This movie production has been stopped by a filmmaker whose name is Chuck Olsen, using underhanded tactics, innuendo, character assassination, and threats.

Chuck Olsen has stepped into a crowded blogosphere, and yelled "FIRE!" when there was no fire. The result is, our project is now without funding.

What follows is as astonishing to me as I'm sure it will be to you.

At first conception of this project, I had intended to produce a documentary about the fullness of the magnificent human spirit as exhibited in blogs. This spirit seemed to me to be the new senate of the people, by the people, and for the people.

I flashed upon the word "blogumentary" as a way of instantly describing what I had in mind, at least in the early stages of development. I searched WHOIS for the owner of the domain, blogumentary.com. It was Wild West Domains, Inc. A search of the domain database showed that all other TLD's were taken, except blogumentary.us.

But one of the nine daughters of Mnemosyne appeared on my shoulder and said "You aren't going to make that the title, are you? It sucks."

"Okay," I demured, "I'll think of something else down the road." Which is typical, by the way, of producers, writers, and directors. A better title always seems to appear.

Well, I mused, the word itself is still usable in my context, and I certainly would remove the word if Wild West Domains thought I was infringing. It was, I reasoned, a word as open for public use as say "rocumentary" or "polticomentary." And it certainly would convey my intentions to the bloggers who might be interested.

I felt safe in my assumptions, but just to be sure, I searched the United States Patent Trademark Office database for the word.

Nothing.

So I used the word a couple of times on this very blog, as in "we're making a blogumentary." But the Chief Muse, being the keeper of all things artful, and having a wicked sense of humor, whispered into the foul ear of Mephisto about my doings, and he visited me with feint and fourberie, with gambit and trickery slithering along his ugly thoughts.

But I quickly dismissed him with disdain.

And herein lies a quick lesson: be careful when the hellborn clangs at your door and mocks you with diabolical taunt. Do not dismiss them with a quick "be gone with your bullshit nonsense" for they will take that as a cue to call forth their frenzied serpents, their vile troglodytes, their frothing bogeymen.

But first, this is how the tale was to begin: with seraphic light.

I had envisioned a movie within a movie, for each blogger that I and my assistants chose for the project. I was moved by the passion, the energy, the creativity, the drama, of so many wonderful journalists.

Since Dec. 2004, I have read thousands of blogs and was amazed, as if I too had touched the four million year old monolith on the moon (2001: A Space Odyssey) for the first time, and felt the ripples of energy emanating from these mini-blogoliths.

(I've been blogging since Dec. 2004 at this site...and don't consider myself a newbie, and I surely do not consider myself a "Hollywood producer who is taking advantage of the blogosphere," as I have been accused. Please. I left Hollywood in '85. The accusation demeans the intelligence of all those bloggers on my list, as if they could be taken advantage of.)

I raised capital and recruited the necessary crew to capture this evolving phenomenon. I started the blog you're reading now, and invited nominations.

It was going to be a wonderful movie, shot in high-definition, about what lies at the core of mankind, about what a single person can accomplish when connected to a collective of like spirits. A theatre audience could look into the eyes of these bloggers and see promise, see the beginning of something new struggling out of the primal soup of the web.

"Yes, yes, we are excited, come visit us," the cry came echoing back. "We are the new Borg -- a collective, but with individuality."

Then came a lamentation, a plaint so demonic, I wondered if I had slipstreamed into Hell itself. "Hear me," the bitching voice demanded. It's name was Chuck Olsen, it said. How clever, disguising oneself as an All-American boy next door.

"Chuck Olsen, ladies and gentlemen! The runner of the three-minute mile, the quarterback who tossed the winning touchdown in the Superbowl, the blue-eyed boy who single-handedly made a blogumentary and put it on DVD!

My God, the women, the wine, the power that one name conjures. CHUCK OLSEN! The blogosphere buckles at the mere mention of his name. Look how the hordes bow and shiver in anticipation of touching the hem of his holy blogumentary on DVD!

And so the devil came in disguise.

In the first week of June 2005, the mighty Chuck Olsen, who operates this blog, emailed me, John Hart, not claiming ownership of the word "blogumentary," mind you, not claiming infringement, not asking for a cease and desist of the word, but in fact, only claiming "concern" and further saying that it would cause "confusion" in the blogosphere, since he already had a 3-year old DVD product employing that name.

His email to me implied the tone that he could be the only person in the history of time to use the word "blogumentary." His lack of forthright demands and his whiney tone triggered my "too busy for this" switch. I was not amused by his arrogance. Here Chuck, read this: I drink Coca Cola, I use Kleenex, I eat at McDonald's. Do you think this mighty heads of the brand world will write to me and ask me to cease and desist writing their brand names on this blog?

But if I say I'm going to "make a blogumentary," or "these are the people in my blogumentary," or BLOGUMENTARY, or Blogumentary, or bLOGuMenTary, Chuck tosses a hissy fit and gathers a smarmy mob about him to form an attack.

I want to point out, that I and my staff had no intention of titling this production "Blogumentary." Never at any time was that going to be our title, it was just a description of what we were up to in the early stages. Good grief, it's such an obfuscating title for a general movie audience.

It's a well-known fact that titles cannot be copyrighted, so why should I be concerned about a word like "blogumentary?" Any third-grader could see that the working title was "59Bloggers" anyway, not "Blogumentary!" Only a hypersensitive buffoon could possibly confuse the two.

We had tossed around dozens of possible titles, such as "The Sphere," "Journals and Soul," "Absolute Truth," "The Journals of the New America," "Blood, Sweat, and Tears," "Beautiful Souls," and on, and on.

I read his email carefully, searching for the part where legal ownership of the word "blogumentary" would be revealed, but I found none. How odd. He blows an ill wind, but it is odoriferous, like smegma.

"Mmmmm," I thought, reaching for my cross and bible. "This truly seems a pest, an oppressor with an ulterior motive to publicize his failed work in the wake of my new production."

And then I made the mistake that brought the full weight of his demonic power upon me: I replied with a hasty email to dismiss what I thought was a mortal fool anxious to stand out above the 150 emails I had received that day.

But no. The old ferry man, Charon, guided his creaking boat across the rushing current of Styx and evil set foot in the mud of the blogosphere that day.

You see, The All-American boy-demon published a part of my email on his blog without my permission. An edited version. What a smote in mine eye and a stain on the blindfold of Justice.

I had attached a binder to my email that clearly stated what I expected of the reader. I reprint it here so you can see for yourself that it cannot be ignored:

NOTE: This email is a private communication between the author and the addressee. It may not be reproduced or published without the author's express permission. Constitutional privacy was first established in the 1967 United States Supreme Court in Katz v. United States. Katz established a two-part test to determine the reasonableness of one’s expectation of privacy. First, the person must have an actual expectation of privacy; and second, that expectation must be objectively reasonable. In other words, society must also recognize the expectation as reasonable.

But it was ignored. And why? Because Chuck didn't have the balls to negotiate with me by himself. He needed his thugs to surround him and give him courage. He had already made the decision to attack after my initial reply. Why didn't he rewrite his request and state clearly what he wanted from me? Because he wanted to storm Hill 59Blogger and burn me out with his flamethrower troops, that's why. He never had any intention of resolving any issue. This is the true face of Chuck Olsen.

Behold, my email account overflowed with sniveling and sniping, with the whine and rumble of a thousand prepubescent boys and pornwoofers, regurgitating the angst of past parental maltreatment upon me.

I ask you dear readers, what's in this word "blogumentary?" It summons vengeance mightier than a mob on the heels of a child-killer. It cascades wrath over the blogosphere like blood roaring over Victoria Falls. Strike it from your vocabulary and teach your children well, for it commands the dogs of Hell upon the earth.

What man can survive this blistering, unrelenting torment from such demons?

Alas, I could not. For I am but one man without the protection of angels who could grapple with this Chuck Olsen. I prayed for battalions of angel-warriors, but they did not come. I even called upon the name of St. Lawyer, and did beseech him to hear my cry and smite these puss-seeking, word-owners.

St. Lawyer did send forth one who held out his hand to mine and spake the words "Rise, and give me your house, your mutual funds, your savings."

It must be the glory of the name Chuck Olsen that gives him power to smack Justice in the mouth and proceed to edit and print my email to the public. It must be his clean-cut arrogance that gives him the gall to bring down a project so pure in its intention. It must be the size of his mighty penis that frightens all who dare oppose him.

Then my staff and I decided that a documentary about blogs would actually be self-limiting. Something greater should be produced. A feature-length film would allow more time. So we dropped all references to a documentary, including the word "blogumentary." It is a coined word without meaning to the vast majority of those who would see our movie, anyway. It has meaning only to bloggers, not to a mass audience.

But the nightmare could not be contained.

One who swore allegiance to the legions ruled by Chuck Olsen, a Nathan Peters -- no doubt a nom de plume for a succubus -- sent this email to the bloggers on my published list, the very bloggers who were expecting light to dawn, were suddenly blanketed in a deep shadow of evil darkness, and a sound so seductive, many could not resist. In part, the sweet voice said "I think it would be a great statement if you wrote the creator of 59 bloggers and asked to be removed from his film."

Ah, the agony. A stab to the heart. Peters earned his right to sit at the feet of His Master, Chuck Olsen that day, and suckle the juices of victory drooling from Olsen's pores.

Puzzled bloggers began writing to me. "Who is this Nathan Peters?" they wanted to know. "Should we be afraid?" And, "Why is Chuck Olsen chain-sawing your reputation?"

I assured each of them who wrote that although I was in a death match with the Antichrist and his Sons of Perdition, I reassured them that I had yet to wrap my fingers around the neck of The Evil One, but when I did, all would be well.

But their legions were many, and they displayed every quality of evil known to man and God.

But the end came when the sound and fury reached our investors.

Our high priest underwriters, locked safely in the Comfort Room of the Church of Venture Capitalists, heard a noise at the gates outside. Barbarians afoot!

The Chuckies rattled their keyboards far and wide until our High Priests of the Almighty Dollar directed a browser away from flashing stock quotes and, God save us, browsed the Internet, whereupon they found Chuck Olsen breathing damnation down up on me.

The Monks of Moolah vanished from our project, fearing retribution and the collapse of the blogosphere.

Yes, Chuck Olsen and Nathan Peters, et al, vanquished our investors!

So, I stand defeated. I, with my six-foot, seven-inch, 225 pound frame, and 20 years of hand-and-kick fighting in dojos, streets, and posh clubs, cannot defeat the Chuckies because they hide like cowards. I, with my 38-inch reach and a power grip so tight it has slain jackals by the throat, cannot reach him.

In plain language, the Chuckies have buggered this project over a single word: "blogumentary." Unless...unless someone can come to our rescue. But hope fades.

I have grown weary of these two-bit blog-bullies who skulk behind their keyboards and spew epithets to strangers and make idle threats. I long for a good old fashioned saloon fight, where some asshat drifter says "That's my word, you can't use that!"

And I say "Get away from me with your bullshit nonsense."

And he says "You're an asshole, I own that word."

And my right hand strikes at his throat like a Rocky Mountain rattler who's been rolled over by wagon wheels one too many goddamn times.

Yep. The Internet sure has ruined them good ol' days.

Thanks, Chuck Olsen, Nathan Peters, et al, for destroying a project that could have lifted the tide of all blog boats. You've done a great disservice to the entire blog community. You must be proud.

Fair warning to all: mobs like Chuck Olsen's gang roam the Internet attacking anyone who has a different colored blog than they do, a different perspective on culture, a different understanding of the English language.

These violent mobs are a danger to the 'Net and society. They can suck the life out of any blog they choose.

One of the seeds of Chucky emailed a journalist who forwarded the email to me which accused me of a "lack of civility" in my first email to Chuck. I ask you, dear reader, if you are interested in measuring blog civility, and that alone will occupy decades, who has greater lack of civility, the Chuck Olsen gang in their massacre of a media production, or me with my hasty dismissal of an amorphous email?

A court of law would undoubtedly find cause for damages and turn Chuck upside down until his past, present, and future assets were spilled into my valise, but I simply do not have the fees to begin and end that legal process.

Instead, I let this record stand as an indictment of Chuck Olsen and his word-terrorists, and I let it stand as a warning to all: the blogbeasts are out there, waiting to pounce upon you and shred your character, your project, your privacy. This I would have expected of Hollywood, not independent filmmakers, and certainly not the blogosphere!

I have been stopped for now, but I am not done with these people. Chuck Olsen couldn't have picked a worse enemy, because I have nothing now but time on my hands. I am free to convert to the Dark Side.

It's one thing to spam my email account, to overwhelm my server, and to hurl threats and vulgarities at me -- that's a typical Hollywood lunch, and it doesn't bother me -- but Chuck and Nate have violated the cardinal rule of commerce, not only of Hollywood, but of all commerce: Thou shalt not fuck with investors.

See ya' round the 'sphere.