In the shadow of the mouse
If Disney sues over 'Escape From Tomorrow,' nobody wins
Published: January 30, 2013
"Heavily influenced by various strange outings I endured as a boy with my father – who at the time lived in Orlando, Fla. – Escape From Tomorrow is my personal attempt to make sense of what felt like a very artificial childhood, brought on by our cultural obsession with these fake, manufactured worlds of so-called fantasy. … The film is really about defining the word 'escape' and how so many American households seek it out in a yearly pilgrimage to a materialistic Mecca." – From the director's statement about Escape From Tomorrow
"I hope that every human being on the planet sees Escape From Tomorrow!" That's what director Randy Moore told Filmmaker magazine recently, when asked what kind of audience he hoped to reach with his first feature film, which debuted at Sundance last week. "Who honestly doesn't want that for their first film?"
But Moore had to know early on that he was taking a chance that his movie – his first feature-length film – might never see the light of day. He made Escape on the down-low and took pains to keep his project secret, even relocating to South Korea to do some of the editing, lest anyone outside his inner circle find out what, exactly, he was working on. In a recent interview with the Los Angeles Times (which devoted a surprisingly lengthy story to Escape last week) he acknowledged that he does have some concern about how Disney will react once it reviews his movie.
Most early speculation about the ambitious film made by this rogue director – a valedictorian graduate of Full Sail University, by the way – is that it'll never see wide release. Critics speculate that Disney, which is fiercely protective of its privacy and intellectual property, will lawyer up and take the indie filmmaker down before Escape gets out of Park City.
"Walt Disney's lawyers are probably climbing onto helicopters and planning a raid on Park City right now," film critic Drew McWeeny wrote on hitfix.com after seeing the movie last week.
"The movie, while careful to leave out certain copyrighted material (like the "It's a Small World" song), would seem to test the limits of fair use in copyright law," the Los Angeles Times said.
CNN reported that Disney is actually "weighing whether to quash the film or to let it slide," though it failed to provide any evidence or comment from Disney indicating that it is actually formulating any response whatsoever.
Regardless, most people – the Los Angeles Times, film blogs and the New York Times included – seem to think that the movie's shelf life will be brief. Whether Disney actually has a strong case or not, it's got the money and power to put an indie outfit out of commission for good. "Disney has enough of a case that it would be able to sue the filmmakers and distributors into the Stone Age," says Paul Rapp, a Massachusetts-based copyright attorney who advises organizations, businesses and individuals working in creative fields. "Whether they won, if someone had the resources to fight back, is another thing. Tim Wu had a great article in the New Yorker making the case that it would be fair use from both a copyright and trademark perspective, which I generally agree with. But I think the most vulnerable spot is that the filmmakers most likely violated the terms of the admission ticket."
> Email Erin Sullivan