Dec
02
“Blood Done Sign My Name” Announces Release Date
The movie portraying a conflict a long, long time ago in Oxford will be released on about 100 screens nationally on February 19. Let’s hope Jeb Stuart, the director, chooses to convey the historical aspect and isolated nature of this incident instead of falling prey to Hollywood’s stereotypical portrayal of the South.
The movie is based on the book by Tim Tyson, which follows a disturbing trend in Hollywood, as only eight of the decade’s Best Picture nominees are original works of art .
7 Comments
Make A CommentComments RSS Feed TrackBack URL
December 2nd, 2009 at 3:57 pm
The author Tim Tyson and screenwriter Jeb Stuart can not present anything credible to the public with this film because of the lies in the book “Blood Done Sign My Name” It always amazes me how many people accept anything they read as fact.
And that someone like Tyson teaches at a reputable school anywhere. If you don’t believe it just Google Tim Tyson exposed.
December 2nd, 2009 at 8:07 pm
Just Google Tim Tyson exposed?
Because anything on Google is a reputable source? I’d be advising people to research Tim Tyson, read the book, and look up Tim Tyson exposed to get a full sense of debate…then maybe even watch the movie, or not, based on what each person discovers.
If you are against people accepting anything they read as fact, then don’t make a statement like “Tim Tyson and Jeb Stuart can not present anything credible…because of the lies in his book” and expect people to be moved merely from your opinion. I’d like to hear some of your facts – can I find them on Google?
The story, true or not, obviously carries a lot of weight – too much weight to be so easily be accepted as the truth or dismissed as a lie.
December 2nd, 2009 at 9:05 pm
I know a lot of people in Oxford who agree with Kalo.
December 3rd, 2009 at 12:54 pm
Kat… I don’t think you understand.That’s exactly what Tim wants for everyone to buy the book and see the movie. After all that’s more money in his pocket.
You want facts ? http://timothybtyson.com/page1.html
I’m assuming that you and everyone else can read the newspapers. Or does everyone think Tim Tyson can walk on water?
It’s obvious that Tim lied about what was in the newspapers. Don’t you feel deceived by Tim advertising this as a True story and all the events are true when in fact they are not?
So Tim has lied to the whole world. Is that credible?
December 5th, 2009 at 6:53 pm
I’ve seen the movie, and there’s nothing stereotypical about it. It’s an excellent movie. I can’t agree, though, that 1970 was “a long, long time ago” or that the events in the book are all that “isolated,” since I know many such stories.
The website in question is operated by the Teel family, and “Kalo” is one of them, by the way. Needless to say, it’s anything but an unbiased source. It makes a mountain range out of two or three molehills, as far as errors in the book are concerned, and fails to explain away the heart of the story–that the Teels shot a young man who was running away from them, beat him half to death as he lay helpless on the ground, then shot him in the head at point-blank range even though the worst thing he could have done to them was bleed on their shoes.
That’s why they hate the book, obviously.
December 6th, 2009 at 7:03 pm
Annie….You’re claiming I’m one of the Teel’s but you don’t know who is stroking these keys.Do you have a learning disability? You state the website is anything but an unbiased source. When Larry Teel is showing newspaper articles that Tim Tyson used as sources, explain how they can be bias or unbiased. Tim is the one that fabricated his own sources, not the Teel’s.
Nobody can believe Tim Tyson because he was caught lying. So how can anyone believe the movie to be true since the movie is based on the the book? Can you believe that two religious families (Tyson’s & Stuart’s) would deceive the public like this? Yes I can, because they are money hungry greedy people.
December 16th, 2009 at 4:34 am
The book is way more convincing than the Teels’ website, mostly because the Teels fume and spit and spin the evidence so hard. They pick at trivia and stay away from the parts of the book that matter. The Teels’ lawyers first pleaded self-defense, and then they said the murder was an “accident.” In my legal opinion, at least one of them could still be prosecuted, and that sure would be interesting, given that he confessed under oath, without immunity, that he was holding the gun that killed Henry Marrow. And I guess Marrow must have also accidentally fallen down and fractured his skull repeatedly, after he accidentally shot himself in the back.
Of course there is no way to comment on the website, so readers can’t ask questions or debate the evidence, and the author can’t defend himself. It’s propaganda from the family of the killers, who are wildly biased. They should open the website for comments and let anybody who wants to offer evidence weigh in, and let the chips fall where they may. Maybe the author would have something to say, and then readers could judge for ourselves.