Madeleine McCann: Not A Film, A Book And The McCanns Making Money
MADDYWATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann
DAILY EXPRESS front page: “Madeleine’s parents planning Hollywood blockbuster movie”
“Kate and Gerry sparked outrage after it was revealed they have held negotiations with leading producers over the movie rights. The couple – who are prime suspects in the case – are also considering book and TV deals in a package worth an estimated £10million”
A book? Like the Daily Express book? That sick..?
Kate McCann: Michelle Pfeiffer
Gerry McCann: James Caan
Madeleine McCann: Macaulay Culkin
And what of this £10million, and the money earned from any film? “The windfall would help finance the search for Madeleine after concerns were raised that a special fund set up by the family was in crisis”
Page 5: The Find Madeleine fund is down to its last £400,000. More money is needed. So why the “outrage”?
Says the McCanns’ spokesman Clarence Mitchell: “We need money to search for Madeleine and that is the most important thing. Nothing has been decided yet. A film would be made on a percentage basis, with part of the profits going to the fund. None of the money would go to Kate and Gerry. They are not trying in any way to profit out of her name’’
And how many films ever make a profit? It would be a film, perhaps, like that about 15-year-old Amy Smart, abducted in the US and found eight months later. “Several movies were made about her while she was missing including The Amy Smart Story”
The “WORLD’S GREATEST NEWSPAPER” does not say if the Amy Smart story made any money. But it does trawl the web and see blog comments like:
“Angry” Pamela Blears, from Oldham, posts: “From the day little Madeleine disappeared I have felt sympathy and compassion for the McCanns but this beggers belief. How can they think about making a film out of the tragedy when the poor child hasn’t even been found yet? How low can you get?”
The Daily Express costs “ONLY 40p”
“McCANNS FEAR CHARGES SOON” – “A source close to the family” tells us: “Kate and Gerry insist they are innocent but they fear they will be charged. Naturally Kate and Gerry are concerned that if this line of inquiry continues to its natural conclusion, charges are always a possibility and they know that’s entirely wrong”
He added: “The Portuguese police seem to be blinkered in their approach and it feels like they want to find the McCanns guilty regardless.”
DAILY STAR front page: “MADDIE: THE £10M MOVIE – Skint parent to sell film rights”
Skint? The Find Madeleine Fund is dwindling, down to its last “£200,000”. But Gerry McCann is going back to work. He is, as the tabloids never tire to telling us, “a heart consultant”. She is a “GP”
Says the Star: “The couple – who are prime suspects – are in negotiations with the world’s biggest talent and entertainment agency IMG”
IMG – International Management Group– has produced the films Touching the Void, Assault on Waco, Seconds from Disaster, I Shouldn’t be Alive and Kevin and Perry Go Large. Naomi Campbell is on the books
Any film would be an “observational documentary following the on-going search for Madeleine,” says IMG
Pages 4 and5: “Thousands blast ‘sick’ plan”
A poll: “WOULD YOU GO AND WATCH MADDIE: THE MOVIE?” Yes? No? Or I’ve already seen tonight With Trevor McDonald, thanks?
“Ester out in crisis” – TV presenter Esther McVey has resigned her post as a director of the Find Madeleine fund
DAILY MAIL front page: “MADDIE’S PARENTS PLAN £2M FILM DEAL”
“Kate and Gerry McCann could make £2million from a film deal over the story of their daughter’s disappearance, it has been claimed”
Not £10m? Such are the perils of showbiz?
Says the paper: “So far the McCanns, both 39, have turned down offers from big-name chat shows and television dramas as they were anxious to avoid being seen as celebrities”
But we watching the parents. So why not make profit, if it will help?
“Disgraced banker Nick Leeson earned a reported £450,000 when he sold the rights to his autobiography, Rogue Trader. Offers to Austrian kidnap victim Natascha Kampusch were said to have topped £1million”
And: “But Gerry McCann was quick to deny the story”
COMMENT: “Maddie the movie: One step too far – Ever since their daughter Madeleine disappeared, Kate and Gerry McCann have ridden a wave of public sympathy. True, there are some (including the Portuguese police) who have aired deeply hurtful suspicions about the couple since that terrible evening in May. But the overwhelming public mood - particularly among parents of young children - has been one of compassion. Today, however, the McCanns risk losing much of that goodwill. Incredibly, it emerges that they are discussing a possible multi-million pound deal to turn Madeleine’s disappearance into a film. To be blunt, isn’t this pushing the boundaries of taste too far?”
But it is already the subject of a media circus. So why not a DVD – we’ve had the T-shirt, the song, the billboards and the trailers..?
ALISON PEARSON writes in her column: “What CAN Kate and Gerry be thinking? Critics who have never forgiven Gerry and Kate for leaving their kids alone in their holiday apartment will be confirmed in their view that the couple have truly terrible judgment. They will be accused of bad taste; of lacking respect for Madeleine’s memory. Kate will be charged with wanting to swan down the red carpet, even though in this case it is sorrow, not vanity, that has reduced her to a Hollywood Size Zero”
How did it become a story about Kate McCann’s looks?
DAILY MIRROR front page: “Maddy THE Movie”
The McCanns also met with ITV about making a documentary. Maddy A Movie…
THE SUN front page: “Maddie hunt ‘to be film’”
Page 9: “ They pary that movie will help find Maddie”
Gerry McCann is a “cardiac specialist”. The McCanns are “doctors”
“IS THIS THE RIGHT DECISION?”
“YES,” says Lorraine Kelly, GMTV presenter.
“NO,” says the Sun’s Jon ‘Guanty’ Gaunt - “I guess the title of the McCann’s proposed film has to be Home Alone”. Or not…
THE GUARDIAN: “McCanns deny reports of Madeleine film”
Writes Gerry McCann on his blog: “We can categorically deny that we are considering a movie about Madeleine’s disappearance. This is simply untrue. We are approached by a huge number of media outlets regarding a myriad of projects, only a tiny proportion of which we agree to. Each proposal is considered on whether it is likely to have a positive effect, either directly or indirectly, on the search for Madeleine”
ON the Guardian website: “Madeleine’s parents consider film - The parents of Madeleine McCann are considering giving the go-ahead to a film about their missing daughter following an approach by a major entertainment firm”
THE TIMES page 3: “Parents may turn Madeleine McCann story into a Hollywood movie”
“On-screen child horror stories:
A Cry In The Dark
Gone Baby Gone
Honour Thy Father And Mother: the True story of the Menendez Brothers
Menenedez: A Killing in Beverly Hills, 1994
The Amityville Horror series
Everybody’s Baby: The Rescue of Jessica McClure”
Says Clarence Mitchell: The media are making money out of the situation themselves and we feel it is only fair and right that some aspect of that should come to the fund to help find Madeleine”
DAILY TELGRAPH: “McCanns in talks to make a film about AMdldine’s disappearance”
“Do you think a Madeleine film should be made”
Well, we;’ve had the sop opera, and who wants to watch EastEnders: The Movie?
THE SCOTSMAN: “McCanns eye Madeleine film”
BOSTON HERALD: “Missing Madeleine story could become feature film”
The speculation, media hype and sensation so far
Posted: 9th, January 2008 | In: Madeleine McCann Comments (1,585) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- eggman on Daily Mail Scuppers BBC’s Wrong Shipping Forecast
- agw on Daily Mail Scuppers BBC’s Wrong Shipping Forecast
- Bat E Bird on I’m A Celebrity: Samantha Fox Is Shrinking As ‘Lesbian’ Lover Katie Price Quits
- Bat E Bird on In Photos: Susan Boyle Sings Rockefeller Center Plaza In New York City
- yampster on Daily Mail And Tax Payers’ Alliance Attacks BBC Over Its Free Trees For A Better Planet
January 9th, 2008 at 8:05 pm
When all else fails, go back to the basics :
1. When they discovered their child had been “abducted” - did they immediately phone the police for help? NO!
2. Did they react like parents whose child had been abducted? NO!
3. Where they able to give an accurate account of when the child had actually last been seen? NO!
4. Did they co-operate with the Police? NO!
5. Did they actively search for their “abducted” child? NO!
6. Did they IMMEDIATELY release CURRENT photos of their missing child? NO!
7. Are there discrepancies surrounding the supposed “abduction”? YES!
8. Did they cling onto their remaining children so as to protect them from the same fate? NO!
9. Did they take the advice of professionals to not release certain information regarding the “abducted” child? NO!
I could go on and on, but the basics of this case speak for themselves! Sad but true!
January 9th, 2008 at 8:03 pm
1136 Garth
“Are you here in the uk?”
No, in the US.
January 9th, 2008 at 8:02 pm
Jolie 1114………. he’s doing the same to me….. not sure why of course!
TB said………..
And this is the man whom ‘coolandcalm’ worships…….
…………..
Liar liar bums on fire! Nothing like my actual mail! Check it back then apologise please Mr B. Not doing so well today in the truth department are you??!! Tut tut
January 9th, 2008 at 8:02 pm
1082
Abraham Zapruder
Somedays ago, on the telly news , appeared the story, that a little cofin with a baby (they didn’t told the age , but what i understood ,it’s the body of a little baby ) buried in a grave ,that should be empty in a Cemetery far from Algarve.
January 9th, 2008 at 8:01 pm
Garth
Some have suggested that the media reports about the movie deal were a diversion from far more serious stories on the McCann front: the resignations of board members from The Fund and reports again in the news about blood evidence confirmed as belonging to Madeleine. It think that may be part of the truth. I would also suggest that the McCanns and their advisors believe bold, in-your-face, “would-an-innocent-person-do-this” tactics like this actually make them appear innocent, and is more of the same smokescreen behavior the McCanns have exhibited since the very beginning of this saga. The truth is, that so many people recognize that their decisions and behavior are very abnormal.
January 9th, 2008 at 7:59 pm
1135
Gloria Smudd Says:
January 9th, 2008 at 7:55 pm
——————————————————–
Good luck on Ebay.
I tend to feel that it’s almost as addictive as Anorak…
January 9th, 2008 at 7:57 pm
1055 Logic Says: January 9th, 2008 at 7:07 pm
TB 1014
I cannot understand why some people think you have misrepresented PeterO. I have been watching with interest. The word “brilliant” was used in connection to CM, an inappropriate adjective, in my opinion, for such a character. I did not think that your use of the word constituted any misrepresentation.
Hope I haven’t offended anyone - it’s just my opinion.
+++++++++++++
We are all entitled to our opinion, even if our opinions our with any basis for truth. Just my opinion of course.
January 9th, 2008 at 7:56 pm
1131
Jolie Says:
January 9th, 2008 at 7:52 pm
—————————————
Are you here in the uk?
January 9th, 2008 at 7:55 pm
No, so it didn’t work. I’m crap at this. chenier, look back to earlier today and the bold/italic technique will be explained properly. I won’t be back now, I’m going to be embarrassed in a room far, far away. Plus it will be Ebay for the rest of the night with Old Smuddy at the keyboard.
January 9th, 2008 at 7:54 pm
1129
Julie
Hi
January 9th, 2008 at 7:54 pm
Redrooster
I’ve not seen you give any reasonable explanations about anything. So let us give you the chance. You tell all, why the McCanns would want to make ‘thousands’ by agreeing to a documentary about the events leading up to and after May 3rd 2007. Bearing in mind of course that they are parents who not only killed their daughter but buried her some 25 days later and tried to deceive the whole world into thinking that they were looking for her the whole time and still continue to do so.
The floor is yours……………..
January 9th, 2008 at 7:54 pm
I wonder what the Pro-McCann’s think of this?
Quotes from Mitchell would seem to be in direct contradiction to his backtracking today. But (cough) perhaps The Guardian is lying and forgot to remove the fabrication from their website…
SOURCE: GUARDIAN ONLINE
“We have had a preliminary meeting with some producers and directors from IMG with a view to discussing an idea for a film. We’ve not agreed anything, we’re not about to sign anything,” Mitchell said. “We like the proposal, we thought it was fair, but there are others.”
The board of Madeleine’s Fund is due to meet this week and will discuss the proposal. Mitchell said the film may have a “cinema feel”, and would be key part of replenishing Madeleine’s Fund.
“If in theory a large film were to be made our lawyers would make sure our commercial interests are protected,” he said. “Madeleine’s Fund is just over £1m. The money is going on investigators and advertising. It’s dwindling. The money is going. I would imagine we’ve got a few months left. It’s not going to last the year unless we get more money in.”
In addition to a film deal, Mitchell said it was a book deal was possible “at some point down the line”, as part of efforts to find Madeleine.
Mitchell said he was still being inundated with offers for interviews with the McCanns, but added: “They cannot get involved in anything personally until their status [as suspects under Portuguese law] is lifted.”
Many pro’s here are of that persuasion due to the following reasons:
- dislike of going with the majority
- are involved
- are employed to sway public opinion
January 9th, 2008 at 7:53 pm
Seriously chenier, for bold: (this may not work and if not, go back through today’s postings where it is explained to Batman (and therefore to me)
type
then the text you want in bold then
for italics (or leaning gently to one side) type the with a lower case i between them at either end of the section you want in italics. (allegedly)
January 9th, 2008 at 7:52 pm
1106 Garth
I know you can’t be seriously believing what you write, Garth. Yesterday’s articles had direct quotes from Clarence Mitchell in them about the McCanns considering the making of the movie and about using part of the proceeds for the Find Madeleine campaign (The Fund replenishment). Do you think the media would open themselves up to lawsuits that way by directly attributing these words to Clarence if he didn’t actually say them?
No. Gerry and Clarence are now backtracking because of the public’s outrage and disgust at the report of them wanting to further profit off the tragedy. As the watcher said in post 1088, “public outcry = denial by team McCann”
January 9th, 2008 at 7:52 pm
1123
lilith
It’s HITLER!!!!! reincarnated
January 9th, 2008 at 7:52 pm
Hello Can’t Say No!
January 9th, 2008 at 7:51 pm
1118
Gloria Smudd Says:
January 9th, 2008 at 7:46 pm
1090 chenier
Taunting you for your inadequacies while leaning sideways? Not I, chenier! I’m almost never perpendicular!
——————————————————
Well, you seem to have got the right angle, then…
January 9th, 2008 at 7:51 pm
1047ciara louise can you please give an explanation on what you meant when you said saying you had an irish name implying you were of a certain kind.what is that meant to mean
January 9th, 2008 at 7:51 pm
1014 Tony Bennett Says: January 9th, 2008 at 6:43 pm
981 Fair says (January 9th, 2008 at 6:31 pm):
Edit…
REPLY TO PETER O: I apologise to the extent that I misrepresented what you said about Clarence Mitchell being ‘brilliant’.
I admit to having been somewhat shocked at your use of the word as it is not an adjective I would ever think of associating with him.
‘Cunning’, perhaps
+++++++++++++
Tony, if you have something you want to say, and I think we both know what it is, then please do just say it and stop beating around the bush. In the interim, please do stop misquoting me. Thanks.
January 9th, 2008 at 7:50 pm
grrrrrrr
January 9th, 2008 at 7:50 pm
1111
Garth Says:
January 9th, 2008 at 7:42 pm
1104
RedRooster Says:
January 9th, 2008 at 7:38 pm
——————————————-
I know you speak from the heart really …….. bloody shame poor sod. But what you need to do is retrieve your head from your arsehole and then you will see a lot more clearly. Just a suggestion. Now lets stop with the personal attacks and talk nicely……..waddayasay chicken legs
…………………………………
now whos getting personal garthy ??? I think as usual you are missing the point garthy..
come and join us garth, you know its the right thing to do. Please dont forget garthy an innocent little girl has lost her life and for what??? so these bastards could go out on the piss 
of course thats just in my opinion but its starting to look like it dont you think garthy. Now come on my little feathered firkin pull yourself together and lets put the past behind us. We can forget all the shite you have been spouting for months.
Come on garthy wadder yer say???
January 9th, 2008 at 7:50 pm
http://www.admit-one.net/webimages/kitler.jpg
Gerry’s proposal for CuddleCats role in Madeleine: the movie.
January 9th, 2008 at 7:49 pm
10 91 Totje
Like you, I do not believe the Tapas7 would deliberately lie to protect the McCanns, but
would possibly lie about the times they checked on their children, hence the discrepancies.
I seem to remember the Tapas 7 only had one Lawyer acting for them all, but that may
change now they are to be questioned. I am sure I wouldn”t remember what I said 8 months
ago in a Statement so I don”t know whether they will retract if other witnesses dispute their
version of events.
It will be interesting to see all this unravel don”t you think?
January 9th, 2008 at 7:49 pm
Have dug out ‘Famous Trials’ for John George Haigh, and note that he apparently disposed of at least some of his victims in sulphuric acid.
And that whilst he claimed to be barking mad his murders appear to have been committed for money…
January 9th, 2008 at 7:49 pm
1010 Cheryl Says: January 9th, 2008 at 6:41 pm
Peter,
Edit…
++++++++++++
To each their own. You may be smiling, I’m cringing at the very thought of what you suggest.
January 9th, 2008 at 7:46 pm
1090 chenier
Taunting you for your inadequacies while leaning sideways? Not I, chenier! I’m almost never perpendicular!
January 9th, 2008 at 7:45 pm
1104
Promise next time I’ll share 
but thank you so very, very much 
DuncanR Says:
January 9th, 2008 at 7:37 pm
**********************
January 9th, 2008 at 7:44 pm
1038
RedRooster,
That quote [I can't even get myself to repeat it] was a headline and in the article it wasn’t the parents who said it, but a friend who said “If the PJ says she’s dead, the legitimate question to them would be…”
Hopeloos, hopeloos… :sigh: I want a smiley for that
January 9th, 2008 at 7:44 pm
980 Fair Says: January 9th, 2008 at 6:31 pm
Tony Bennett
THANK YOU!
Why did you choose to omit the word ”a” & not include the word smokescreen???
Makes the whole ”quote” (which you alledged by using quotation marks) completely different. Doesn’t it??
I think an apology to Peter O is in order. What do you think?
+++++++++++++++
Thanks for the support but let’s not worry about the apologies thing, it just gets tedious. Tony knows he’s misquoting, though I sure as hell have no idea why.
January 9th, 2008 at 7:44 pm
Tony,
I think you should be particularly careful to be accurate in your statements because of your professional position and the position you take in being a leader for the group of people who want to pursue private legal actions against the McCanns for child neglect.
You did misquote Peter by saying he referred to Mitchell as brilliant, when, as Peter pointed out, and as one of your own posts which copied and pasted Peter’s statement, showed brilliant was only used to describe the latest PR attempt (the possibility of the McCanns okaying a movie about Madeleine for profit) as a ‘brilliant smokescreen.’ There is a world of difference in the two. I don’t think you should generalize the way you did–it is very misleading.