Fahrenheit 9/11

[Madison]

Originally Posted by Ryan Dognaux

If your choice of candidate can be swayed by watching one movie, then maybe you shouldn't.

While I'm 99% certain you misunderstood what was written...

Are you suggesting that someone not vote?

[UlTiMaTeP]

Please see the movie! and then, give it a week, and I am sure there will be many reports showing you all the false facts in the movie, just as there was for BFC. I personally liked Bowling for Columbine but then, I found out about how many little facts were slanted to make his point. As Schnitt says, "He makes good entertaining crapumentary's" I personally will see it, but if its slanted to the point where it says its a conspiracy brought on by US Government (and/or George Bush) I will be walking out.

[akaria]

These movies, just like any information, have to be taken with a grain of salt. They are trying to further their views, so they are probably only going to tell one side. However, in this case, the otherside appears everyday, and Bush's administration slants what he says way more than this movie probably will, he's a politician that’s what they do, but to not want to see both sides or simply disregard one side is just an attempt to maintain ignorance, and that has never helped anyone.

[Ryan Dognaux]

Originally Posted by M. Krass

While I'm 99% certain you misunderstood what was written...

Are you suggesting that someone not vote?

Maybe what I typed didn't make sense... but what I meant was, if by just watching this movie your choice of candidate will be decided, then yes maybe you shouldn't vote. People need to actually research and know their candidate before they vote for them - not just go and watch a biased 2 hour movie and then decide.

Hopefully that made more sense...

[Bill Gold]

Originally Posted by UlTiMaTeP

Please see the movie! and then, give it a week, and I am sure there will be many reports showing you all the false facts in the movie, just as there was for BFC. I personally liked Bowling for Columbine but then, I found out about how many little facts were slanted to make his point. As Schnitt says, "He makes good entertaining crapumentary's" I personally will see it, but if its slanted to the point where it says its a conspiracy brought on by US Government (and/or George Bush) I will be walking out.

UltimateP,
As you may or may not know, Michael Moore has hired 2 prominent publicists to monitor the news wire services 24/7 and to respond to any allegations of falsifications within minutes of the accusations. In fact, at least one attempt to label Moore a liar has already been swept aside. Knowing that Michael Moore wants President Bush to follow in his one term father’s footsteps, and observing that Moore has set up this “War Room” with such reputable people as Mark Fabiani and Chris Lehane; I have, implicitly, come to the conclusion that Moore has taken quite a bit more care in his fact gathering and fact distribution tactics than Moore critics allege he has taken in his older movies.

I had no idea who this Schnitt guy you spoke of was, and after I did a quick search I’m sad to say I do now. He appears to be another rightwing talking head with a three-hour time block to himself. On a side note: with so many rightwing talk show hosts on the air doesn’t it get a little boring to hear the same static? Back to the topic at hand (or maybe I’ll take this further off topic)… This Schnitt guy is entitled to his opinion, and if his opinion is that he hasn’t liked Moore’s movies, then that’s how the cards fell. He can say whatever he wants, but he and his zealous followers have to realize that there are an equal ore greater number of people who like Moore’s films and have the right to like them, as well. For all of the “States’ Rights” and “Censorship / Political Correctness is ploy the Left to take away our rights” arguments the Right makes they sure seem to be contradicting themselves with regard to this film. I’ve seen and read dozens of interviews with activists from the Right who go out and tell people to boycott this film. In order to keep with their supposed “people should be free to do whatever they want, as long as it doesn’t break a law or hurt other people” ideal, shouldn’t they say something more along the lines of “People can go see this film if they want, and if they don’t like what they’ve read about it then they shouldn’t see it.” Doesn’t that sound like a better slogan for everyone involved?

You say you’ll see it but if it’s slanted against the Bush Administration you’ll walk out? Why even bother to see it, then? It’s really okay for you to wait until more reviews of the movie come out and see if they say he’s bashing Bush too much. From what I’ve observed of your comments on these boards (here’s an example) I believe that you probably wouldn’t like this movie, and I suggest that you might want to save yourself $7-10 and pass on this movie. Conversely, I would encourage you and everyone else to see this movie and help make it the highest grossing documentary in American movie history.

<edit>
I'll be seeing the movie on Friday after work with a large group of interns here in Washington D.C.
</edit>

[UlTiMaTeP]

Originally Posted by Bill Gold

UltimateP,
As you may or may not know, Michael Moore has hired 2 prominent publicists to monitor the news wire services 24/7 and to respond to any allegations of falsifications within minutes of the accusations. In fact, at least one attempt to label Moore a liar has already been swept aside. Knowing that Michael Moore wants President Bush to follow in his one term father’s footsteps, and observing that Moore has set up this “War Room” with such reputable people as Mark Fabiani and Chris Lehane; I have, implicitly, come to the conclusion that Moore has taken quite a bit more care in his fact gathering and fact distribution tactics than Moore critics allege he has taken in his older movies.

I had no idea who this Schnitt guy you spoke of was, and after I did a quick search I’m sad to say I do now. He appears to be another rightwing talking head with a three-hour time block to himself. On a side note: with so many rightwing talk show hosts on the air doesn’t it get a little boring to hear the same static? Back to the topic at hand (or maybe I’ll take this further off topic)… This Schnitt guy is entitled to his opinion, and if his opinion is that he hasn’t liked Moore’s movies, then that’s how the cards fell. He can say whatever he wants, but he and his zealous followers have to realize that there are an equal ore greater number of people who like Moore’s films and have the right to like them, as well. For all of the “States’ Rights” and “Censorship / Political Correctness is ploy the Left to take away our rights” arguments the Right makes they sure seem to be contradicting themselves with regard to this film. I’ve seen and read dozens of interviews with activists from the Right who go out and tell people to boycott this film. In order to keep with their supposed “people should be free to do whatever they want, as long as it doesn’t break a law or hurt other people” ideal, shouldn’t they say something more along the lines of “People can go see this film if they want, and if they don’t like what they’ve read about it then they shouldn’t see it.” Doesn’t that sound like a better slogan for everyone involved?

You say you’ll see it but if it’s slanted against the Bush Administration you’ll walk out? Why even bother to see it, then? It’s really okay for you to wait until more reviews of the movie come out and see if they say he’s bashing Bush too much. From what I’ve observed of your comments on these boards (here’s an example) I believe that you probably wouldn’t like this movie, and I suggest that you might want to save yourself $7-10 and pass on this movie. Conversely, I would encourage you and everyone else to see this movie and help make it the highest grossing documentary in American movie history.

<edit>
I'll be seeing the movie on Friday after work with a large group of interns here in Washington D.C.
</edit>

Just watch the movie trailer and you can already see the things hes pulled out of context and distorted.

[Bill Gold]

Originally Posted by UlTiMaTeP

Just watch the movie trailer and you can already see the things hes pulled out of context and distorted.

Trailers, as any rational person can attest to, are made to grab the viewer’s attention. They're an effective marketing tool for movies. They do not tell the whole story; they rarely show a whole scene. By implying that because the trailer has out of context quotes (that were selected by Moore and/or the producers for either shock value or for other reasons) the movie in its entirety distorts that person’s standpoint is misinformed and to be quite honest a ridiculous statement. Neither you nor I know what’s in the movie for sure; it’s inappropriate at this time to accuse Moore of doing something in this film having not seen it yet. Wait a few days, or until you’ve seen it to start attacking it. We can have a civil conversation after we’ve both seen the movie.

[Joe Matt]

Ok, Apple hosts exclusive Fahrenheit 9/11 trailer, and just two months ago offered Al Franken's 'The Lying Liars and the Lies they Tell' for only $3, massive discount. Then Steve Jobs gives loads of money towards the Howard Dean campaign. Ok, I'm a democrat and a mac user, but dosn't that seem more odd than Moore's film? Just a thought to chew on.

[Adam Y.]

Ok, Apple hosts exclusive Fahrenheit 9/11 trailer, and just two months ago offered Al Franken's 'The Lying Liars and the Lies they Tell' for only $3, massive discount. Then Steve Jobs gives loads of money towards the Howard Dean campaign. Ok, I'm a democrat and a mac user, but dosn't that seem more odd than Moore's film? Just a thought to chew on

No. It's nothing unusual in my book. He's just trying to promote his views. I see no reason why no one should do that.

[Joshua May]

Originally Posted by JosephM

Ok, Apple hosts exclusive Fahrenheit 9/11 trailer, and just two months ago offered Al Franken's 'The Lying Liars and the Lies they Tell' for only $3, massive discount. Then Steve Jobs gives loads of money towards the Howard Dean campaign. Ok, I'm a democrat and a mac user, but dosn't that seem more odd than Moore's film? Just a thought to chew on.

Many companies, organizations, or persons do this. For example, you don't really see FOX News plugging Moore's film, and yet Ann Coulter was jolted to being a Republican celebrity through their constant plugs for "Treason", and I'm sure Al Franken was on CNN alot, so really, its not really suspiscious or odd.

[FotoPlasma]

Originally Posted by Ryan Dognaux

Maybe what I typed didn't make sense... but what I meant was, if by just watching this movie your choice of candidate will be decided, then yes maybe you shouldn't vote. People need to actually research and know their candidate before they vote for them - not just go and watch a biased 2 hour movie and then decide.

Hopefully that made more sense...

While I agree that, in general, movies shouldn't have enough influence to change the way a person votes, I do think that facts should. If the movie does indeed contain facts about the current administration, and the viewer thinks that John Kerry would only improve the situation, then they have more than enough right to vote for him.

I seriously take issue with you saying that some people shouldn't vote. We're obviously on opposite ends of the spectrum, here, but I think that most will agree that this is one of the most un-American things anyone can say.

[UlTiMaTeP]

Originally Posted by Adam Y.

No. It's nothing unusual in my book. He's just trying to promote his views. I see no reason why no one should do that.

Apple hosts all big time movies, they dont just select the ones they want to host www.apple.com/trailers

[akaria]

"Ok, Apple hosts exclusive Fahrenheit 9/11 trailer, and just two months ago offered Al Franken's 'The Lying Liars and the Lies they Tell' for only $3, massive discount. Then Steve Jobs gives loads of money towards the Howard Dean campaign. Ok, I'm a democrat and a mac user, but dosn't that seem more odd than Moore's film? Just a thought to chew on."


Most likely Apple thinks there is something to be gained out of Kerry becoming president. They are most likely banking on Kerry being more for the smaller businesses, or if nothing else, at least putting caps on large corporations such as Microsoft. They know that Bush wouldn't do that given his ties to big businesses, such as Microsoft, and so this would help Apple immensely in the long run and could definitely be the reason they are donating money to the campaign. In any case, it's nothing comared to the money that Bush is accepting from the oil companies.

[Andy A.]

Originally Posted by FotoPlasma

I seriously take issue with you saying that some people shouldn't vote. We're obviously on opposite ends of the spectrum, here, but I think that most will agree that this is one of the most un-American things anyone can say.

It may not be popular, but it is every citizens right not to vote. Voting or not voting has nothing to do with being American or Un-American, whatever that means.

I fully belive that if you don't think any canidate has earned your vote, then don't vote. I sure am not going to vote for the lesser of two evils. I don't think that anyone else should vote just for the sake of voting.

Again, it may not be popular, but calling it un-american is a little absured. It strikes me as the same as saying not owning a gun is Un-American. Afterall, if you don't own a gun, how can you defend your country?

Voting is a right. Just like all our other rights, it is our choice, as citizens, to excercise those rights. Voting is not an obligation. And those who chose not to vote are as American as anyone else.

-Andy A.

[Joe Matt]

Originally Posted by Andy A.

but it is every citizens right not to vote.

I hate brining up these complaints now, but I decided to look up the definition of 'citizen'....

according to dictionary.com...

A resident of a city or town, especially one entitled to vote and enjoy other privileges there.

Now, I know it's an option not to vote, but when the definition of being a citizen is the right to vote, it's kinda like being a chef and refuse to cook. I agree that if you don't want to vote, then don't, but don't say you are still a citizen or 'american'. You arn't a part of the process anymore.