Fahrenheit 9/11

[Leon Rodriguez]

Congratulations to Michael Moore on winning the Palme D'Or at Cannes for Fahrenheit 9/11. Does anyone out there know if it's supposed to show in Austin, Texas? I haven't seen a bit of advertising! Seems really weird. (for Austin anyway). I'm dying to see it.

[Mitch Gross]

There is currently no US distributor because parent company Disney refused to let subsidiary Miramax distribute the film. The Weinstein brothers are negotiating to buy the film rights back from Disney and either self-distribute or sell it to another distributor, perhaps a company such as New Market. Harvey Weinstein has already stated that he wants it in theaters across the US on July 4th weekend.

[Leon Rodriguez]

Why wouldn't Disney put out an award winning film? Is Eisner a big Republican? Maybe he got a check from Bush to keep it under wraps till after the elections. Anyway, I don't want to talk politics, never a good idea. I just want to see the picture. I think Michael Moore is great.

[Bill DiPietra]

I think Michael Moore is great.

Many others (such as myself) feel exactly the opposite.

[Eric Steelberg ASC]

I don't like him either. But I don't think his film should be censored..it plays into his 'consipracy.'

[Guest J Jukuzami]

Michael Moore has balls. It is to be admired. What is not to be liked about him? His looks? We should never get on this kind of level.

[Phil Rhodes]

Hi,

 

I liked "Bowling for Columbine" until the point where he went and badgered Charlton Heston in a rather embarrassing, predictable and uninteresting way, apparently for little more than kicks. I have no interest in seeing "Farenheit 9/11," my disregard for the current incumbent of the office of president currently knows no bounds anyway, but if it does the same thing as the cheesier bits of "Bowling..." then I have no regard for it, either.

 

Phil

[stijnbarbe]

I think many people have mixed feelings when it comes to Michael Moore.

On one hand he criticizes on what's going wrong in his country, for instance the extremely free weapons market in the US and the television-fear-fed growth of weapon-posession. On the other hand he uses sensation aswell to make his point. the boys bringing back the bullets to Kmart, the exploitation of a clearly senile Charlton Heston,...

I'm afraid Moore, apart from his social engagement, has also smelled the green bills.

I personally prefer his earliest work, Roger and Me, a film with a lot of humour and true concern for 'the cause'.

 

I think Moore also feeds anti-americanism in Europe too much. A lot of so-called anti-Bush people here in Belgium no longer se the distinction between being anti-Bush and beind anti-USA. I peronally hate the Bush administration, but feel this is separate from the American people. As I understand it's voluntary to vote and the elections are being organized on weekdays. For a country that calls itself democratic this is very weird. All too convenient that the average American worker propably can't go to vote.

 

does anybody know when and who will distribute Fahrenheit 911 in Europe?

[Mitch Gross]

Why wouldn't Disney put out an award winning film? Is Eisner a big Republican? Maybe he got a check from Bush to keep it under wraps till after the elections.

Disney is a huge company with a rather huge investment in Orlando, Florida. They pay millions in taxes, sanitation fees, electric bills, etc. The Gov. of Florida is Jeb Bush. His brother is the President, who is highly criticized in the movie. Whatever financial gain the company would have in releasing the film could be vastly offset by the wrath unleased onto the theme park and corporate entity.

[Mitch Gross]

Moore played to a very friendly audience in Cannes. Many others do not share his position. I'm not drawing any sides myself, but there are a number of websites such as michaelmoorelies.com that purport to tear apart all his arguments and perspectives on a step by step basis. While I think that Moore is a very well-intentioned guy, I also question his analytical skills and the depth to his research and fact checking. He paints in rather broad strokes, which can sometimes lead to innaccuracies that undermine the entire argument.

 

For every grandstanding move that works wonderfully (shaming Kmart to stop selling guns and bullets), others fall flat (the Charlton Heston incident).

[Eric Steelberg ASC]

He paints in rather broad strokes, which can sometimes lead to innaccuracies that undermine the entire argument.

That's my problem with him.

[Jim Gauthier]

Hello! I wouldn't want my first post to be poitical, but I can't wait to see if the power of feature films can still effectively impact the political climate of this country. Documentaries and exposes in general have given way to pundits and cable news soundbites designed to spin without anyone trying to tell a complete story. Whatever happened to Nader, Proxmire, and Krulwich and other great consumer advocates? Michael Moore may not be the most observant watchdog, but he is one of the last of a dying breed. While this may be to some nothing but a propaganda film, at least it is done by a man willing to stand for his convictions and his own vision with his credibility at stake.

[Brad Grimmett]

I don't believe EVERYTHING that Michael Moore says, but then again, I don't believe EVERYTHING ANYONE says....

Sometimes you have to scream and yell and "paint in broad strokes" to get people's attention. If his only intention is to get people thinking and make them really take a look at what's going on in this country, and the world, then he's doing a good thing. Of course, that's not his only intention, but it's an important one. I know many people who hate Michael Moore and think he's a liar and a grandstander that makes propaganda films. That's fine, they're entitled to their own opinion. Of course, most of those people that I've spoken to haven't ever seen one of his films. When I ask them how they came to form their opinion about him they say, "Oh, I've heard about this, and I've heard about that......" That's fine too I guess. Everyone is entitled to think and say what they want for whatever reason they want. But there are also those of us who think he's making important films and is really trying make a difference in the country and in the world. What Disney is doing is just sad. That line from Hamlet comes to mind....."The lady doth protest too much, me thinks." I believe that's the line, but you get the idea.....

Just as "The Passion" deserved a release (despite all the naysayers), "Fahrenheit 9/11" deserves a release too (despite all the naysayers).

We don't have to agree with someone to still believe that they have good intentions. It's our right, and duty, as American's, to speak out against the government if we disagree with what they are doing and the direction they are taking the country. Many people consider Michael Moore a true patriot for speaking out and making his films.

 

This post is not meant to stir anyone up. These are just my opinions. I'm sure many people disagree with my opinions, and I'm sure I feel the same way about some of their opinions, but I respect their right to have those opinions, and to voice them.

[Dan Salzmann]

I agree with Stijn and Mitch. Michael Moore is quite short on facts and big on opinion.

I admire his intentions but get the impression that he tailors the facts to his opinions.

In "Bowling for Columbine" there was little investigation and lots of obvious statements.

Instead of badgering a rather out of it Charlton Heston, why didn't he go see the person that was taking care of the little boy who shot the little girl to ask him why a loaded gun wasn't locked up?

More needed to said about the causes.

IMHO the only person that came off in a rational, forthright manner was Marilyn Manson.

[Rachel Oliver]

the exploitation of a clearly senile Charlton Heston,...

Dont take this as a "pro" Moore stance but I think that is exactly what Moore was pointing out, the fact that the NRA had appointed a "Clearly senile" old man to do their PR, if Heston is a leading authority on the politics of the NRA (as his public speaking suggests) then he is the man to question on matters concerning the organization he represents, senile or not! I couldn't stop laughing at the madness of the situation.....

Olly

[Rachel Oliver]

the exploitation of a clearly senile Charlton Heston,...

Dont take this as a "pro" Moore stance but I think that is exactly what Moore was pointing out, the fact that the NRA had appointed a "Clearly senile" old man to do their PR, if Heston is a leading authority on the politics of the NRA (as his public speaking suggests) then he is the man to question on matters concerning the organization he represents, senile or not! I couldn't stop laughing at the madness of the situation.....

Olly

[Ozgur Baltaoglu]

Why is Moore so obsessed with Bush and his administartion?

 

Other than the reasons (regardless of the fact that they may not be based in reality) stated in F911, I recall an episode of the awful truth in which Moore approaches George Bush who was then a governor, and tries to corner him by throwing some provoking questions at him and the annoyed Bush, amidst an army of journalists and partizans, dodges the questions by replying; "Get a real job!"

 

No wonder Moore made it personal. Anyways, Moore if you ask me, is overrated. The grandprize is a political gesture. BUt even though he may not be entirely "correct" the film should be distributed because every american has the "right" to see it. Trying to prevent it from being distributed wouldn't be very "democratic" Or is democracy for the "others".

 

Ali

[Bill DiPietra]

No wonder Moore made it personal. Anyways, Moore if you ask me, is overrated. The grandprize is a political gesture. BUt even though he may not be entirely "correct" the film should be distributed because every american has the "right" to see it. Trying to prevent it from being distributed wouldn't be very "democratic" Or is democracy for the "others".

 

Ali

I'm very anti-Moore, but I'm even more anti-censorship. I'd like everyone to be able to see it to reach their own conclusions.

 

Anyway, not releasing it would be playing right into Moore's hands.

[Leon Rodriguez]

He does get the dialog going. Don't he?

[Tenolian Bell]

On the other hand he uses sensation as well to make his point.

I think he actually is doing to Republican's and big business exactly what they do to their political enemies. No its not nice at all.

 

The difference is the Republican's do their dirt in plush corporate offices, wearing fancy suits, with a smile and a handshake. Moore is grass roots, angry, and in your face. He's wearing a dirty T-shirt and old faded jeans which is aesthetically far less attractive.

 

How do you change the reason we went into Iraq several times and convince the public to go with it? Wave at the camera's and smile with a battle ship in the background.

 

How do you convince people you are the war time president when you skipped your opportunity to go to war, and convince the people your opponent is soft on national security when he really has been to war was injured, volunteered to go back and get injured again? Wave to the cameras and smile with the statue of liberty in the background.

 

How do you stir up the leftist grass roots groups to go fly wherever, get tear gased, and draged away by thier hair to jail; trying to disrupt the annual WTO meeting? You go to the CEO of Exxon stick a camera and mic in his face, show him a picture of a sad oil covered sea otter and ask him why doesn't he care.

 

It's all sensationlist and manipulative. The whole thing is one unfortunate mess from both sides.

[Nate Downes]

IMHO the only person that came off in a rational, forthright manner was Marilyn Manson.

too true.

 

I enjoy Moore's work, but I understand that he is always reaching for the sensational, in order to sell his "product." Guess what, that's true of almost anyone, even such "I'm not in it for the money" advocates such as Ralph Nader (who charges $1 million per-speech last time I checked).

[Mitch Gross]

FYI to the original post in this thread, the film will be released in the US by a partnership formed by the Weinstein Brothers, New Market Films and IFC Films. Look for it to hit screens before the July 4th weekend.

[Aaron Tan]

I try not to judge Bowling for Columbine as a whole. It presented some rather interesting facts but much of it was also done in a very sensational style which made it pointless as an objective documentary. Then again it was his personal soapbox ranting against America so maybe objective is the wrong word.

 

The reason why I think he has done well is that he presents information in a very simple way which appeals to a broad audience. And this is good as it would make a lot more people think about the issues than an more intellectualized piece.

 

However the 'style' that he uses reminds me of the same sensationalist style that is used in most of today's network news which he himself brought up as an issue in the film. The whole thing reminded me of some investigative report from A Current Affair.

 

Wasn't it shocking though the number of deaths from firearms America has a year compared to the rest of the world??? :o

 

Can't wait to see Fahrenheit 9/11 here in Aussie...

 

Side note: I read somewhere that Ray Bradbury, author of Fahrenheit 451 is iffed about the name rip off.

[Aaron Tan]

Wasn't it shocking though the number of deaths from firearms America has a year compared to the rest of the world???

 

As a contradiction to myself, this guy makes a good point. The rest of his article is pretty interesting too however slightly 'over-enthusiastic' about his dislike of Moore:

 

http://www.thetriangle.org/news/2004/05/28...es-683519.shtml

 

"Or take, for instance, the statistics Moore uses in Bowling for Columbine. Toward the middle of the movie, the number of gun-related deaths per country flashes across the screen, and because America's is highest, Moore concludes we're all pistol-packing racists. He doesn't, however, mention any of the circumstances from which the numbers come. For instance, in China most policemen are allowed to kill whoever they want for any infraction of the law without a trial. So, technically, every time a person is killed with a firearm, it's an "execution" and not a "murder." Yet according to Moore, China is a safer place than America, because China has zero gun-related murders a year."

[Max Jacoby]

Wasn't it shocking though the number of deaths from firearms America has a year compared to the rest of the world???

Yes, except that he undermined his own argument by giving the TOTAL number and not a number which took the SIZE of the population into account! That was a sensationalist, not a scientific approach to these numbers.

 

I appreciate what Moore is trying to do. Anyone trying to prevent Bush from being reelected needs to be applauded, but his films strike me as the documentary equivalent of a Hollywood film: painting in broad strokes, going for the easy thrill.