will you see Farenheit 9/11?

[dmadman43]

Keep in mind, they love this bozo in France. Enough said.

And the love Jerry Lewis, too. Hey, maybe they think Moore's movies are on par with The Nutty Professor and the like. Maybe they are correct in not viewing him as credible or his movies as "documentaries". Just a thought.

 

[ThreeCircles]

Originally posted by dmadman43
I'd rather eat bees

Now that I would pay at least $8 to watch.

Ohhhhh, wait....

 

[Yzma and Kronk]

Originally posted by faithinkarma
crap? perhaps you would like to give a few specific examples?

The whole thing about walking through Toronto and finding people with their doors unlocked. I lived there - some people do keep their doors unlocked at times - exactly like they do here in Atlanta. However, I bet the percentage of doors that were locked were much higher. He made it look like most, if not all Canadians keep their doors unlocked. I grew up in a very small town (near Sarnia, Ontario which was a big focus of his movie). Up until I was about 18 we never locked our doors. However, today I'm sure you'd be hard pressed to find homes there with their doors unlocked.

I'm sorry I don't have stats and data to back up the whole gun issue, but his presenting Canada as having more guns per capita is not exactly true. Canadians may have more hunting/pellet type guns, but overall - no way. IMO he made it look like Canadians are a bunch of gun toting people, who don't kill their citizens with guns. Again, presented the data to support his point - right or wrong.

Those are the two parts that struck me the most. I tend to agree with some of the other posters. He presents facts to fit his agenda, his way and that's what I don't like about him.

I just think Canadians like him and his movies because he pays attention to the country and puts it in his movies......and we like that.

.......ooops I shouldn't have said that........

 

[dmadman43]

Originally posted by ThreeCircles
Now that I would pay at least $8 to watch.

Ohhhhh, wait....

Only private screenings at the moment...

 

[2BigKIdz]

Originally posted by EsmeraldaX
He makes me sick. Maybe he makes some good points, I don't really know or care. He strikes me as a hypocrite and a whiner and I would not spend a dime on any of his drivel. [/B]

I totally agree. I couldn't finish watching the first movie, I just felt like he was ramming his opinions down my throat. I have no desire at all to see this new film.

 

[Nancy]

nope, I won't see it at all.

BUT there are tons of movies I won't go see just because they don't interest me. I wouldn't go see The Passion; even though all my friends told me I "had" to see it. I have no desire to see any of the Harry Potter movies...the whole HP thing eludes me.
There are many others that I was told I have to see or don't miss this movie and I don't go.......
because I won't spend my hard earned money to see a movie that holds absolutely no interest for me.

 

[Eeyore1954]

Originally posted by shortbun
Most people could NOT look in their local papers and find the
film-it's only showing in a smattering of places, usually one in
each large city.

(This is the world's smallest violin playing "My heart bleeds for you" for those who may not have this film showing near them. That is a true American tragedy.)

SO-the poster was really trying to help.

And as
far as incredibly slanted and warped opinions....I find many on
these boards.

This is not a movie, it's a documentary film

If this is a documentary, then I am the President of the U.S.

and it will surely be entertaining to me!

Can't argue with that.

Bowling for Columbine had me laughing so hard I was crying. Michael Moore sees humor in the absurd and this film should provide us with lots of humor.

www.moorelies.com
I'd rather slide down a 50-foot razor blade into a pool of iodine than sit through one minute of Moore's blatant lies.

 

[shortbun]

This is the world's smallest violin playing "My heart bleeds for you" for those who may not have this film showing near them. That is a true American tragedy.

the above is a quote but I don't remember from whom
oh yeah, Eyeore1954. hi!


This film IS about a true American tragedy! Thousands have died
because our government was not ready for this attack despite
specific warnings. Have you been watching the news???
This film also addresses President Bush II's response to this
attack on our countryand his ties to Saudi Arabia(which are documented btw and his ties to big business involving the Bin Laden family. It addresses how he protected the Bin Ladens after
the September 11th attack on our country. My heart sorrows for those who died in the attacks on September 11th and those subsequent deaths in Afganistan and Iraq. I'm thinking many of you don't even know the focus on this film and are merely rejecting it through pure stubborness. If I reacted similarly, I wouldn't watch state of the union addresses, TV press conferences and so forth. If you are going to argue, know what you are arguing about or your arguements have no weight and you are simply talking to hear/see yourself talk.

 

[Eeyore1954]

Originally posted by shortbun
This film IS about a true American tragedy!

No, this film is a tragedy and a distortion of the truth... something MM wouldn't recognize if it bit him on his posterior.

I'm thinking many of you don't even know the focus on this film and are merely rejecting it through pure stubborness.

Not really ... MM has consistently proven that he is little more than a lying publicity hound. The lies and distortions in his other films are so well documented. His warped political agenda in this film is so clear one doesn't need to see it to know what Moore is trying to say.

If you are going to argue, know what you are arguing about or your arguements have no weight and you are simply talking to hear/see yourself talk.

You'd be interested then in some of these websites...

www.moorewatch.com
www.moorelies.com
www.mooreexposed.com
www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html
www.bowlingfortruth.com/

 

[disneydad2]

MM is a pompous Arsch. Even scores of liberals wish he'd just go away and stop pretending to represent them. It's even been rumoured that he was 'manufactured' by conservatives to make the liberals look so ridiculous. When questioned about all the inaccuracies in his films, his response was something like (not exact quote) 'how can comedy be accurate?' And he's correct. It is totally in his right to make a comedy, satirical or fictional film. Just stop calling it a documentary.

Or is that where the comedy comes in?

 

[faithinkarma]

Originally posted by tiggersmom2
My grandparents are from Quebec Canada - nobody considers themselves more "French" than the Quebec Canadians. My grandparents love Chiraq Oh well, my grief is not with the French people per se, but rather their government.

BTW, if you ever go to Quebec or France you would not believe the American bashing cartoons and sentiment in general (just got back from Quebec a few months ago) so I guess it goes BOTH ways!

I lived in Quebec for over 50 years. Anyone who knows anything about the political situation in Quebec for the last half century will understand that the last thing I want to do is defend the French.

What I am defending is good behavior. Political cartoons are one thing. There are plenty of satirical ones right here in the US doing their own share of bashing. That is the nature of the game. But it disturbs me when individual people start thinking it is fun to take pot shots at another people. It demeans us all when that happens. It brings to mind behavior that woulld not be tolerated in a schoolyard.


PS....I lived there until 2002, and I never locked my doors. Whether or not one keeps doors locked, I don't think anyone can deny they feel safer in Canadian cities than in most US ones. The crime stats do not lie.

As to Canadians having more guns per capita, if MM said that he is clearly wrong.

Canada has roughly 1 million handguns while the United States has more than 76 million. While there are other factors affecting murder, suicide and unintentional injury rates, a comparison of data in Canada and the United States suggests that access to handguns may play a role. While the murder rate without guns in the US is roughly equivalent (1.8 times) to that of Canada, the murder rate with handguns is 14.5 times the Canadian rate. The costs of firearms death and injury in the two countries have been compared and estimated to be $495 (US) per resident in the United States compared to $195 per resident in Canada.

http://www.guncontrol.ca/Content/Cda-US.htm

 

[dmadman43]

This film also addresses President Bush II's

Who is "Presidet Bush II"

 

[Disney Enthusiast]

NO. Not only because I do not like MM and wouldn't give him a dime of my hard earned money, but also because he probably used the same tactics he used when making Bowling. He doesn't just go over the edge, he actually splices speeches together months and months apart to make us "think" they are the same speech given 2 days after a massacre. Think if I took a word here and there from what you've said over the years and spliced them together titled, ".... In his own words." Well, that may be a fact, but it would be wrong. And people believe what they see in print or on the screen w/o doing any research to determine if they've been swindled.

The remarks about Canada are so skewed because there are less people per region and lots of wilderness and the statistics can look as if there are so many more killings here in the USA. But if you look at it proportionally, you'll find a much different answer.

Here is an example of what he does........ Quoted from HardyLaw

"His NRA webpage" with highlighted reference to "48 hours after Kayla Robinson is pronounced dead." Here's where it gets interesting. Moore zooms in on that phrase so quickly that it blots out the rest of the sentence, and then takes the image off screen before you can read anything else.

(It's clearer in the movie). The page is long gone, but I finally found an archived version and also a June 2000 usenet posting usenet posting. Guess what the page really said happened? Not a Heston trip to Flint, but: "48-hours after Kayla Rolland is pronounced dead, Bill Clinton is on The Today Show telling a sympathetic Katie Couric, "Maybe this tragic death will help."" Nothing to do with Heston. Incidentally, if you have the DVD version and the right player, you can freeze frame this sequence and see it yourself. Then go back and freeze frame the rally, and you'll make out various Bush election posters and tags.

Yep, Moore had a reason for zooming in on the 48 hours. The zooming starts instantly, and moves sideways to block out the rest of the sentence before even the quickest viewer could read it.

By the way, when interviewed by a reporter for the Times of London, Moore had to admit the point: "When I spoke to Moore last week, he confirmed Hardy's point about the date of the speech, but angrily denied the allegation that he had misled viewers." Link to Times webpage (charge for download).

If this is artistic talent, it's not the type that merits an Oscar.

He uses factual information like a transcript to skew the truth and mislead the viewer. The viewer thinks, "It must be true," because the viewer saw it in the movie or in print. And obviously, the way he edits his works, your eyes are deceiving you. By seeing Bowling, one believes Heston said those words, when actually it was President Clinton. That actually should be against the law, and certainly not Oscar worthy for a documentary. So instead of bringing up good points to discuss between us, he is instead guiding the viewer through fancy tricks to promote and follow his agenda. So by taking facts and skewing them to be truth, his movies seem more true than ever. It's so easy to fall into his trap. I won't allow that man to play tricks on my mind.

I watched Hannity last night I think and he put 3 quotes up by President Bush for a journalist who just wrote a book about getting the President out of the WH because he lied to us. He asked the journalist if the President had lied in all 3 quotes about WMD's etc. The journalist said, "Yes, he mislead the people." Then Hannity told him he tricked him and they were quotes by Clinton, Kerry, and someone else. Ha Ha. MM is doing the same thing in his movies, only he isn't telling you he tricked you at the end. He's letting you believe what you heard/saw. That's why I won't go see his movie.

 

[Eeyore1954]

Originally posted by dmadman43
Who is "Presidet Bush II"

I'll give this a try ... I think shortbun is trying to distinguish between Bush 41 and Bush 43, using the suffix "II" to indicate Bush 43. Confusing? Yes, but when you think about it, the use of "II" sort of adds a sort of royal ring to the name. Sort of like Queen Elizabeth II.

 

[Disney Enthusiast]

Originally posted by EsmeraldaX
I've met Michael Moore and was disgusted by his arrogance, his rudeness to his fans and his general attitude. This was before I even really paid attention to politics when someone took me to one of his lectures maybe 4 or 5 years ago. I knew nothing about him and I learned all I needed to about him by watching the way he treated the people who came and waited for an hour in line to have him sign a book for them.

I also know that recently, he was requiring small, indie bookstores to order a minimum of 1000 books for his signings and that for many of them, he cancelled last minute or did not show up.

He makes me sick. Maybe he makes some good points, I don't really know or care. He strikes me as a hypocrite and a whiner and I would not spend a dime on any of his drivel.

EsmeraldaX has mentioned this before too. So here's another reason. I won't go see his movie because he treats people terribly. So much for taking care of the little people. I'll admit it..... I don't like him, I think he's a jerk, a slob, and I won't give him any of my money. Some may call it censoring.... I call it boycotting.

 

[faithinkarma]

Originally posted by Eeyore1954
I'll give this a try ... I think shortbun is trying to distinguish between Bush 41 and Bush 43, using the suffix "II" to indicate Bush 43. Confusing? Yes, but when you think about it, the use of "II" sort of adds a sort of royal ring to the name. Sort of like Queen Elizabeth II.

Like The Madness of King George was originally titled The Madness of George III, but it was feared people would think it was part three?

 

[dmadman43]

Originally posted by Eeyore1954
I'll give this a try ... I think shortbun is trying to distinguish between Bush 41 and Bush 43, using the suffix "II" to indicate Bush 43. Confusing? Yes, but when you think about it, the use of "II" sort of adds a sort of royal ring to the name. Sort of like Queen Elizabeth II.

I guess my point is, why do so many people think George W. Bush is a Jr? He does NOT have the same name as his father.

 

[disneydad2]

Many of his followers say his films are thought provoking. I agree. But the thoughts that go thru my head are more like "how can this be legal - fabricating situations by using video tricks and misleading statements?"

 

[DawnCt1]

I hear that Hezbollah has offered their help and support in distributing Michael Moore's film. I guess Hezbollah has found something attractive in it.

 

[Eeyore1954]

Originally posted by dmadman43
I guess my point is, why do so many people think George W. Bush is a Jr? He does NOT have the same name as his father.

Alas, they do share one identical middle initial (W) and I think that leads to the confusion -- if it's actually confusion. I'll admit it took me a few moments to figure out Bush 41 and Bush 43 the first time I saw it. But then I've never claimed to be the brightest bulb in the chandelier!