Fahreinheit 9/11....again

[dmadman43]

Clearly we didn't have an existing structure in place to deal with this unprecedented situation, but he might have been called upon to decide whether to shoot down the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania.

That decision was made. But, during those 7 minutes no one knew that Flight 93 had been hijacked. So, you would be asking the President to be clairvoyant. That flight was taken over at by the hijackers at 9:27.

I know we all want to believe, knowing what we now know, that someone, anyone, surely the President, could have done something to prevent the events after the first plane hit the WTC. But the reality is, there is nothing anyone, save maybe Superman, could have done to alter the events already unfoldling on 9/11 had those supposed 7 minutes been bought back. Nothing! This is just a moronic argument based purely on 20/20 hindsight. Hell, we now know FDR could have prevented Pearl Harbor had he "connected the dots". But, he didn't.

 

[kbeverina]

Originally posted by LauraR
I haven't seen "F 9/11" but it sounds like alot of it is a bunch of left wing hooey. I put this movie in the same class as Oliver Stone's "JFK" which intimated that LBJ was behind the Kennedy assassination. But I do see Bush's reading to the kids after news of the planes hitting the WTC as bad leadership. Events get cut short all the time for the President. The kids would have been fine if he handed the book off to a teacher and left, and the nation couldn't see him, so I don't see that he was projecting calm to anybody. I do think he should have been taking charge and finding out exactly what was going on. Clearly we didn't have an existing structure in place to deal with this unprecedented situation, but he might have been called upon to decide whether to shoot down the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania. Once the passengers on that plane knew what was going on, they took action themselves and probably saved Washington D.C. from another catastrophe. But if they hadn't acted, he might have had to.
I don't know the timeline, so those 7 minutes probably didn't make a difference, but to be honest, it bothers me that President Bush sat there, not knowing what decisions needed to be made.

I think we need to step back from accepting Moore's account as gospel. The 9/11 commission reported that Bush left the classroom 5-7 minutes after being informed that the second plane hit.

So he was informed at 9:05 and between 9:10 and 9:12 he walked out of the classroom to the other classroom where secure communications had been set up and was on the phone with Cheney. Did he know that was being arranged? I don't know. I suspect he did. Was he told he would be informed when it was set up and at that point left the classroom? I don't know that either. But just because we're not shown those things in Moore's footage doesn't mean it didn't happen. He certainly knew that the Secret Service wasn't going to let him leave without a plan in place for that departure.

There were reporters in the room and the footage was shown on tv that day, so the nation did see his reaction. Even if they didn't see it, it would be reported. He was well aware of that and acted accordingly. Again, though, I would like to hear specifically what anyone thinks could have been done during those 5-7 minutes that was more important than what he did.

Anything, any communications, any decision conveyed, any updates relayed, would require security. I'm not really sure how you know Bush just sat there, not knowing what decisions needed to be made. Is that conclusion based solely on Moore's film?

 

[Van Helsing]

NORAD had little to no authority to deal with attacks coming from WITHIN US air space by commercial airlines.

Yeah sure George didn't have the authority to deal with attacks either. He was too busy at School !!!!

 

[SoonerKate]

As you know, Miramax distributes Tarantino's films, therefore they are investing in him. Although Disney blocked Mirimax from distributing, the Weinstein bros (co-chairmen of Mirimax, if i am correct) set up the Fellowship Adventure Group and tagged along for the distribution of Moore's film. Anyways, the whole thing is a bit complicated but the point is this: Since Tarantino is the Lead Judge at Cannes, his choice in Moore's film will boost his own investors and in the future, win investments for his future movies. (btw, I have a credible source for this info) Filmmakers struggle for investors when needed a start, as most individuals and businesses do. Does that make any sense? I'm just a rambling college student so I'll try to explain my point of view a little better when I've had a full nights sleep . The Cannes situation this year has been VERY commercial, and VERY political -> Cannes is in France...France and in fact just about all of Europe is not exactly #1 GO GO Bush fans, hence, they LOVE the movie. So that is why I think that he should not have gotten the award.

Okay. Where to start...

A) Tarantino does not have a specific exclusivity contract with Miramax regarding funding and distribution of his films. He is, essentially, a free agent and is in no way beholden to the Weinstein Brothers or Miramax itself as a business entity. He can choose to distribute his films through whatever channels he feels are appropriate. Additionally, Miramax is not the sole source of funding for his films. Miramax essentially works as a buyer; for the most part, they don't MAKE films, they buy completed films and (usually) re-edit them. Though this is not always the case, 99.9% of the time, it is.

B) Though Tarantino was, in fact, the president of the Cannes Jury for 2004, there were also 8 other members of different nationalities (American, French, Haitian, Belgian, British, British/Chinese (Hong Kong), and Finnish). Additionally, there are separate juries for Feature films, Short films, and the Camera d'Or. Even if Tarantino was as short sighted as to push F9/11 solely for his own financial gain, if he was the only person who felt that way, he would have had 8 other (VERY influential in world cinema) people to contend with and convince. Additionally, if you have a credible source, cite it; don't just say so.

C) Tarantino is Tarantino. Believe me, he does NOT struggle for investors.

D) Cannes is ALWAYS political, and especially in the last 20 years, ALWAYS commercial. However, it is political in the sense of film business politicking; not necessarily world politics. This year it is more focused on world politics, as is everything. With the state of the world today, it would be damned near impossible for everything to be politically heightened.

E) With all of your reasoning, you say NOTHING about the value of the film as a piece of filmic art, which is what Palme d'Or win should be based on.

 

[ThreeCircles]

Well said SoonerKate!

 

[Fooboy]

To SoonerKate:
I respect ur knowledge of Cannes. I know one of the judges very well. She is in accordance with me on the reasoning that i have done. After all, I am a college student putting forth some critical thinking on a film that you must admit is controversial in many aspects. However, with opinion only, I do not agree with the decision of Cannes. Say what you may say but keep in mind, with ur point E) about the talent of which Moore possesses, I have stated that he does have it, no doubt, but I just feel that there is much more to this than we see on the surface. Art comes in many forms, however I feel that F/911 is simply a Sunday Morning Political Cartoon. I do not mean to start any static with any of our DIS board friends. So please, respect the opinions of others. hehe, is this a Sooner/Longhorn thing? haha! As for the credible source, she is one of the judges. I cannot and will not give names for it may form negative results. So I will leave it at that. Again, Kate...I only state how I feel and my opinion. At least we have a mouse in common. Funny how opposing sides can be bound back together, if possible, by a mouse and a theme park. So i offer a handshake, accept? or not. Either way, I stand adamant with what I say.

Hook 'em Horns

foobs

 

[SoonerKate]

No, it's not a Sooner/Longhorn thing, but I hope y'all are ready for yet another loss in October! Boomer Sooner!Actually, I'm a film studies/french major and I've interned at both Cannes and Miramax (as well as WDW!).

My take on Moore is that he's a political activist who just happens to make some entertaining films that raise questions that, perhaps, need to be asked -- and answered. I don't look to him as a mouthpiece for the left (in fact, I wish he'd shut up sometimes, just as I'm sure those on the right wince on occasion when Limbaugh or O'Reilly speak up). Did he deserve the Palme d'Or? I don't know; I've not had the opportunity to see most of the films up for it (I'm incredibly excited about Kusturica's Life Is A Miracle..I LOVE his work and can't wait to see it.), so I can't possibly make a fair comparison.

 

[Fooboy]

haha, i was hoping that you would still be on! According to stats, the Horns will prolly be bowing and hoofing to you Sooners once again, but a game is a game...perhaps one day, we will prevail . So I assume the handshake has been accepted...or do i assume too much I have not seen Life Is a Miracle...however I will look into it. I did not know you interned at those areas of entertainment, it is an honor to meet one that has those credentials. May I suggest a few films that are of my favorites, You have probably already seen most or all of them.

Amarcord
The Seven Samurai -> I LOVE THIS ONE!
Yi Yi
In the Mood For Love
La Regle de Jeu
Chunking Express
Tokyo Story
and of course, Citizen Kane, The Godfather, and Vertigo.
King of Hearts, I enjoyed as well found it very simple and amusing. Heartlifting even though it was a bunch of insane people.

Anyways, it is nice that we are in accordance to some things, and unfortunately, in rivalry in others. Thank you for your thoughts and opinions, Kate!

See y'all on the field soon!

foobs

 

[AirForceRocks]

Originally posted by Van Helsing
Yeah sure George didn't have the authority to deal with attacks either. He was too busy at School !!!!

He had no authority to deal with the attacks? Where do you get your news?

 

[shortbun]

Originally posted by Fooboy
Hello shortbun,
As you know, Miramax distributes Tarantino's films, therefore they are investing in him. Although Disney blocked Mirimax from distributing, the Weinstein bros (co-chairmen of Mirimax, if i am correct) set up the Fellowship Adventure Group and tagged along for the distribution of Moore's film. Anyways, the whole thing is a bit complicated but the point is this: Since Tarantino is the Lead Judge at Cannes, his choice in Moore's film will boost his own investors and in the future, win investments for his future movies. (btw, I have a credible source for this info) Filmmakers struggle for investors when needed a start, as most individuals and businesses do. Does that make any sense? I'm just a rambling college student so I'll try to explain my point of view a little better when I've had a full nights sleep . The Cannes situation this year has been VERY commercial, and VERY political -> Cannes is in France...France and in fact just about all of Europe is not exactly #1 GO GO Bush fans, hence, they LOVE the movie. So that is why I think that he should not have gotten the award.

And an added note: I am proud to live in this country where we have the Freedom of Speech! I don't believe in ANY other country were a documentary of such extreme mockery can be publicly distributed without the writer/director's head being placed on a stick...maybe in the UK. But I must admit, Freedom of Speech is a great thing...even if the speech is not. But we all have the right to our own opinions and the right to know facts.

Hope this helps...or has it just caused more static?

foobs

I understand what you are saying but I think it's an oversimplification of a complicated financial structure-funding
films. AND, I imagine Quentin Tarantino can get money for about
any project he wants to do right now so he has no conflict of
interest. Also, based on your argument, no one involved in any
film making should be on any jury at Cannes lest they have to make a decision about a film they have some backdoor ties to.
The reputation of Cannes is pretty safe. If your source had a
complaint, she or he should have registered it while the whole
process was fresh and not just through a college student with
thought process on a message board. You are certainly entitled
to your opinion. As to Bush not being hugely popular outside the
USA-he made his bed and is sleeping in it comfortably. IMHO, for
some perverse reason, he loves being hated. Gives him some kind
of rush. Were he not the leader of this country, I wouldn't care about that at all. Also, I think someone else has already told you
that free speech is allowed in most places in the world and that
the places where it's not are highly publicized.

 

[dmadman43]

Originally posted by Van Helsing
Yeah sure George didn't have the authority to deal with attacks either. He was too busy at School !!!!

If your going to comment on the workings of the various govt agencies and processes and military institutions we have in this country, at least try to be informed.

 

[Fooboy]

Originally posted by shortbun
I understand what you are saying but I think it's an oversimplification of a complicated financial structure-funding
films. AND, I imagine Quentin Tarantino can get money for about
any project he wants to do right now so he has no conflict of
interest. Also, based on your argument, no one involved in any
film making should be on any jury at Cannes lest they have to make a decision about a film they have some backdoor ties to.
The reputation of Cannes is pretty safe. If your source had a
complaint, she or he should have registered it while the whole
process was fresh and not just through a college student with
thought process on a message board. You are certainly entitled
to your opinion. As to Bush not being hugely popular outside the
USA-he made his bed and is sleeping in it comfortably. IMHO, for
some perverse reason, he loves being hated. Gives him some kind
of rush. Were he not the leader of this country, I wouldn't care about that at all. Also, I think someone else has already told you
that free speech is allowed in most places in the world and that
the places where it's not are highly publicized.

it is not a complaint that she had. and the judges at Cannes, they will cover for each other. That's politics. Of course the reputation of Cannes is safe! It is the McLaren F-1 of Film Awards. However, I do agree with you that Bush likes to be pushed and shoved...he'll push and shove right back.

And of course this movie will be highly publicized in other nations. Especially if they are nations in that place we like to call Europe. I KNOW OTHER NATIONS HAVE FREEDOM OF SPEECH! I never stated that we are the only nation with that freedom, I said that we are a nation that can FULLY UTILIZE to this degree...in farhrenheit, not celsius.

foobs