Hollywood abuzz about 'Fahrenheit 9/11'
Find a Conversation
Hollywood abuzz about 'Fahrenheit 9/11'
| Sun, 06-13-2004 - 2:23pm |
"...and this country is really in the mood for somebody to tell ’em what they should think, what to do.â€
That's exactly what democrats want--to tell the American people what we should think and what we should do. Unbelievable, he just gave away their secret! I'm glad I can think for myself, thank you.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5050832/
And how about the celebrity turnout for the premiere? Not a real shocker to see Martin Sheen, Demi Moore, Drew Barrymoore, et al excited to be there. And how about Camryn Manheim who was also there, quoted, "A lot of us look to Michael Moore to uncover the real truth." ROFL.
*sigh* These people...


Pages
Okay.....let me know what you think, so I can wait for the "freebie" on cable.
Michael Isikoff was on Scarborough County last night, again blasting the movie for this exact thing, so I think that this is speaking for itself, as I don't see Mr. Moore slapping a libel suit against Isikoff or Newsweek as he threatened to do with any lies about his film.
Why is it okay to lie to the American public under the guise of "factual news conferences and press releases"? The biggest work of fiction of all has been the compost spouted by Bush Administration over the last 4 years.
Repetition gets so-o-o-o boring:
http://messageboards.ivillage.com/n/mb/message.asp?webtag=iv-elpoliticsto&msg=3046.37
http://messageboards.ivillage.com/n/mb/message.asp?webtag=iv-elpoliticsto&msg=3046.46
C
Here is a read for you about Moore's notorious "misinterpretations" he passes off as "documentaries" it has been posted before along with other articles but I bet yo didn't read those either? You probably will just agree with Moore's POV solely because it supports your dislike for Bush regardless if they are based on fabrication and misinterpretations.
Never said it was. But there you're talking about politicians, and lying is second nature to them. There's a little saying along those lines, forget the source but it's quite apt... When a dog urinates on a fire hydrant, it isn't committing vandalism, it's just being a dog. A politician lying amounts to the same thing to my mind.
~mark~
If Moore just wants to take shots at Bush, fine, no problem. If he feels it necessary to fabricate, misrepresent and lie, no problem. But DON'T do it in what he is claiming (and has won awards for) as "documentary". It's plainly not.
~mark~
That would be incorrect. If it WAS the truth, WAS factual, that would be fine whether I like the movie or not. But just like in "Roger and Me" and to a greater degree in "Bowling for Columbine", it's not "factual". Moore lies, fabricates, and unappologetically misrepresents the "facts", all in the publicized guise of "documentary".
Being "close to the truth" isn't good enough for a "documentary", where objective facts are supposed to be the stock in trade. That isn't the case in Moore movies, even those which are supposed to be documentaries.
~mark~
Pages