Just Art or tempting fate?

There’s a big debate raging right now about a movie (tv program actually) about to make its debut at the Toronto International Film Festival. The program in questions is a tv program that will be released in the UK (so far there’s no US deal in place and this being the hot potato that it seems to be, its doubtful one will be found soon).Â

It features as it’s main plot line, the assasination of President Bush, not a fictionalized leader of the USA like many other films of the genre, but an actual digitized version of Bush.

mercurynews.com/mld/mercuryn … 425360.htm

and the official site from the TIFF an item simply listed as DOAP e.bell.ca/filmfest/2006/film … .asp?id=88

Needless to say this has the folks down below the 49 and the ones to the left of us on the map, a tad upset.

I must admit that I find that it’s a tad unseemly to openly prophesize the death of any public figure, perfering the safety of the fictionalized world. But maybe I’m just an old fogey.

What say you?

Is it ok in your books to portray an incident like this with a real living target, or are some of the critics right about this issue?

Just wondering where the Film Class 101 of htmf is on this one.

It’s hard to say without first having seen the film.  It sure sounds creepy but maybe it has artistic value.  I am wondering how the aftermath is described in the story and who would be behind the act.
Americans ( and us too) are big fans of reality tv and “true stories”.  Maybe this is the beginning of the “Surreality” tv genre.

Isn’t there some sort of law about portraying real people in a movie or television without that person’s consent?

They must’ve caught GW in one of his “Beer and Pretzels” moments when they asked his permission.