Jump to content

Fahrenheit 9/11


Takvah
 Share

Recommended Posts

Yes, you knew it had to happen. Somebody would have to finally comment on this movie.

First of all there is always the debate where it concerns a Michael Moore movie as to whether one should consider it a Documentary or not. I think that because Moore manages to entertain while making these films he is somehow taken less seriously. Also because Moore has taken liberties with material he brings scrutiny on himself (ofcourse most of these detractors also watch Fox News without any problem *snickers*).

There are parts in this film that will make people laugh, will make people cry and will make people angry. I don't want to get political, (afterall this is just a movie thread) but Moore does stir you and does make you think. There is a lot in the movie that cannot be simply explained away as "revenge", "propaganda", etc. Some of this stuff you just can't make up. Some of this stuff has been covered before but perhaps not placed in the context of the whole picture so that you see clearly that there is a pattern of behavior within government that surely makes one arch an eyebrow.

Republicans will say that they are boycotting this movie because it is propaganda. I find that humorous. I went in with a popcorn and a coke and I enjoyed this movie like I would any other. It was not made to sway people that are firmly entrenched in one camp or the other politically. It was made to illustrate for those that maybe haven't been paying attention, some of the absurdity that is epidemic within government. If you hated the Iraq war before you went in, you'll still hate it coming out. Likewise if you loved Bush going in, you'll likely love Bush coming out. I will never understand how that could be possible seeing the evidence laid before you (not just in this film but in the day to day workings of the government) but that's not for me to judge.

For those of you that think this was a campaign ad, John Kerry is not mentioned once. This is all about Bush and what has gone on for the past three or so years.

SPOILER - one thing I never knew and found to be a startling revelation surrounds Fox News calling Florida for Bush and who was on duty there at Fox that night. It makes you go HMMMMMMM. Also, I was also quite interested to hear about Mr. Bath and his relations with Bush and Bush's National Guard service. If you go see this let me know what you think about that.

Well shot. Great entertainment value for a documentary. It was stirring and thought provoking. My wife and I, life long Republicans have not shut up about it since we left the theater. Oh, one more strange thing about this movie. I saw it with a pretty mixed crowd, seniors, middle aged folks, twenty somethings and even teens (it was a packed house with a line waiting to get in for the next show). When the movie ended for the first time ever (I'm 34 I've seen a lot of movies) people APPLAUDED. It was very foreign to me to see such a response.

"Now watch this drive," *nods, smirks and walks to the tee*

[ 06-26-2004, 04:55 PM: Message edited by: Takvah ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm, yea, I've wanted to see this. I've heard some people (who feel the same about Bush as I do) that some of it is very questionable as to its truth though. Most of it has been touched before, and its more or less a wake-up call to all the people who continue to remain ignorant about some of the stuff that Bush has done.

Personally, I don't consider Michael Moore a emblem of the Democratic Party. In fact some of his views on government are a little to liberal for me, and some of his ways about voicing his opinions are disgraceful to the Democratic Party (because people directly associate him to the Democrats every time.)

But yea, I'm gonna probably try to see this movie tomorrow if its in our theatres.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I won't waste my time on such intellectually dishonest garbage.

If it says Michael Moore it isn't worth the money to pay, it isn't worth the loss of time to see, and most of all, it isn't worth the energy to watch.

Propaganda, based on Michael Moores fantasies that his world's reality is based on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw it.

I wasn't planning on voting for George before I saw it. And still don't plan on voting for George come November.

In fact, I'm gonna get even. I'm gonna vote for Clinton. Again!!

ps: Jaguar, can we not turn this thread into a political debate plz? You guys are more than welcome to start a new thread in the politics forum...where you can club each other to death.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright, I finally had the chance to see this movie - and, like Takvah, the rather socially diverse crowd I was with applauded at the end.

Here's the thing - conservatives simply arenÔÇÖt going to see this movie. They just have no interest. So, what kind of audience does that leave you with?

Here's my quick hit: Fahrenheit 9/11 was, by turns, false, deceptive, and uninspiring. I am familiar with pretty much ever trick Moore used in this film - and boy did he use a lot of tricks. It makes me wonder what great film was robbed of a Palme d'Or at Cannes this year.

Yeah, I threw money at Michael Moore - but I don't consider myself qualified to comment on movies that I havenÔÇÖt seen. And this was one movie I was positive I would want to comment on.

The first 30 min or so is spent scurrying as quickly as possible threw a milieu of half-truths, assumptions, and misinterpretations about the Florida debacle through Bush's first year in office. One scene in particular comes to mind: Moore explains where Bush was during the first attack on 9/11... only, he's pushed time out of synch to make Bush's reactions fit the narrative. Moore talks about the first attack as Bush in entering a classroom - leading you to believe that Bush was already informed - the President has a big smile on his face. Then, a man walks up and whispers in the President's ear. That's when Moore starts talking about the second plane (in actuality, that's when President Bush was first informed of the attack) - then Moore explains that the big frown that shows up on Bush's face all of a sudden is because he doesnÔÇÖt know what to do. In reality, Bush had to maintain his composure in front of

people, cameras, and a room full of elementary kids in light of terribly devastating news. And this is just one 10min example in a 2hr movie full of these kinds of shenanigans.

In another place Moore shows himself accusing the President of desertion during his service in the military. This is really just a set up for another point since Moore quickly scurries past this part before you have a chance to realize that what he is calling desertion is just Bush missing a scheduled medical exam. He then goes on to talk about one of Bush's military buddies who became an international banker who eventually ended up in charge of the Saudi Bin Laden fortune. That's the Bin Laden family, by the way, not Osama. And just like the Smith family of southern Ohio, there are a ton of Bin Laden's in the US (who were in terrible danger and had nothing to do with the attack). So how exactly was flying them safely out of the country a bad thing again?

Towards the end of the film Moore preys, in typical liberal fashion, on the emotions of the audience. He shows some soldiers who donÔÇÖt want to be in Iraq, some blood and gore (Hence the R rating), and typical horrors of war. You know what? In war, bad stuff happens. No kidding. Sure maybe our objectives at the beginning of the war were a little imprecise, but the outcome is that millions of Iraqis will have better lives at the end of all this. That's the one thing Moore doesnÔÇÖt ever get around to telling you.

There's just enough humor to keep you entertained as Moore bombards you with points just quickly enough to keep from having to explain any of them. The result is a movie filled with *points* but completely devoid of any substance to back them up... maybe that's because the *evidence* Moore constantly claims to have but never shows doesnÔÇÖt actually exist.

And hey, if you don't want to risk your neck - don't join the bloody army. If there's no jobs in your hometown, get on the bus and leave. There are always other options.

What makes a good movie? One that fulfills it's own ambitions. Fahrenheit 9/11 fails miserably at that. It also fails miserably at being honest, entertaining, or logical.

If there's one thing that this movie does accomplish, it's reminding me that stupidity exists on both ends of the political spectrum - but there's just a little Moore on the left.

2/10

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Supreme Cmdr:

ps: Jaguar, can we not turn this thread into a political debate plz? You guys are more than welcome to start a new thread in the politics forum...where you can club each other to death.

LOL, you got it SC....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uhmmm Scrivener... just so that we're clear. According to President Bush he had heard about the first plane hitting the tower prior to entering that classroom. He had thought at that point and I quote, "There's one terrible pilot". He walked into that classroom knowing that at the very least everyone on that plane was dead accident or not, with a big smile on his face.

You mention the fact that Moore glosses over facts but then you don't bother to mention that both Bush and Bath were grounded at the same time for missing medical examinations. This is during the time when nobody can account for the President's whereabouts and to this day nobody has corroborated anything. Mysteriously enough, just prior to this exam the military had instated drug screenings as part of their medical exams. Hmmm. This of course if rife speculation because well, the President never appeared for that exam. Why? Just coincidence that Bush and Bath have been friends since then? Maybe. Moore is asking you to question motives. Circumstantial evidence convicts many a killer.

You say that the Bin Ladens were in serious danger? Do I give a damn about the Bin Ladens? Would any of us stack 1 million Bin Ladens against the three thousand people that died on that day? This is a country of laws. The Bin Ladens could have been protected here. Why not do it that way? Of course we could have questioned the hijackers families and the Bin Ladens in Saudi Arabia too (we have enough people there) but we weren't allowed to. Hmmm.

Yes war sucks and of course Moore used footage of the carnage to stir emotion. It was no less cheap than Bush hiring actors to portray firefighters carrying a body out of the Trade Centers for a campaign ad. What there wasn't enough stock footage? You also glossed over the real crux of Moore's attack which is that nothing that we believed we were going in for actually materialized. The people put into power in Afghanistan were oil shills. Why not discuss that too Scrivener, I mean it is proven fact is it not?

I don't mind people critiquing a movie but when their criticism is based on the lies and then none of the truths are included I have to respond. Propaganda is a two way street... just ask the poor shmucks that won't be able to reach into a cooler this weekend without wincing. I stay informed so this was a rehash and I'm gonna take a stab at it and say you're a conservative that saw this movie. There are a ton of us... me included.

My apologies SC... I just had to respond to the critique, I didn't respond to the other politicized rhetoric from those that did not see the film.

*Laughs*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, let's play this game on your ground. I'm good at that...

quote:

He had thought at that point and I quote, "There's one terrible pilot". He walked into that classroom knowing that at the very least everyone on that plane was dead accident or not, with a big smile on his face.

So when the first plane hit it didn't sound like terrorism. It sounded like a really stupid accident. Just another day on the tely. Makes sense. A second plane? OK... maybe not so much an accident any more. There's something seriously wrong with this picture. Then, the towers collapsed on top of all that. But at the first, still just an unfortunate accident that would require a confolense speach later. Should Bush have gone running off if he heard a bus full of schoolchildren drove off a cliff in Kentucky? On a side point, The Guardian is about as trustworthy as the Time's Al Graib porn photos.

quote:

...you don't bother to mention that both Bush and Bath were grounded at the same time for missing medical examinations... Mysteriously enough, just prior to this exam the military had instated drug screenings as part of their medical exams. Hmmm.

So? And what if Bush and Bath snuck off to smoke some weed? Do you remember the 60s and 70s? I'd be surprised if he wasn't holed up somewhere with a joint. Shoot... maybe he didn't even inhale? I don't care. Didn't care when it was Billy Boy in office. What's the point? It dosnt matter.

quote:

Yes war sucks and of course Moore used footage of the carnage to stir emotion. It was no less cheap than Bush hiring actors to portray firefighters carrying a body out of the Trade Centers for a campaign ad. What there wasn't enough stock footage?

So Bush should've used stock footage? Maybe. Woulda been more cost effective for sure. But the point of those ads wasn't to drive the audience into a blind senseless rage - which is what Moore tries to do. Anger without reason.

quote:

You also glossed over the real crux of Moore's attack which is that nothing that we believed we were going in for actually materialized. The people put into power in Afghanistan were oil shills. Why not discuss that too Scrivener, I mean it is proven fact is it not?

Ok, here's the discussion... they were successfull *local* buisnessmen. Maybe we should have hired a talent agency to find the next Afghan government? The FACT is that they were the best candidates for the job. Since we're on this topic lets touch on Halliburton, since it supports the point I'm making. If you were to choose someone to do a very important job - who would you trust most? A company with whom you are very familiar or another company you have no experience with? The one thing I do agree with is what these people are being paid (Bus driver being paid $10k a month)- but what do you think happens locally? When someone is contracted to do road work here in Southern California, the same thing happens. Don't like that either, but its a simple reality in a capitalist society.

quote:

I don't mind people critiquing a movie but when their criticism is based on the lies and then none of the truths are included I have to respond.

My criticism is no more based on lies than your's, or Moores, or Bush's, or Limbaughs, or Dan Rather's. You may think your speaking true as much as I do - and we both think the other misguided. However, that dosn't make F9/11 any less deceptive. If there was a third political option, that's where I'd be (I consider myself Libertarian, actually)-but right now we're controlled by bickering idiots on both the far left AND the far right. If this movie had been about Gore, I still would've ripped it a new one.

But here's the thing: people like Michael Moore love to make much ado about nothing, making people think normal buisness practice is some kind of vast conspiracy. The same thing happened to Clinton with the Monica Lewinsky scandal. Just like then, I find myself reciting the same old mantra: "So what?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Caution....Jaguar does NOT want you to see this movie... please wear your flotation device when viewing , because the communist bull**** that you will experience may become unbearable. On the other hand, I'm proud of my boy Michael. He did a fantastic job. When I saw Bowling for Columbine I thought...this is the best he's gonna do. BOY was I WRONG.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is hilarious that conservatives cant even admit this was a well made and effective film by a talented filmmaker. People more talented and qualified voted this the best film at the most prestigious film fest in the world and I should give a shit some yokel some where thinks it bad simply because of its point of view?

Look honestly I dont agree with a damn thing William F Buckley says but I read him because he's a gifted writer and orator. Same for PJ O'Rourke whos views are way different than mine but is a quick wit and damned amusing. As a film buff I sat through Birth of a Nation which not only was the most racist polemic ever put on film, but also lead directly to lynchings of blacks in cities it was shown. Only the most uninitiated would shrug off the technical brilliance and narrative power of Griffiths work regardless of the stance it took.

I guess that is too much to ask of the "New right" though, which is really quite sad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Race Bannon IV:

I think it is hilarious that conservatives cant even admit this was a well made and effective film by a talented filmmaker. People more talented and qualified voted this the best film at the most prestigious film fest in the world and I should give a shit some yokel some where thinks it bad simply because of its point of view?

Look honestly I dont agree with a damn thing William F Buckley says but I read him because he's a gifted writer and orator. Same for PJ O'Rourke whos views are way different than mine but is a quick wit and damned amusing. As a film buff I sat through Birth of a Nation which not only was the most racist polemic ever put on film, but also lead directly to lynchings of blacks in cities it was shown. Only the most uninitiated would shrug off the technical brilliance and narrative power of Griffiths work regardless of the stance it took.

I guess that is too much to ask of the "New right" though, which is really quite sad.

Well, let's see, if he called it an opinion film, or perhaps a fictional elaboration, or perhaps an exageration, I might have some patience for it, but he calls it a Documentary.

So far even the left wing papers are tearing it a new one as far as it's socalled "facts" are concerned.

The movie is full of lies, misrepresentations, outright fabrications, it is basicallyt a piece of fiction. If it were ACTUALLY called that, instead of a Documentary by an OBJECTIVE artist, again, I might even find it amusing.

The fact is that a lot of people are going into this movie and believing that since it is a "documentary" that it must be the truth, because documentaries are well researched and the facts are checked. When the fact of the matter is, it is anything BUT a documentary.

It may be a BRILLIANT piece of film making, it might be the next best thing to "the ten commandments" or "Gone with the Wind", but when it claims to be a documentary, any and all credibility for Michael Moore or his filmaking is gone, especially when Left wing fact checkers are having a field day tearing it into itsy bitsy shreds.

Oh, and the film festival was in FRANCE, ANY film that bashed Bush and the United States would have won an award. Can we get real here?

It could have been in 35mm, black and white, grainy as hell and the worst editing you had ever seen, and the musical score could have been the frequency of hydrogen, and it would have won an award at that festival.

Here's Just one example. This is from Slate.com, not exactly what you'd call right wing, and Christopher Hitchins is NOT what you would call a conservative.

This guy rips into this movie and Michael Moore like nothing I have yet seen. Read the WHOLE article, it is long, but WELL worth the read.

Brilliant, yeah, RIGHT!!!!

[ 06-30-2004, 02:09 AM: Message edited by: Jaguar ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm gonna mosey on down here and put a gate in this fence. It is far more gratifying to bash one another when it's done up close and eye to eye, instead of swinging from behind the perceived safety of the fence.

All in all we're all just bricks in the wall.

Anyone want another soda?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CHRISTOPHER HITCHENS?!

CHRISTOPHER HITCHENS?!

BUAHAHAH! Oh this is like that time you brought up some inane internet fabrication as fact and then I checked urban myths on the net and the very thing you posted was there... *laughs*

OK, Michael Moore is I suppose, in great company because the only other person Hitchens has savaged to such a degree was MOTHER THERESA! Hitchens also savages Clinton regularly while defending Henry Kissinger. Now when you savage Clinton (who SURELY DESERVES IT) and wash the feet *snickers* of Henry Kissinger, I think that you've painted yourself firmly into one political corner Jaguar. Hitchens is not some lefty gone rogue against Michael Moore. Your assertions that this is the case is as dishonest as what you proclaim Moore has done. Your fact checking is suspect Jag. As for Hitchens, let's face it he is a crafty opportunist. He is a Devil's advocate type of personality that attacks what is currently popular to get his name out there. I don't find anything wrong with this personally, the same could be said about Moore... but you don't counter what you proclaim to be propaganda with MORE propaganda. Hitchens casually ignores the truths in the movie applying to it a standard that he himself fails to meet.

Peace

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Takvah:

When the movie ended for the first time ever (I'm 34 I've seen a lot of movies) people APPLAUDED. It was very foreign to me to see such a response.

At the end of Rocky 4, when Rocky beat the russian, the crowd in the theater I was in gave the movie a standing ovation and chanted "USA! USA! USA!" throughout the credits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hehe, i thought it was good,

kinda funny

oh btw:

im coming up on my 18th birthday and as a american living abroad, in canada, what do I do to sign up for the draft? theres a american consouate in vancouver, so i just show up with my passport?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Hellbinder[CE]

How could you guys or anyone else CLAP etc at the end of a movie that is nothing but one outright LIE after the next?

This movie is not about entertainment, its not a story. Its a petty pack of lies from a bitter little man.

I dont care wether you are liberal, conservative or whatever.. Stand for TRUTH. Or at least Honest representations of people and events. Not total sespool garbage like this.

Its flatly shamefull and shows jut how bad "sheeple" of today are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

I think it is hilarious that conservatives cant even admit this was a well made and effective film by a talented filmmaker.

Michael Moore is about as talented as a dead rat at the bottom of a well during a snowstorm during the apocalypse. He has not made a single film that effectively, stylistically, or qualitatively could be called anything more than diversionary. Touching the Void was brilliant - Step into Liquid was brilliant - Farenheit 9/11, Bowling for Columbine, The Big Lie, these films were about as good as an episode of the Crocodile Hunter. The truth is, the only reason Moore's films win anything is because the film festival circuit is owned by liberals. Now for the most part, that's a good thing (can you imagine conservative film festival judges? *shudders* Benji: The Resurrection wins the Palme d'Or?) - but they're also suckers for policially charged anti-conservative filmaking. The film's not good, brilliant, factual, or interesting. It's ultra-liberal, and that's the ONLY reason it's won anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...