The Profit

Infobox Film
name = The Profit


caption = The Profit movie poster
director = Peter N. Alexander
producer = Bob Minton
Patricia Greenway
writer = Peter N. Alexander
starring = Eric Rath
Christine Eads
Jeff Hughes
Jerry Ascione
Ryan Paul James
music = Yuri Gorbachow
cinematography = Mark Woods
editing = Cole Russing
distributor = Human Rights Cinema Society
released = made in 2001, release blocked by court order, 2002
runtime = 128 minutes
country = USA
language = English
budget = USD$2,000,000
followed_by =
website = http://www.theprofit.org/index2.html
amg_id = 1:338237
imdb_id = 0277255

"The Profit" is a feature film written and directed by Peter N. Alexander. The film premiered at the Cannes Film Festival in France in 2001.cite news | last =Sipple | first =Danielle | title =Alexander explains inspiration for controversial cult movie 'Profit' | work =University Wire, Tampa, Florida | pages =The Oracle | date =September 4, 2001 | ] Distribution of the film was prohibited by an American court order which was a result of a lawsuit brought by the Church of Scientology, although the filmmaker says that the film is not about Scientology. As a result, "The Disinformation Book Of Lists" and "The Times" have characterized "The Profit" as a banned film in the United States.

The film was described by its producers as a work of fiction, meant to educate the public about cults and con men. It was widely seen, however, as a parody of the Church of Scientology and its founder, L. Ron Hubbard. The main character L. Conrad Powers leads an organization called the "Church of Scientific Spiritualism", and many elements about both the Church portrayed in the film, and Powers' life have been compared to Scientology and Hubbard. The film was mainly produced and shot in Tampa Bay, Florida, and the cast included actors from the area and cameos from a few Scientology critics.

The Church of Scientology did not think favorably of the piece. Representatives from the Foundation for Religious Tolerance of Florida came to protest the film, and the film's producers asserted that they were harassed by Scientologists. Initially, representatives of the Church stated the film had no resemblance to Scientology, but later the Church initiated litigation to block the film's distribution. As a result of a 2002 court order from the Lisa McPherson case, a Pinellas County judge blocked further distribution of the film in the United States. According to the film's attorney the injunction was lifted in 2007, but distribution is still blocked due to a conflict with one of the producers, Bob Minton. The film generally did not receive positive reviews from local press, and reviews in the "St. Petersburg Times" criticized over-the-top acting, and noted that the director should have instead produced a non-fiction documentary piece if he wanted to educate others about cults.

Plot synopsis

The film's promotional website describes it as "a work of fiction that attempts to explain how a con man can use mind control to effectively form/lead a group of deluded adherents."cite web | last =Production staff | title =FAQ's Frequently Asked Questions | work =theprofit.org | publisher =The Profit, official Web site | date = | url =http://www.theprofit.org/faq.html | accessdate = 2007-11-01 ] The film's director stated that the script was based upon a fictional character he had created with, however, "many parallels to reality." Eric Rath plays a paranoid cult leader named L. Conrad Powers (taken by some observers to be a parody of L. Ron Hubbard), whose organization is called the "Church of Scientific Spiritualism."

The narrative starts with Leland Conrad Powers getting interested in cults and he watches a Black Mass from behind a tree being performed by Zach Carson. Carson invites Powers to perform the "Caliban Working" and afterwards Carson gives Powers $20,000 to sell sailboats. Powers sails off with the boat, the money, and Helen Hughes. In retribution, Carson evokes Satan to summon a typhoon.

The film often takes the form of parody. One of the church followers in the film creates a device that can read thoughts, called a "Mind Meter." Scientology utilizes a similar looking device called an e-meter, which they say can analyze what they call the "reactive mind". Other elements in the film that have been cited as similar to L. Ron Hubbard and Scientology include conflict with the Internal Revenue Service, an infiltration of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, usage of military uniforms and science fiction theology. L. Conrad Powers is also supported in the film by a "Tom Cruise-style celebrity," before eventually becoming a "reclusive demagogue."

Production

Filming took place over the course of eight weeks during the summer of 2000, with locations near Fort De Soto Park, Ybor City and Tampa Bay, Florida.cite news | last =Farley | first =Robert | title =Man's film a veiled look at Scientology | work =St. Petersburg Times | date =August 2, 2001 | url =http://www.sptimes.com/News/080201/TampaBay/Man_s_film_a_veiled_l.shtml | accessdate = 2007-11-01] Half of the cast came from Tampa Bay, Florida, and cameo appearances by Scientology critics included Bob Minton, Stacy Brooks, Jesse Prince and Ken Dandar. Costume and design themes hearkened back to the "Citizen Kane" period. Bob Minton funded the film, and invested almost USD$2.5 million into the piece. [cite news | last =O'Neill | first =Deborah | title = Man spent millions fighting Scientology: The worldwide total: $10-million. Robert Minton spent much of that money in Pinellas County. | work =St. Petersburg Times | language =
date =May 18, 2002 | url =http://www.sptimes.com/2002/05/18/TampaBay/Man_spent_millions_fi.shtml | accessdate = 2007-11-01]

According to the director, the film's cast and crew faced harassment from Scientologists throughout production. Representatives from the Foundation for Religious Tolerance of Florida — a Scientology front group — came to the shooting sites of the film and handed out fliers which demeaned the film's financial backers. They also followed crew members home in order to "press them for information about the content of the film." In addition to the protests, promotional videos shipped to Cannes, France were reported to have disappeared, and Alexander believed that an individual disguised as himself came to pick up the videos.

The founder of the Foundation for Religious Tolerance of Florida, Mary DeMoss of Clearwater, Florida, characterized the movie as a "hate propaganda film," denied that anyone from her foundation followed crewmembers home and stated that the fliers were passed out in order to let crew members know "who was behind this." While Alexander was a member of the Church of Scientology for about twenty years, the filmmakers assert that "Any correlation between this story and Scientology is purely coincidental."

Church of Scientology's response

Initially in response to the film, Church of Scientology spokesman Ben Shaw agreed with the film's director that "the movie is fiction and has nothing to do with Scientology." Notwithstanding the fictional elements of the film, the Church of Scientology took legal action against the film makers after a handful of test screenings in Florida. The Church said that the film was intended to influence the jury pool in the wrongful death case of a Scientologist, Lisa McPherson, who died while in the care of the Church of Scientology in Clearwater, Florida. In response to the lawsuit, Pinellas County, Florida, Judge Robert Beach issued a court order in April 2002 enjoining "The Profit" from worldwide distribution for an indefinite period. As part of the decision, Church of Scientology attorneys were also barred from seeking any information about the film's production.

In November 2002, Bob Minton, one of the films producers, filed a lawsuit against Peter Alexander in order to see the financial accounts of the film's production.cite news | last =Levesque | first =William R. | title = Scientology critic sues over movie: Robert S. Minton wants to see the financial books for The Profit, which he says he invested $2.44-million in. The film is a veiled look at Scientology. | work =St. Petersburg Times | date =November 9, 2002 | url =http://www.sptimes.com/2002/11/09/NorthPinellas/Scientology_critic_su.shtml | accessdate = 2007-11-01 ] According to the "St. Petersburg Times", "Minton went from being Scientology's archenemy to a cooperating witness who wanted out of an expensive fight against the church." Though a contract signed by Minton and Alexander guaranteed either partner to demand an accounting of the film's finances, Alexander would not let Minton see the books. Peter Alexander's attorney "accused Minton of doing the church's bidding by attacking Alexander and a movie that could be interpreted as being critical of Scientology." A spokesman for the Church of Scientology, however, denied any involvement in Minton's lawsuit. The court issued an order, compelling the two parties to arbitration. In 2003, Alexander filed in state court in Florida, seeking a writ of certiorari in the matter, and the court found in Alexander's favor and reversed the decision of the lower court.Florida Case Law, "ALEXANDER v. MINTON", 855 So.2d 94, (Fla.App. 2 Dist. 2003), Case No. 2D02-5544. Opinion filed June 13, 2003.]

The producers of the film had a court hearing on March 5, 2007 to ask that the injunction on the film's distribution be lifted.cite web | last =Film producers | title =Dear PROFIT Fans | work =Official Web site, The Profit | date =February 22, 2007 | url =http://www.theprofit.org/feb2207.htm | accessdate = 2007-11-01 ] On April 7, 2007, attorney Luke Lirot announced on the official website for "The Profit" that "We have absolutely no exposure for any repercussions from the court order."cite news | last =Lirot | first =Luke
title =Latest Legal Updates | work =The Profit Legal Updates |publisher =theprofit.org | date =April 7, 2007 | url =http://www.theprofit.org/latest-legal.htm | accessdate = 2007-11-10] Lirot also stated that there was still an impediment to the film's release, writing "all that's stopping the release of the movie is the legal battle with the partner who was compromised by Scientology (Robert Minton) and is currently using his power as partner to stop the release of the film."

The complete film was leaked to the internet in late March 2008, and in response Thomas H. McGowan, attorney for Bob Minton, sent a letter to Luke Lirot.cite news | last =McGowan | first =Thomas H. | title =Scientology/ Minton Letter | work =Hosted at website for The Profit | publisher =www.theprofit.org | date =March 24, 2008 | url =http://www.theprofit.org/public_html/tfcomp/McGowanSCAN2934_000.pdf | accessdate = 2008-04-02 ] In his March 24, 2008 letter, McGowan wrote: "To say the least, I was astonished to learn that in spite of our correspondence, and in spite of what I know of your understanding of the misuse of proprietary materials to be, a complete version of the film "The Profit" is now streaming on the internet." McGowan asserted: "I am not persuaded in the least that the direct responsibility for what has happened lies anywhere but directly at Mr. Alexander's feet." McGowan requested that Alexander take action to remove the film from the internet. Luke Lirot responded to McGowan's letter on March 26, 2008, and wrote: "In response to your latest letter, I can unequivocally state that my people (Mr. Alexander and his affiliates) had absolutely nothing to do with the unauthorized distribution of the film "The Profit" and we have gone to great lengths to stop any further transmissions."cite news | last =Lirot | first =Luke | title =Attorney Luke Lirot responds | work =Hosted at website for The Profit | publisher =www.theprofit.org | date =March 26, 2008 | url =http://www.theprofit.org/public_html/tfcomp/AlexanderSCAN2937_000.pdf | accessdate = 2008-04-02 ] In his letter Lirot asserted "... my people believe it was either Mr. Minton, or one of his agents, who posted the film illegally, in order to give some manufactured or false grounds for some type of adverse actions or action against my client, so that Minton can fulfill his presumed agreement with the Church of Scientology to find any means whatsoever to "harass and destroy utterly" his former "partner," Mr. Alexander, as is the policy of the entity whom my people believe is your actual client, the Church of Scientology."

Reception

"Tampa Bay's 10" reported on the opening of the film at the Cinema Cafe in Clearwater, Florida on August 24, 2001, noting the film's controversial nature, and the fact that it appeared to be an exposé of the Church of Scientology.cite news | last =Roundtree | first =Reginald | coauthors =Marty Matthews, Mike Deeson | title =The Profit | work =Tampa Bay's 10 | publisher =WTSP | date =August 24, 2001 | ] The report stated that a subtle message of the film was director Alexander's critique of Scientology and his motivation to bring information about it to the public. In an interview with "Tampa Bay's 10", Alexander stated he was trying to expose a hoax, and give others insight into "what it is that makes people join cults." "Fox 13 News" called the film's portrayal of the Church of Scientific Spirituality as "oddly similar to the real world's Church of Scientology," but also reported that Alexander asserted character L. Conrad Powers was actually a composite character, based on several "alleged cult leaders."cite news | last =Staff | coauthors =Steve Nichols | title =Scientology Movie | work = Fox 13 News | publisher =WTVT | date =August 24, 2001 | ] Alexander stated in an interview with "FOX 13 News", that he felt he could better inform others about cults through a fictional portrayal than he could have through a documentary.

The film was not well received in a review in the "St. Petersburg Times". The reviewer described the movie as "stilted", but also debunked the Alexander's statements that the film was not based on the life of L. Ron Hubbard, and drew several parallels between the plot of the film and Hubbard's life. The review also critiqued the length the story went to make a point, stating "Cultists may be capable of the acts The Profit describes, but this story comes across as farfetched rather than convincing." Eric Rath's performance as "L. Conrad Powers" was seen as "over the top", and the review characterized the film on the whole as "National Enquirer-style entertainment."cite news | last =Staff | title =No love lost | work =St. Petersburg Times | pages =Indie Flix | date =August 23, 2001 | url =http://www.sptimes.com/News/082301/Weekend/Indie_Flix.shtml | accessdate = 2007-11-01]

In a separate review in the "St. Petersburg Times", Steve Persall also did not view the film in high regard.cite news | last =Persall | first =Steve | title = Floridian: Real problems with a fictional movie | work =St. Petersburg Times | date =August 24, 2001 | url =http://www.sptimes.com/News/082401/news_pf/Floridian/Real_problems_with_a_.shtml | accessdate = 2007-11-01 ] Persall noted that although Peter Alexander stated the film was a "warning against the influence of religious cults," and not based on Scientology specifically, he thought that "The Profit is a rant against Hubbard and Scientology, no matter how many cults the filmmakers claim to have researched and incorporated into the story." Persall expressed frustration when Alexander did not answer specific questions about his inspiration and influences used in the film, citing concerns that: "the evil empire will jump all over whoever else is going to show it next." Though the review was not favorable, Persall also wrote that the film would have been a more powerful piece as a truthful documentary, and not a parody, writing: "The Profit would make a stronger statement if Alexander used his Scientology experience to produce a documentary or a no-holds-barred version of Hubbard's life that calls him Hubbard."

The film is cited in Russ Kick's 2004 work, "The Disinformation Book Of Lists", as one of "16 Movies Banned in the U.S.," in between the 1987 film "" and "Ernest and Bertram", from 2002.cite book | last =Kick | first =Russ | title = The Disinformation Book Of Lists | publisher =The Disinformation Company | date =2004 | pages =List 68: "16 Movies Banned in the U.S.", Page 238 | id = | isbn =0972952942 ] Kick described the film as "obviously based on L. Ron Hubbard and the Church of Scientology." He also recounted how the Church of Scientology changed tactics midstep, writing that "Lawyers and spokespeople for the Church professed that the movie bore absolutely no resemblance to Scientology, then turned around and sued the filmmakers after it had been showing for a few weeks." Kick ended his segment on the film by writing that "The litigation continues..." In October 2007, "The Times" discussed "The Profit" as part of an article on blasphemy in film.cite news | last =Purves | first =Libby | title =The Blasphemy Collection | work =The Times | date =October 26, 2007 | url =http://timesonline.typepad.com/faith/2007/10/the-blasphemy-c.html | accessdate = 2007-11-01] "The Times" noted that the film depicted a con man who had started a religion in order to become wealthy, and noted that the film is "banned in the US because of a lawsuit taken out against it by The Church of Scientology," even though the filmmaker stated the film does not depict L. Ron Hubbard.

Cast

ee also

*Banned films
*List of fictional religions
*Parody religion
*Religious satire
*Scientology in popular culture

References

External links

* [http://www.theprofit.org/index2.html "The Profit" official website]
*imdb title|id=0277255|title=The Profit
* [http://www.xenutv.com/film/profit.htm Newscast: Production of "The Profit"] , "XenuTV", September 27, 2000
* [http://www.theprofit.org/trailer.html "The Profit" Trailer on official site] , [http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=970340742427657764 on Google Video]
* [http://www.theprofit.org/media.html Media Coverage] , from the film's website, coverage on ABC News, France 3, WMNF.
* [http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/TheProfit/ The Profit: The Movie Scientology Won't Let You See] , Dave Touretzky, Ph.D.