<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: New Captivity Billboard: &#8220;Captivity Was Here&#8221;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.slashfilm.com/2007/03/25/new-captivity-billboard-captivity-was-here/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.slashfilm.com/2007/03/25/new-captivity-billboard-captivity-was-here/</link>
	<description>Blogging the Reel World</description>
	<pubDate>Mon,  7 Jul 2008 05:40:29 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Prop16</title>
		<link>http://www.slashfilm.com/2007/03/25/new-captivity-billboard-captivity-was-here/#comment-9115</link>
		<dc:creator>Prop16</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2007 16:44:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.slashfilm.com/2007/03/25/new-captivity-billboard-captivity-was-here/#comment-9115</guid>
		<description>I think it is great, I saw them too this past weekend driving in Hollywood.  Nice and Simple and besides they probably paid for the billboard time that they needed to fill with something?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think it is great, I saw them too this past weekend driving in Hollywood.  Nice and Simple and besides they probably paid for the billboard time that they needed to fill with something?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 5000!</title>
		<link>http://www.slashfilm.com/2007/03/25/new-captivity-billboard-captivity-was-here/#comment-8575</link>
		<dc:creator>5000!</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Mar 2007 00:18:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.slashfilm.com/2007/03/25/new-captivity-billboard-captivity-was-here/#comment-8575</guid>
		<description>You're making mountains out of molehills. The offended parties had their say. Now the studio is having theirs. That's how free speech works. Acknowledging that they removed a message due to outside pressure is hardly a "slap in the face," and implying that they're not even pretending to respect the public is ridiculous hyperbole. Even if the majority of public had been up in arms over the original (and it doesn't seem to me that they were), disagreeing with them doesn't constitute disrespect.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;re making mountains out of molehills. The offended parties had their say. Now the studio is having theirs. That&#8217;s how free speech works. Acknowledging that they removed a message due to outside pressure is hardly a &#8220;slap in the face,&#8221; and implying that they&#8217;re not even pretending to respect the public is ridiculous hyperbole. Even if the majority of public had been up in arms over the original (and it doesn&#8217;t seem to me that they were), disagreeing with them doesn&#8217;t constitute disrespect.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott</title>
		<link>http://www.slashfilm.com/2007/03/25/new-captivity-billboard-captivity-was-here/#comment-8467</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Mar 2007 19:05:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.slashfilm.com/2007/03/25/new-captivity-billboard-captivity-was-here/#comment-8467</guid>
		<description>I don't think you're wrong... from the parent's P.O.V. 
BUT, I do think it's a good idea from Lionsgate. The movie was so under the
radar before this and now it's on the map. 

Good for them to get some free PR.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t think you&#8217;re wrong&#8230; from the parent&#8217;s P.O.V.<br />
BUT, I do think it&#8217;s a good idea from Lionsgate. The movie was so under the<br />
radar before this and now it&#8217;s on the map. </p>
<p>Good for them to get some free PR.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
