- Special Features
Blogs & Columns
- Fun & Games
Oscar-winning filmmaker Oliver Stone recently announced that he would no longer be involved with the Martin Luther King,Jr. biopic because of major backlash from producers and King's estate.
According to Entertainment Weekly, Stone wanted to take a different, lesser-known route with this version of MLK's life. Stone went to Twitter to explain, “The script dealt w/ issues of adultery, conflicts within the movement, and King’s spiritual transformation into a higher, more radical being.”
All Voices also tells us that although King's estate was all for the movie and even gave the producers the right to King's speeches, their support ended when they were made aware of Stone's rewrite of the script. In addition, Dream Works and Warner Bros. refused to offer any more support for the director.
Stone was obviously burdened by the series of events and also tweeted, “I wish you could see the film I would've made. I fear if ‘they’ ever make it, it’ll be just another commemoration of the March on Washington. Martin, I grieve for you. You are still a great inspiration for your fellow Americans—but, thank God, not a saint.”
Do you think the producers made the right choice, or should they have chosen to go with Stone's vision?
Image: Wikimedia Commons