Everyone should see Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 911&quo

Forum for hijacking, general discussion, chatting and off-topic posting
sKnob
Posts: 269
Joined: 02 Jul 2003, 10:50
Location: France
Contact:

Post by sKnob » 28 Jun 2004, 09:26

Looking forward to seeing it here in Europe. I'm glad it's a hit in the US. I don't see why some are upset by MM's bias. MM claims he's a movie-maker first, and a political activist second, and if so, then as an "artist", he has no obligation to be evenhanded (and I don't think that Tarantino & the Cannes jury would have gotten away with awarding the palme d'or if this wasn't true to a large degree).

Besides, having followed the news from many countries via the Internet, it is quite obvious that the US media, (owned by right-wing major corporations), were very biased and / or unquestioning in their coverage of the war. They have recently admitted this themselves.

Europe never felt closer to the US than right after 9/11, and anti-US sentiment has never been as high as it is now.

What a waste. Way to go GWB !

arimaka
Site Supporter
Posts: 54
Joined: 22 Jan 2003, 21:59
Location: Boston
Contact:

Post by arimaka » 28 Jun 2004, 10:24

I don't believe everything Michael Moore says at all... He obviously has his personal beliefs and desires and portrays them in the movie....

BUT....

I saw the movie last night, and there is footage that just confirms to you how evil the people in power right now are, and how much they have mislead the country. I always thought bush could say or do things like the ones in the movie but once you see him do it it's completely unbelievable....

I don't think Bush will win honestly, and hope he doesn't. Especially after watching this movie I could never vote for bush.... there is nothing that can change my mind anymore...
Manuel Jimenez
Arimaka Productions
manuel@arimaka.com

marc
Posts: 45
Joined: 11 Dec 2002, 05:42
Contact:

Post by marc » 28 Jun 2004, 10:55

arimaka wrote:I don't think Bush will win honestly
He didn't the first time... :(

marc
Posts: 45
Joined: 11 Dec 2002, 05:42
Contact:

Re: Saw it. Loved it.

Post by marc » 28 Jun 2004, 10:58

Mind-Over-Midi wrote:Agreed! My girlfriend and I saw the film last night. Brilliant! Moore has his opinion and he makes it quite evident but the the images and the facts speak for themselves. Hell Bush speaks for himself! I can see why the Republican supporters tried to block the release of this film. I can see why they are now going to court to try to block advertising for this film.
Aside from court, I just heard that the Carlyle Group bought the biggest U.S. movie theatre chain, Loews, right before this film's release. The Carlyle Group is that investment group that the Bushes and Binladens and James Baker are part of. That's pretty intense!

marc
Posts: 45
Joined: 11 Dec 2002, 05:42
Contact:

Re: Good points if true.

Post by marc » 28 Jun 2004, 11:12

blumpy wrote:Michael Moore has made some very good points in his other films. More often than not, he stretches the truth. While entertaining, I would not call them accurate. Just dramatic.
Or better yet, let's say "mostly accurate".

It is unfortunate that Michael Moore can't seem to ever resist doing a bit of fact stretching and key omissions in each project of his. But not unfortunate in that he is deceiving folks so badly, but mostly unfortunate because he doesn't need to. He doesn't need any of that in order to still be able to make his points very well. And I just can't fathom how folks could watch, for example, Farenheit 911 and and then leave it only fussing over the little details that he got wrong. I mean, they just don't measure up worth a damn compared to all of the extremely important and valid evidence delivered for making his points.

I mean, if you watch that film and then leave it say, "Well, I dunno, cuz Iraq once shot at our planes in the no-fly zone, ya know?" then I think you need your head checked. I wish that Moore was a little more airtight with his info, but it's still ridiculous to try to say that the errors and omissions that he does make come even close to measuring up to the importance of what he does talk about honestly.

joe_mama
Posts: 34
Joined: 28 Jun 2004, 12:08

Post by joe_mama » 28 Jun 2004, 13:47

as consumers of art/entertainment/ideas/etc, we shouldn't invest in people who have even the slightest difficulty in representing basic facts. no matter how well-intentioned they are. mischaracterizing the truth (in a "documentary", no less) is propaganda by definition. period.

what's most disturbing is that big business is turning a BIG profit from the mass-marketing of this film (and others to be released before november) with the most sinister of objectives - influencing the outcome of a free election.

...open your eyes.

just for the record, i'm an american and a libertarian (ex-democrat). back in the 70's they used to call us punks - the true anti-establishment ;)

joe_mama
"The most dangerous of all falsehoods is a slightly distorted truth."
--G. C. Lichtenberg

Jason Hyerstay
Forum Guru
Posts: 1673
Joined: 05 Mar 2003, 01:43
Location: Vermont

Post by Jason Hyerstay » 28 Jun 2004, 13:56

I thought I was the only Libertarian here!

sKnob
Posts: 269
Joined: 02 Jul 2003, 10:50
Location: France
Contact:

Post by sKnob » 28 Jun 2004, 14:00

joe_mama wrote:as consumers of art/entertainment/ideas/etc, we shouldn't invest in people who have even the slightest difficulty in representing basic facts. no matter how well-intentioned they are.
On the contrary, as artists, we should have an easier time than most understanding and respecting people who posess singular or personal points of view, no matter how skewed or distorted. Besides, as soon as you exit the realm of hard science (math, physics etc.), facts are difficult or impossible to dissociate from the emotional and cultural environment of the believers / beholders, and as such, can hardly ever be deemed absolute.

nickgold
Forum Guru
Posts: 202
Joined: 27 Jan 2003, 11:44
Location: Baltimore
Contact:

Post by nickgold » 28 Jun 2004, 14:06

Ah, Libertarianism -- let's dismantle the government, because mega-corps with no legal restraints will do what's best for the consumer. Because, of course, consumers are well-educated and their free-market decision-making will force corporations to do the right thing. Of course if we dismantle the government, all schools will be brought to us by the mega-corps directly, and this in fact furthers the democratic process.

If I've missed anything in my above analysis of the general Libertarian argument, please let me know. But as far as I can tell, it's pretty wacky (no offense intended, friends). I mean, as wacky as anything else. I think it's all a bunch of crap, but that any system would work pretty well if not for some humans being quite corrupt (a relative minority IMO).

This is why I am an avid proponent of Common-Sensism. But I don't think it's a philosophical/political/economic system most folks have the common sense for.

nickgold
Forum Guru
Posts: 202
Joined: 27 Jan 2003, 11:44
Location: Baltimore
Contact:

Post by nickgold » 28 Jun 2004, 14:09

I should add that I think it's pretty hilarious that Moore is attacked mercilessly for "bending the truth" a wee bit to make a point, but the same people who skewer him for that back the Bush administration, probably the most corrupt, lying, backwards, indeed downright fascist administration I've seen in my life. So bitterly ironic.

qo
Site Supporter
Posts: 1103
Joined: 20 Dec 2003, 13:15
Location: San Jose, CA

Post by qo » 28 Jun 2004, 14:23

joe_mama wrote:as consumers of art/entertainment/ideas/etc, we shouldn't invest in people who have even the slightest difficulty in representing basic facts.
masterhiggins wrote:Nice try. Actually, he commonly uses a tactic known as "lying by withholding information".
As if the current administration has never done the same thing? And, we can't really blame even them (as much as I completely abhor Bush, and most of the high-level folks in his administration). After all, half truths and/or conveniently incomplete descriptions, are an unfortunate ubiquitous insidious advertising/marketing tactic.The only defense is to be critical of everything you read, see, hear (especially from MOTU, hahahahah). Heck, I maintain a healthy suspicion even of the things I touch, smell, or taste :mrgreen:

qo

marc
Posts: 45
Joined: 11 Dec 2002, 05:42
Contact:

Post by marc » 28 Jun 2004, 14:49

joe_mama wrote:as consumers of art/entertainment/ideas/etc, we shouldn't invest in people who have even the slightest difficulty in representing basic facts. no matter how well-intentioned they are.
What the hell is that even really supposed to mean? And is it in any way useful for anything? It would be interesting for you or anyone to seriously try to apply that criteria to everything that you do and support, for like a week or something. Seriously think it through, not just applying it to things that are so blatantly up for scrutiny (like Moore's film, by virtue of being so much in the popular media while making statements that clash intensely with the typical ones in the popular media), but everything.

The whole concept of that kind of purity is a crock, in any way that you try to apply it. None of us are pure, but we can evaluate a lot of things and think through stuff, you know? We don't need to protect anyone from the lack of purity of this or any other film, folks can see it, think about it, and despite the problems that it has, I still think that it's about a million times more deserving of our "investment" than practically anything else out there right now. Ugh, I just have no interest in a conversation about this that is framed in terms like, "Let's find the little wholes in the arguments, and then throw the whole film, and everything that it has to say, out!" Total b.s. On the other hand, folks who want to look critically at everything, the holes and the substance, that is worthwhile...
mischaracterizing the truth (in a "documentary", no less) is propaganda by definition. period.
Yeah, you should hang onto that period. You are right about the film being propaganda, but you're not right about anything else. By definition, propaganda has nothing to do with misrepresentation of facts. By connotation it does, in its popular usage, but not by definition. Propaganda by definition simply means information disseminated to advocate or oppose a cause, which is a fine thing to do.

jrathkopf
Posts: 17
Joined: 19 Sep 2003, 10:54

Post by jrathkopf » 28 Jun 2004, 15:05

I could try to come up with a really interesting neutral comment, but I must confess.
I AM THRILLED THIS MOVIE HAS COME OUT AND IS DOING SO WELL.
I am ashamed to have a person such as George Bush jr representing me as an American and I cant wait until he is out of office.
And I am really excited that popular film culture in America is embracing such a relevant film in the heat of the summer (usually Terminator type blockbusters)
it is time other voices are heard. i feel like this administration has effectively silenced doubtors, and finally someone broke through who could embody the anger of a vast portion of this country.

Milque_dx
Posts: 110
Joined: 03 Dec 2003, 23:20

Post by Milque_dx » 28 Jun 2004, 15:26

I got a chance to see it the day after opening.

Everybody should see this, indeed. Biased, yes.. but so is the fox network news, your local paper and even your own perceptions. Only through taking in many views, debating them and discussing them can we come to some sembalance of reality.

putte
Posts: 2590
Joined: 11 Oct 2002, 07:25
Location: stuttgart, germany
Contact:

Post by putte » 28 Jun 2004, 15:41

to me bush is the leader of western people (not all, of course) beliving that the western way is the way to go, that "we" are right, ´cause "we" are the free, we are the tolerant ..

and that´s the big mistake, to me.

Like these cultures or not, fact is that they exist. And they exists because millions or billions of people belive in them, like we belive (more or less) in our system.

When it comes to complex issues like this one, issues where my knowledge about the real truth is so minimal, i always like to see these things as simple as i can.
And when i do this, in this case, i see 2 huge families sharing a place.
And these families live a very diffrent live compared to each other.

I bet most of us would think "okay .. let´s see .. there are problems, diffrencies. so what to do? Shall we place our rubbish in front of their door, or shall we try to find compromises to get along?"

And i bet even more (i hope so) that most of us would go the compromise-way.

But look at the world .. where is the diplomacy? Where are these "wise" people having learned from history that wars arent the way to go? where´s the progress when it comes to this?

ill communication

maybe i see all this too simple .. i dont know

putte

Locked