- Although AAFF will continue without state funding, this is a de facto censorship attempt.
- I applaud the AAFF for rejecting state funding rather than limit their programming.
- The opposing argument is ignorant on many levels, the foremost of which is that by inspiring people (and bringing people to town) the film festival (and art in general) creates economic and social benefits for the greater community, not just the small segment of the population that actually views it.
- AAFF has been around for 45 years, and only used state funds for the last 10. Although they might not be able to maintain the scope they'd like, I'm confident they'll survive.
- The use of the word "pornography" is misleading and a distraction from the debate.
- On NPR, one of the arguments the pro-AAFF interviewee made (and I didn't hear the whole story, as I had to catch the BART for Asianfest) was that an extremely passionate kiss might fit the definition of "sex acts" that Michigan refuses to fund.
- However, of the movies listed in the opposing essay, the one feature I've seen, "What Is It?" goes far beyond passionate kissing. On the opposite side, "Boobie Girl" is an award winning animated short and it's only sexual content is the word "boobie" in the title. I haven't seen the other films mentioned.
- Finally, AAFF bills itself as "the oldest festival in North America that showcases independent and experimental film." I will ponder that as I attend the 50th SF International Film Festival next month. Seriously, it sounds like they're playing a little fast and loose with the whole "showcases independent and experimental film" designation. Perhaps SFIFF hasn't always shown independent and experimental film? I haven't been around for it's whole history. Or perhaps SFIFF's programming has too many mainstream or international films for AAFF's definition? I don't know.
Okay, that is all. Gotta go back to writing up Asianfest now.