ANYONE GOIN TO SEE IT? :cool: ..I AM FOR SURE
Fahrenheit 9/11
I wouldn't waste my money or time watching a film by that loser.
Originally posted by Rob_Gee_a.k.a _Guiny:In that case, I would recommend the more cerebral film on the war, "Control Room." By the director of startup.com, it's a great film that looks at media coverage of the war inside Iraq, comparing Al Jazeera to US stations. It's far less biased but still leaves a strong impression.
I wouldn't waste my money or time watching a film by that loser.
thanks for the recommendation… i had no idea what that movie was about and now i want to go check it out.
"Control Room" has gotten raves, and it's the next flick I see…it's at both the Bethesda and E Street Landmark theaters.
Originally posted by Rob_Gee_a.k.a _Guiny:Way to be open minded guiny.
I wouldn't waste my money or time watching a film by that loser.
"Our Government" in action…
â??Fahrenheit 9/11â?? ban?
Ads for Mooreâ??s movie could be stopped on July 30
By Alexander Bolton
Michael Moore may be prevented from advertising his controversial new movie, â??Fahrenheit 9/11,â? on television or radio after July 30 if the Federal Election Commission (FEC) today accepts the legal advice of its general counsel.
At the same time, a Republican-allied 527 soft-money group is preparing to file a complaint against Mooreâ??s film with the FEC for violating campaign-finance law.
In a draft advisory opinion placed on the FECâ??s agenda for todayâ??s meeting, the agencyâ??s general counsel states that political documentary filmmakers may not air television or radio ads referring to federal candidates within 30 days of a primary election or 60 days of a general election.
steve finn/Getty images
Michael Moore
The opinion is generated under the new McCain-Feingold campaign-finance law, which prohibits corporate-funded ads that identify a federal candidate before a primary or general election.
The proscription is broadly defined. Section 100.29 of the federal election regulations defines restricted corporate-funded ads as those that identify a candidate by his â??name, nickname, photograph or drawingâ? or make it â??otherwise apparent through an unambiguous reference.â?
Should the six members of the FEC vote to approve the counselâ??s opinion, it could put a serious crimp on Mooreâ??s promotion efforts. The flavor of the movie was encapsulated by a recent review in The Boston Globe as â??the case against George W. Bush, a fat compendium of previously reported crimes, errors, sins, and grievances delivered in the directorâ??s patented tone of vaudevillian social outrage.â?
The FEC ruling may also affect promotion of a slew of other upcoming political documentaries and films, such as â??Uncovered: The Whole Truth About the Iraq War,â? which opens in August, â??The Corporation,â? about democratic institutions being subsumed by the corporate agenda, or â??Silver City,â? a recently finished film by John Sayles that criticizes the Bush administration.
Another film, â??The Hunting of the President,â? which investigates whether Bill Clinton was the victim of a vast conspiracy, could be subject to regulations if it mentions Bush or members of Congress in its ads.
Since the FEC considers the Republican presidential convention scheduled to begin Aug. 30 a national political primary in which Bush is a candidate, Moore and other politically oriented filmmakers could not air any ad mentioning Bush after July 30.
That could make advertising for the film after July difficult since it is all about the Bush administration and what Moore regards as its mishandling of the war on terrorism and the decision to invade Iraq.
After the convention, ads for political films that mention Bush or any other federal candidate would be subject to the restrictions on all corporate communications within 60 days of the Nov. 2 general election.
â??Fahrenheit 9/11â? opens nationally tomorrow.
The filmâ??s distributor, Lions Gate Films, an incorporated organization, would almost certainly pay for its broadcast promotions.
David Bossie, the president of Citizens United, plans to allege that â??Fahrenheit 9/11â? violates federal election law, arguing that â??Moore has publicly indicated his goal is to impact this election season.â?
Bossie had planned to file a complaint with the FEC yesterday but postponed action because his lawyers want to review it at the last minute, said Summer Stitz, a spokeswoman for Bossieâ??s group.
â??I donâ??t think much of Michael Moore or his two-hour political advertisement â?? thatâ??s all it is,â? Bossie said. â??He uses all of these words to make it look like he makes documentaries, but itâ??s the furthest thing from the truth. Documentaries tend to be fact-based.â?
Sarah Greenberg, a spokeswoman for Lions Gate Films who is serving as Mooreâ??s spokeswoman, did not return a call for comment.
The FEC counselâ??s draft advisory opinion responded to a request for guidance from David Hardy, a documentary film producer with the Bill of Rights Educational Foundation. Hardy asked whether he could air broadcast ads that refer to congressional officeholders who appear in his documentary.
At issue in the FECâ??s opinion is whether documentary films qualify for a â??media exemption,â? which allows members of the press to discuss political candidates freely in the days before an election.
In its opinion, the general counsel wrote, â??In McConnell vs. FEC â?¦ (2003) the [Supreme] Court described the media exemption as â??narrowâ?? and drew a distinction between â??corporations that are part of the media industryâ?? as opposed to â??other corporations that are not involved in the regular business of imparting news to the public.â??â?
â??The radio and television commercials that you describe in your request would be electioneering communications,â? the counsel concluded. â??The proposed commercials would refer to at least one presidential candidate. â?¦ They would also be publicly distributed because you intend to pay a radio station and perhaps a television station to air or broadcast your commercials. â?¦ Finally, they would reach 50,000 people within 30 days of a national nominating convention and or the general election.â?
However, one commissioner, Michael Toner, has a different view of what restrictions may be placed on political films.
â??I think thereâ??s evidence that when Congress created the press exemption they intended for it to cover media in all its forms,â? said Toner. â??If a documentary produced by an independent company would be subject to restriction or, equally important, if efforts to promote the documentary would be subject to restriction, I think that is very problematic.â?
The Hill
â??Fahrenheit 9/11â?? ban?
Ads for Mooreâ??s movie could be stopped on July 30
By Alexander Bolton
Michael Moore may be prevented from advertising his controversial new movie, â??Fahrenheit 9/11,â? on television or radio after July 30 if the Federal Election Commission (FEC) today accepts the legal advice of its general counsel.
At the same time, a Republican-allied 527 soft-money group is preparing to file a complaint against Mooreâ??s film with the FEC for violating campaign-finance law.
In a draft advisory opinion placed on the FECâ??s agenda for todayâ??s meeting, the agencyâ??s general counsel states that political documentary filmmakers may not air television or radio ads referring to federal candidates within 30 days of a primary election or 60 days of a general election.
steve finn/Getty images
Michael Moore
The opinion is generated under the new McCain-Feingold campaign-finance law, which prohibits corporate-funded ads that identify a federal candidate before a primary or general election.
The proscription is broadly defined. Section 100.29 of the federal election regulations defines restricted corporate-funded ads as those that identify a candidate by his â??name, nickname, photograph or drawingâ? or make it â??otherwise apparent through an unambiguous reference.â?
Should the six members of the FEC vote to approve the counselâ??s opinion, it could put a serious crimp on Mooreâ??s promotion efforts. The flavor of the movie was encapsulated by a recent review in The Boston Globe as â??the case against George W. Bush, a fat compendium of previously reported crimes, errors, sins, and grievances delivered in the directorâ??s patented tone of vaudevillian social outrage.â?
The FEC ruling may also affect promotion of a slew of other upcoming political documentaries and films, such as â??Uncovered: The Whole Truth About the Iraq War,â? which opens in August, â??The Corporation,â? about democratic institutions being subsumed by the corporate agenda, or â??Silver City,â? a recently finished film by John Sayles that criticizes the Bush administration.
Another film, â??The Hunting of the President,â? which investigates whether Bill Clinton was the victim of a vast conspiracy, could be subject to regulations if it mentions Bush or members of Congress in its ads.
Since the FEC considers the Republican presidential convention scheduled to begin Aug. 30 a national political primary in which Bush is a candidate, Moore and other politically oriented filmmakers could not air any ad mentioning Bush after July 30.
That could make advertising for the film after July difficult since it is all about the Bush administration and what Moore regards as its mishandling of the war on terrorism and the decision to invade Iraq.
After the convention, ads for political films that mention Bush or any other federal candidate would be subject to the restrictions on all corporate communications within 60 days of the Nov. 2 general election.
â??Fahrenheit 9/11â? opens nationally tomorrow.
The filmâ??s distributor, Lions Gate Films, an incorporated organization, would almost certainly pay for its broadcast promotions.
David Bossie, the president of Citizens United, plans to allege that â??Fahrenheit 9/11â? violates federal election law, arguing that â??Moore has publicly indicated his goal is to impact this election season.â?
Bossie had planned to file a complaint with the FEC yesterday but postponed action because his lawyers want to review it at the last minute, said Summer Stitz, a spokeswoman for Bossieâ??s group.
â??I donâ??t think much of Michael Moore or his two-hour political advertisement â?? thatâ??s all it is,â? Bossie said. â??He uses all of these words to make it look like he makes documentaries, but itâ??s the furthest thing from the truth. Documentaries tend to be fact-based.â?
Sarah Greenberg, a spokeswoman for Lions Gate Films who is serving as Mooreâ??s spokeswoman, did not return a call for comment.
The FEC counselâ??s draft advisory opinion responded to a request for guidance from David Hardy, a documentary film producer with the Bill of Rights Educational Foundation. Hardy asked whether he could air broadcast ads that refer to congressional officeholders who appear in his documentary.
At issue in the FECâ??s opinion is whether documentary films qualify for a â??media exemption,â? which allows members of the press to discuss political candidates freely in the days before an election.
In its opinion, the general counsel wrote, â??In McConnell vs. FEC â?¦ (2003) the [Supreme] Court described the media exemption as â??narrowâ?? and drew a distinction between â??corporations that are part of the media industryâ?? as opposed to â??other corporations that are not involved in the regular business of imparting news to the public.â??â?
â??The radio and television commercials that you describe in your request would be electioneering communications,â? the counsel concluded. â??The proposed commercials would refer to at least one presidential candidate. â?¦ They would also be publicly distributed because you intend to pay a radio station and perhaps a television station to air or broadcast your commercials. â?¦ Finally, they would reach 50,000 people within 30 days of a national nominating convention and or the general election.â?
However, one commissioner, Michael Toner, has a different view of what restrictions may be placed on political films.
â??I think thereâ??s evidence that when Congress created the press exemption they intended for it to cover media in all its forms,â? said Toner. â??If a documentary produced by an independent company would be subject to restriction or, equally important, if efforts to promote the documentary would be subject to restriction, I think that is very problematic.â?
The Hill
Please please please let the FEC follow through with this. It won't take effect until the end of July and by that time most people will know what the movie is and its message. Then, Moore can alter the ads that show Bushie's face blacked out, saying "THIS IMAGE BANNED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT".
Like Obi Wan once said, "if you strike me down I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine".
All these silly right-wingers are playing right into his hands. There is no such thing as bad publicity.
Like Obi Wan once said, "if you strike me down I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine".
All these silly right-wingers are playing right into his hands. There is no such thing as bad publicity.
honestly, i think the right wingers are all pissed off because they didn't think of it first… putting together a 100 minute attack ad and having people lineup to spend money to see it. :D
the movie from john sayles could be a good one too
edit - with Chris Cooper it's gonna be ace!
http://www.dickiepilager2004.com/
the movie from john sayles could be a good one too
edit - with Chris Cooper it's gonna be ace!
http://www.dickiepilager2004.com/
Originally posted by redsock:He supports his mein fuhrer no matter what, like the good German, I mean American that he is.
Originally posted by Rob_Gee_a.k.a _Guiny:Way to be open minded guiny.
I wouldn't waste my money or time watching a film by that loser.
Did anyone hear about how the republicans are financially backing Nader so he can drain more votes from the dems? Not that a vote for Nader is a vote for Bush or anything…..
:roll:
I used to feel like being somewhat sympathetic to Bush and not think he was so bad, but after seeing this movie, I can not speak with any support of him at all…Michael Moore sucked me in…Bush is one motherfucker.
Michael Moore at the Oscars 8 months from now as he is accepting the "best documentary" award: "President Kerry, please don't fuck up and force me to make a movie about you too."
you went and saw a movie that has a complete bias thats not based on facts…and that changed your mind. wonderful.
Bush supporters believe someone who deals in lies and half-truths. Why shouldn't his non-supporters have the same opportunity?
Originally posted by manimtired:
you went and saw a movie that has a complete bias thats not based on facts…and that changed your mind. wonderful.
Have you seen the movie? I've been on one too many message boards with folks using nearly the same retorts as you, yet amazingly, they haven't seen the film.
Originally posted by manimtired:
you went and saw a movie that has a complete bias thats not based on facts…and that changed your mind. wonderful.
no, i wouldnt give him my money.
here's an interesting article from the new york times of all places…
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/30/opinion/30KRIS.html
but i have heard many on both sides discredit many of the facts moore uses to drive home his points bashing bush…
here's an interesting article from the new york times of all places…
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/30/opinion/30KRIS.html
but i have heard many on both sides discredit many of the facts moore uses to drive home his points bashing bush…
It figures. :roll:
Originally posted by manimtired:
no, i wouldnt give him my money.
here's an interesting article from the new york times of all places…
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/30/opinion/30KRIS.html
but i have heard many on both sides discredit many of the facts moore uses to drive home his points bashing bush…
that's not an article, it's an editorial…the link even reveals it's directory "Opinion"…of course, each is entitled to theirs…
the biggest take away for me from the movie, and most of Moore's work, is that the working class get screwed royally by leaders like Bush…
the biggest take away for me from the movie, and most of Moore's work, is that the working class get screwed royally by leaders like Bush…
sorry…its an interesting editorial.
and im sure a lot of leftist would run to see a movie about the clinton administration put out by sean hannity.
and im sure a lot of leftist would run to see a movie about the clinton administration put out by sean hannity.
Originally posted by Celeste:actually, working americans were screwed by the framers of the constitution and their contemporaries that decided to give corporations the same rights as individuals without the same responsibilities.
the biggest take away for me from the movie, and most of Moore's work, is that the working class get screwed royally by leaders like Bush…
I am a raging lefty. I thought Moore's work was rather sloppy, but it's the best we've got. Did he need to show the soldier saying he's going to work for the Democratic party? Did we need to take the mother to the white house (knowing she wouldn't get anywhere and setting her up for that scene exactly)? And would any Senator really sign their kid up? Come on.
But it's theatre. It's funny, it's compelling, it makes you question. It's a starting point. Anyone who thinks a film– or for that matter, the news, magazines, newspapers, etc.– is 100% is a nut. But it does make you wonder, and thus it achieves its goal.