are you saying that all leaks are by definition thefts? Or just whistleblowers? Are all newspapers and opposition MPs then guilty of recieving? Crikey.
90. r0b 90

    24 June 2008 at 11:14 pm

    That argument seems to come from the economically illiterate and financially ignorant. I do not consider you, r0b, to be either of those. I would be disappointed to be proved wrong

    Well Phil, economics / finance is certainly not my strong suit, though one thing I like about commenting here is that it’s making me learn a bit at least.

    In truth, at the moment I can’t tell if my problems in coming to grips with this field are due to my rapidly ageing brain cells or due to the field itself being full of shite. The jury’s still out.
91. Stephen 91

    25 June 2008 at 9:58 am

    Yeah T-rex I’m torn, but a world with less entertainment is still very liveable, so: away with government funding!
92. Tane 92

    25 June 2008 at 10:04 am

    So what, Tane? These emails were stolen ~ doesn’t matter by whom ~ and Hagar the Horrible shouldn’t be allowed to profit from it; end of story.

    Let’s assume for a moment someone took the material from Brash.

    What was taken, presumably, was copies of emails, memos, diary entries etc. As these were copies no physical material was actually taken – that means it’s Don Brash’s right to the privacy of his emails that you’re concerned about here.

    And that’s the crunch – public figures engaging in unethical behaviour have no right to hide this behaviour from the public. That’s why we acccept leaks and whistleblowing as an important part of democracy, and this is accepted by National every time they use a leaked memo to score political points.

    So your argument is essentially anti-democratic. I look forward to you criticising National next time they exploit a leaked document for political gain.

    Or you can just accept the ‘stolen email’ story was invented by National to distract attention from the contents of the book.
93. lukas 93

    25 June 2008 at 11:28 am

    Tane-And that’s the crunch – public figures engaging in unethical behaviour have no right to hide this behaviour from the public.

    Unless of course the whistle blower is Ian Wishart or some one from the VWRC right?
94. Robinsod 94

    25 June 2008 at 11:35 am

    Tard.
95. Vanilla Eis 95

    25 June 2008 at 11:35 am

    lukas: you appear to have missed the bit where almost everyone before me has pointed out that Wishart isn’t blowing a whistle, and has no sources to back him up.

    If his allegations had any traction then they’d stick, but the results speak for themselves.
96. lukas 96

    25 June 2008 at 11:40 am

    Sod-Tard.

    That pretty much sums up the way you treat anyone who disagrees with you. Straight to petty name calling.

    VE-

    lukas: you appear to have missed the bit where almost everyone before me has pointed out that Wishart isn’t blowing a whistle, and has no sources to back him up.

    If his allegations had any traction then they’d stick, but the results speak for themselves.

    A fair amount of the allegations that Ian made have stuck actually, and have proven to be true. Do you think that it is a bit strange how no one has ever taken Ian to court over all the allegations that he has made?
97. Vanilla Eis 97

    25 June 2008 at 11:44 am

    Lukas:

    Not really. I guess it comes down to ‘sods pigf*cker argument. Don’t you think that if the allegations were true there’d be a bit more media coverage, given that the Herald and the Dom seem to have a taste for blood at the moment?

    captcha: pres warbasse.

    There’s an ‘s’ a few characters too far to the right there. Ironic?
98. lukas 98

    25 June 2008 at 11:46 am

    Oh and while I remember- Tane, are you going to retract your statement about Absolute Power being ‘peddled in the bargain bin’?
99. Tane 99

    25 June 2008 at 12:00 pm

    Lukas you semi-literate munt, I’ve already responded to you:

    [Tane: Lukas, it seems my attempt to take the piss has touched a nerve. Don’t worry son, I’m sure Ian’s stoked to be leading 100 Ways to Use Slow Cookers and Crockpots and Short Fat Chick to Marathon Runner.]
100. lukas 100

     25 June 2008 at 12:03 pm

     Tane, I believe that that comment was in response to Absolute Power still being at #1 on the best sellers list (for the last 6 weeks I believe). Oh well…
101. Matthew Pilott 101

     25 June 2008 at 12:07 pm

     “Do you think that it is a bit strange how no one has ever taken Ian to court over all the allegations that he has made?”

     Mmm of course, because in this country which is supposedly on the verge of becoming like Zimbabwe, the onus is on the prosecutor to prove the allegation to be false, in order to protect free speech. What an awful, despotic concept huh?

     I guess you didn’t know that, or you wouldn’t be asking such a question.
102. Steve Pierson 102

     25 June 2008 at 12:08 pm

     Lukas. It was number one in the New Zealand non-fiction catagory. Do you realise how thin the competition is? Like, Tane says – he’s just beating “short Fat Chick to Marathon Runner”.

     Big deal.

     Hollow Men sold out in a couple of days and it was weeks until many people could get hold of a copy. People were reading it fast to send on to their friends who, who then had to pass it on to the next person. It was an actual literary sensation.

     Oh, and it brought down Don Brash, whereas Absolute Power was only brought on yawns.
103. lukas 103

     25 June 2008 at 12:12 pm

     SP- I could give you details about people not being able to get copies of Absolute Power also. I could also bore you with stories about how numerous book stores failed to keep the embargo on the book as the demand was so high they could not turn away the sales.

     Tell me again, how long was Hollow Men at number one? (I really don’t know thats why I am asking)
104. Steve Pierson 104

     25 June 2008 at 12:18 pm

     I don’t know and who cares? I mean number one nz non-fiction, big deal. Look at what second place is and you see what the competition is.

     You can go on about it being number 1 until you’re blue in the face – it was still ignored and mocked, and didn’t even make the news.
105. Matthew Pilott 105

     25 June 2008 at 12:18 pm

     ye gods, lukas thinks it’s like the music charts. Lukas, while Absolute Power might have as much substance as your average pop #1 these days, and I can see why you think that’s important, perhaps you’d do better to look at the effect of books such as these, which is a bit more relevant.

     How many party leaderships has Absolute Power caused to be overthrown?

     How often were the two mentioned in the media within, say two years of release?
106. Pascal's bookie 106

     25 June 2008 at 12:30 pm

     Lukas, I’m not surprised that booksellers sold AP before the official release date. The ‘fans’ can be quite disturbing and you want to get them out of the shop.

     Hollow Men had a real embargo though. Remember? Don Brash tried to stop it being published. Ian Wishart, in his pre release promotion talked up the probability that AP would be banned. How did that work out?
107. G 107

     25 June 2008 at 1:08 pm

     Nice attempt at distraction there, Rob. As far as your understanding of economic theory goes, may I suggest you stick to whatever it is you do during the day… 🙂

     The emails were stolen and here’s the proof: many people within the Beehive had copies of Don’s parliamentary emails. There was, however, one email that wasn’t passed on at all: Lindsay Perigo’s email regarding Don’s civil union U-turn.

     That was a private email, passed on to no-one.

     And it was stolen.

     Justify the profiteering of something stolen here, comrades, and you undermine the whole fabric of society.
108. G 108

     25 June 2008 at 1:12 pm

     … and as far as the Police not pursuing this case goes: HA!

     How many prima facie cases have they’ve dropped on the Right Honourable Sir Helen Clark?

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS