
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





January 9th, 2008 at 6:06 pm
Obviously not!
January 9th, 2008 at 6:06 pm
Catkidd
What question? What truthful answer?
January 9th, 2008 at 6:06 pm
The link doesn’t work here
January 9th, 2008 at 6:05 pm
does underline work?
January 9th, 2008 at 6:05 pm
Garth
Go to the M.F .you will find the translation there
January 9th, 2008 at 6:04 pm
sledgehammer had to ask that question because that was the only truthfull answer their could have been.now if you really believe the mccanns tell me how do you justify their behaviour after maddie going missing
January 9th, 2008 at 6:04 pm
908
Tony Bennett Says:
January 9th, 2008 at 5:57 pm
………PeterO (and I quote) thinks is ‘brilliant’
————————————————————————–
Tony,
It has already been pointed out to you that you misquoted PeterO.
Doing it once more suggests that it’s deliberate…
January 9th, 2008 at 6:04 pm
CSN
I’m going around in circles
January 9th, 2008 at 6:04 pm
878
chenier,
[..] “Which means that the ’source’ for the press article was lying through his/her teeth.
Not a big surprise, really… ”
Unnames sources allways come in handy for “reporters”
But I mentioned that firm because the discussion was about the expenses paid by the fund. Tony [and Matt] also told this is an expensive firm. Like ₤ 1,000 a day.
I would be intersted though reading their “explaining the likely sequence of events”
January 9th, 2008 at 6:04 pm
going
January 9th, 2008 at 6:04 pm
914 Matt
Which makes me think that on some level a cage or two was being rattled. Otherwise why not either ignore it or laugh it off. Rattle rattle rattle.
January 9th, 2008 at 6:03 pm
913
Batman Says:
January 9th, 2008 at 6:00 pm
——————————————-
{b} type your bold msg here {/b}
Instead of using the { use these to enclose the b for bold <
January 9th, 2008 at 6:03 pm
Hi Batman! I’m already looking for a site (which I could then post here) where the html-tags are explained!
January 9th, 2008 at 6:02 pm
904 coolandcalm says (January 9th, 2008 at 5:55 pm): “TB…880 I am missing your point…”
REPLY: Briefly, you were very cool about Max Clifford earlier (’only in it for his 15%’ cut) but raving hot for Clarence Mitchell in your 11.30am post today.
Given that Clifford is clearly in a much higher league than Mitchell, and in view of Clarence’s performances of late, I simply find it hard to understand why you are so keen on him.
But perhaps, like PeterO, you think Mitchells’ ‘hugely entertaining and fun’ remarks yesterday were ‘brilliant’
January 9th, 2008 at 6:02 pm
886
Garth Says:
January 9th, 2008 at 5:46 pm
883
RedRooster Says:
January 9th, 2008 at 5:44 pm
————————–
…….and your excuse?
…………………………………
unfortunately i didnt get an invite…i would love to have gone
January 9th, 2008 at 6:01 pm
813 Totje Says: January 9th, 2008 at 5:07 pm
764 Peter O,
Sorry I don’t get it. Edit…
Who’s THE shrink?
Edit…
+++++++++++
Who’s THE shrink? I dunno, but in reference to your suggestion that they (Hideki) should ask for refund, I was humorously implying that maybe Hideki WAS the shrink….
Never mind, if you have to explain a joke, it’s usually a crap joke!
January 9th, 2008 at 6:00 pm
Hi Baby
Now you are doing it - major showing off!!!!
Italics AND bold.
I feel left out and might have to resort to sulking.
January 9th, 2008 at 6:00 pm
911
Batman
Not for me
But ,sources, near the P.J. ,told they were NOT swiners
January 9th, 2008 at 6:00 pm
911…Batman
Shuuush…Don’t mention the “Swinging” word….if stig is lurking
around he/she will go absolutely bonkers.
January 9th, 2008 at 6:00 pm
910 Garth
what the h*ll is html? You did a great job of livening up dull days by teaching us all smilies
- so please be more explicit. Ta.
January 9th, 2008 at 5:59 pm
test for bold and invers
January 9th, 2008 at 5:58 pm
905 Matt
If earlier reports about certain swinging practices are true - perhaps there will just be one king-size casting couch!! Need to be enormous though to fit you-know-who’s ego!!!
January 9th, 2008 at 5:57 pm
900
Batman Says:
January 9th, 2008 at 5:53 pm
——————————————–
You need to use html mate!
January 9th, 2008 at 5:57 pm
902
Totje
you
January 9th, 2008 at 5:57 pm
CLARENCE MITCHELL on RICHARD AND JUDY
By the sound of it, the sight and sounds of Clarence Mitcehll furiously rowing back from yesterday’s mega-gaffe on ‘Maddie the Movie.
He was clearly nervous, spoke too fast and very clipped, said there were no plans being made for any film, then said that no money was going to be made from any film (if any film was made), then said if any money was going to be made it would go to ‘a good cause’, and then finally admitted that it would probably go to the Find Madeleine Fund!
And this is the man whom ‘coolandcalm’ worships and ‘would love to have working for her’ - and whom PeterO (and I quote) thinks is ‘brilliant’
January 9th, 2008 at 5:56 pm
Ciara-Louise
It wasn’t that sick.
January 9th, 2008 at 5:56 pm
900…Batman
Geez….Dr G P and Dr K controlling their respective Casting Couchs.
January 9th, 2008 at 5:56 pm
Garth
http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/f…..1665.shtml
January 9th, 2008 at 5:55 pm
TB…880 I am missing your point. Or rather….. that was a very pointless post!
A good PR is a good PR. Clarence is doing what he is paid to do, keeping the profile high. Max C does exactly the same for his clients. What’s wrong with that exactly?
Either of them would be good for publicity!! What are they like in their private life? who knows? Who cares?
January 9th, 2008 at 5:54 pm
865
can’t say no : shrink is psychiatric
Also : verb: to decrease in size like the cold water made my balls shrink