|
|
 |
Nosuchsoul |
+ |
Thursday, August 12, 2004 at 9:06 PM
Edited Thursday, August 12, 2004 at 9:16 PM Check this out, seems like Michael Moore got a little ahead of himself in his drive to destroy Dubya. Doesn't even want to apologize! http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040812/ap_on_en_mo/people_michael_moore_3 Michael Moore Defends Disputed Headline Thu Aug 12, 6:34 PM ET
BLOOMINGTON, Ill. - Filmmaker Michael Moore makes no apologizes for his Bush-bashing documentary "Fahrenheit 9/11," and his lawyer says he'll make no apologies for its use of an Illinois newspaper headline, either.
The (Bloomington) Pantagraph says the headline, flashed briefly in the film, came from a letter to the editor about the 2000 presidential election recount but was doctored to look like a news story. Even the date was changed.
P.S. How do you make a hyperlink in this forum? —Nosuchsoul |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
dotcomse |
+ |
Thursday, August 12, 2004 at 9:52 PM If it looks exactly like that, how come that doesn't show up as a link? —dotcomse |
|
|
|
|
Jacotus |
+ |
Thursday, August 12, 2004 at 10:35 PM There are codes to display the symbols involved in html tags, or else there would be no way to display certain symbols/ —Jacotus |
|
|
|
|
Coleman |
+ |
Friday, August 13, 2004 at 12:30 PM Michael Moore lied? Shhhhhhhhhhhocking. —Coleman |
|
|
|
|
Perma Hardon |
+ |
Friday, August 13, 2004 at 7:52 PM The sight or sound of Michael Moore is one of the very few things in the world that can cause my penis to go limp. —Perma Hardon |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
superhew |
+ |
Friday, August 13, 2004 at 9:27 PM yea no kidding, michael moore is old news, people should make their own decisions. and by the way, michael moore always advertised his movie as an "entertaining" film, and wasnt necessarilly 100% true. —superhew |
|
|
|
|
Coleman |
+ |
Friday, August 13, 2004 at 10:25 PM Yes, Michael Moore never meant people to take the charges in his movie seriously. Nor did he intend it to have any political effect. In fact, Michael is quite horrified that some people are hoping that the movie might help defeat George W. Bush in November. So distraught is he over this blatant misuse of his frothy confection that he is currently touring the country pleading with naive audiences not to let his little cinematic bagatelle disuade them from supporting the President during these times of crisis. He is outraged that some would dare use his lighthearted work of fiction for vile, partisan purposes! Sadly, however, he has had little success in stopping the evil scum who have hijacked his innocent little fairy tale and perverted its meaning beyond all recovery. It seems Michael Moore is the last honest man in America. But the shenanigans perpetrated by all you heartless partisan scoundrels have left him a bitter and a broken man. Shame on you! —Coleman |
|
|
|
|
Nosuchsoul |
+ |
Saturday, August 14, 2004 at 7:52 AM Yeah, sure it's just an "entertainment" film. I am positive that if he were to be win the Oscar for best documentary, he would feel compelled to turn it down since he NEVER meant for it to be seen that way. —Nosuchsoul |
|
|
|
|
Coleman |
+ |
Saturday, August 14, 2004 at 1:32 PM
Edited Saturday, August 14, 2004 at 1:35 PM That particular fabrication is typical of Moore's sloppy and dishonest method. It's also typical that our mainstream media would get outraged over something as hair-splittingly pedantic as that (because it involved one of their own outlets), yet gloss over the far grosser errors contained in the movie: the non-sequiturs, the irrelevancies, the glaring omissions and blatant distortions. —Coleman |
|
|
|
|
Shandala |
+ |
Saturday, August 14, 2004 at 2:49 PM It's also typical that our mainstream media would get outraged over that...because it involved one of their own outlets. Welcome to the real world, Coleman. Where people and organizations only care when their own ox gets gored. You see this pitiful lack of imagination and concern everywhere. How about mainstream Hollywood movies that can't dramatize the plight of Africans or Asians unless there's a white male protagonist, along with a nice white female love-interest, for audiences to identify with. Otherwise, who in the popcorn-munching crowd would give a shit about the tragic fate of all those indistinguishable funny-looking little furriners? Even a black director like Antoine Fuqua couldn't make his (lousy) movie about an African genocide without starring Bruce Willis and the pneumatic Monica Belluci. Even Spike Lee has turned to making movies starring lots of whites so he can make any kind of return on investment. Sorry for the rant, but it's a pet peeve of mine about American movies and American audiences. —Shandala |
|
|
|
|
Voltaire |
+ |
Saturday, August 14, 2004 at 6:42 PM Right on, Shandy. But that's one more consequence of an economic mindset in which every enterprise must make instant, maximum profit or be ruthlessly disposed of. It's no longer enough to make a decent profit: You've got to make obscene profit, or you're a loser. Drive through the mid-West sometime and look at the landscape littered with abandoned "Miracle Miles," those hideous strip malls thrown up to rake in the cash by drawing away customers from shops in town. After they've run independent shops out of business, they too dry up (too much competition from identical strip malls down the road) and are abandoned, becoming the new Ghost Towns of the mid-West. Hollywood is gripped by the same sad mindset, so intent on reducing everything to a "magic" formula that's guaranteed to generate massive return on the dollar. But when every movie is just like the last, why bother to see it? It always pleases me when the latest crap "blockbuster" from Tinsel Town goes flop. —Voltaire |
|
|
|
|
teental |
+ |
Saturday, August 14, 2004 at 8:06 PM yeah but look what happened to martin scorsese when he made a film about tibet and the dalai lama with a cast of unknown asian actors and no westerners. it flopped so horribly that he made his next two movies about white people in new york. and if you make movies about foreign people, using foreign actors, you either make them speak english, which doesn't work all that well (eg, john malkovich's dancer upstairs), or you use subtitles, which is box office death in america. if you are going to make a movie about foreigners, starring foreigners, you should not expect to be a big hit in this country. directors and the film industry should learn to expect that. voltaire is right: they should be happy with modest profit from the art house circuit and forget about the big audience, if they are real artists, that is. —teental |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MajandraFan |
+ |
Sunday, August 15, 2004 at 5:31 AM
Edited Sunday, August 15, 2004 at 5:44 AM This talk of Michael Moore puts me in mind of my sisters.
My sisters came back from seeing King Arthur the other day and proclaimed (about Keira Knightley) "she's not even that pretty!"
I've yet to hear them say that about anyone who wasn't extraordinarily attractive.
If Michael Moore is an end-of-the-world sandwich man, why do any of you care?
Answer that and stay fashionable, motherfuckers! —MajandraFan |
|
|
|
|
snuffy |
+ |
Sunday, August 15, 2004 at 7:00 AM Q: How can you tell when Michael Moore is lying? A: His lips are moving. —snuffy |
|
|
|
|
Coleman |
+ |
Sunday, August 15, 2004 at 3:51 PM teental: While I admired what Scorsese tried to do in Kundun, it was still a weak movie with choppy editing and opaque performances. Too bad, because I had hoped it might start a trend toward more interesting, culture-specific mainstream movies about non-Western cultures featuring non-white stars. BTW, the globalization of Hollywood hurts not only film industries in other countries, it's wrecking even our own films, turning them into slick, empty bore-fests.
—Coleman |
|
|
|
|
Leif |
+ |
Sunday, August 15, 2004 at 4:16 PM Of course Michael Moore lied. Anyone who is against Operation Iraqi Freedom is obviously a liar, and a traitor. I, for one, am glad the U.S. invaded Iraq. After all, in the ten years following the first Iraq war, all anyone could talk about in this country were those poor Iraqi people. People would say, "What about Saddam Hussein? Those poor Iraqi people!" The chief reason Bush edged out Gore (who invented this here Internet we're using now, God bless him) is because Gore didn't take a tough stand on Saddam. During the 2000 presidential race, Bush promised that, if elected, he would take out Saddam. And, true to his word, just days after taking office, at the first NSC meeting -- before 9/11, before anything -- Bush and his buddies started ploting to invade Iraq. All I can say is, "Thank God!" -- because if Bush hadn't taken out Saddam, there would be a mushroom cloud over a U.S. city right now. And we've liberated the Iraqi people! —Leif |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
snuffy |
+ |
Sunday, August 15, 2004 at 7:08 PM Whooooooooo caaaaaaaaares? —snuffy |
|
|
|
|
Shandala |
+ |
Sunday, August 15, 2004 at 7:21 PM Actually, that was mildly interesting. Leif: You can be on the right side and still be a liar and a buffoon. —Shandala |
|
|
|
|
Nosuchsoul |
+ |
Sunday, August 15, 2004 at 7:46 PM Well, last time the Iraqi people tried to free themselves, he killed around 200,000. I have heard estimates that 500,000 people died directly and indirectly because of the embargo's on his country. If there were no embargo's I do not think there would be a mushroom cloud over New York, but there may be one over Riyadh. After he used the first couple on Kuwait. Yeah, sometimes cold hard body count math needs to be done when it comes to situations like these. —Nosuchsoul |
|
|
|
|
goodtimes3 |
+ |
Monday, August 16, 2004 at 5:33 PM hed attack isreal first dumbass, why would he attack saudi arabia? thatd just piss his people off majorly. those people were going to die anyways. —goodtimes3 |
|
|
|
|
Coleman |
+ |
Monday, August 16, 2004 at 7:05 PM He'd attack and invade both countries. Saudi Arabia for more oil and the chance to own Mecca, Israel to score points with the Islamic world. —Coleman |
|
|
|
|
Perma Hardon |
+ |
Monday, August 16, 2004 at 7:46 PM Hey dickweed, just to prove to you that I am not obsessed with my penis and the many uses I find for it, I want you to know that when I read "score" and "oil" in your post, I did NOT immediately think of slathering Astroglide on my hard throbbing member before inserting it into the unconscious "date" I picked up at the local tavern. I am capable of interesting conversation on many varied topics. —Perma Hardon |
|
|
|
|
Nosuchsoul |
+ |
Monday, August 16, 2004 at 9:54 PM
Edited Monday, August 16, 2004 at 9:56 PM The only reason he would have attacked Isreal first was to garner support before he attacked the other countries around him. I got two more points for you to use against me.....twenty-five years ago tell me ->why would he attack Iran dumbass and.......fifteen years ago ->why would he attack Kuwait dumbass??? Well, why did he and why would those actions not lead you to believe he wants control of the whole damn area?! Huh, ya rude fuck? —Nosuchsoul |
|