Fake TV Documentary 'Death of a President' Praised, Panned - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Bittertalker · 09-01-2006, 05:17 PM

Reading the news on the Internet Movie Database as I do every weekday I came across an interesting article, which I feel is easily and interesting as topic for discussion. For ease I decided just to cut and paste the article, but it can be found at this address, Studio Briefing

"A controversial British film titled Death of a President, which takes place in the not-too-distant future and revolves around the assassination of President Bush in 2007 is due to have its world premiere at the Toronto Film Festival on Sept. 10, the film's producers, Britain's Channel 4, announced Thursday. The film, which resembles an actual documentary, had previously been listed by the festival as '"D.O.A.P.". Gretchen Essell, spokeswoman for the Republican Party in Texas, told the British wire service Press Association, "I cannot support a video that would dramatize the assassination of our president, real or imagined. ... I find this shocking, I find it disturbing. I don't know if there are many people in America who would want to watch something like that." But Peter Dale, head of Channel 4's digital channel More4, which plans to air the film on Oct. 9, said: "It's a pointed political examination of what the War on Terror did to the American body politic. ... It's not sensationalist or simplistic but a very thought-provoking, powerful drama. I hope people will see that the intention behind it is good.' "

highthief · 09-01-2006, 05:25 PM

I know, I know, there will be outrage. But really, I could care less. Where's the outrage when San Francisco get wrecked in the disaster movie of the week, or when Steven Seagal aces some thinly disguised stand in for whatever world leader is on America's shit list this week?

Get over it, if you haven't already.

djtestudo · 09-01-2006, 06:45 PM

How many presidents have the producers of "24" killed?

Personally, I think this is just British revenge for "King Ralph".

Willravel · 09-01-2006, 07:03 PM

WHERE CAN I SEE IT?!

ASU2003 · 09-01-2006, 08:26 PM

Not in the United States. It made the front page of Yahoo today or CNN and they had a video with some still shots. Interesting concept, but it's a good way to get the secret service to watch you.

Pacifier · 09-01-2006, 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djtestudo

Personally, I think this is just British revenge for "King Ralph".

But one movie is not enough for that atrocity.

Elphaba · 09-02-2006, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willravel

WHERE CAN I SEE IT?!

It will be shown first at the Toronto Film Festival.

Charlatan · 09-02-2006, 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by highthief

I know, I know, there will be outrage. But really, I could care less. Where's the outrage when San Francisco get wrecked in the disaster movie of the week, or when Steven Seagal aces some thinly disguised stand in for whatever world leader is on America's shit list this week?

Get over it, if you haven't already.

Come to Singapore... there is plenty of outrage in the bureaucracy. The film censors here love to get upset about things like this.

For example, Zoolander (the goofy Ben Stiller film) was banned here for reasons of political sensitivity. It seems the film's plot revolved around the plot to assasinate a fictional Malaysian president.

Ustwo · 09-02-2006, 04:11 PM

Its about free publicity.

Its close to viral marketing. Make a so so film, include something that will upset some people or seem shocking, let the talking heads and water cooler do the advertizing for you.

Willravel · 09-02-2006, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Its about free publicity.

Its close to viral marketing. Make a so so film, include something that will upset some people or seem shocking, let the talking heads and water cooler do the advertizing for you.

Oh, you've seen it! How was it? Where did you see it?

Ustwo · 09-02-2006, 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willravel

Oh, you've seen it! How was it? Where did you see it?

Yes I saw it, I was sitting with the real killers from the WTC, they thought it was a hoot and told me to say hi.

Charlatan · 09-02-2006, 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Its about free publicity.

Its close to viral marketing. Make a so so film, include something that will upset some people or seem shocking, let the talking heads and water cooler do the advertizing for you.

I can assure you that Channel Four (the producers of the film) do not need to make a film to get publicity. They have a large audience of people who will gladly tune in... an audience that for which the Toronto Film Festival appearence has no bearing really.

The marketing of this film, as little to do with the making of this film.

Willravel · 09-02-2006, 09:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Yes I saw it, I was sitting with the real killers from the WTC, they thought it was a hoot and told me to say hi.

I was just surprised how you were able to give the movie a so-so review despite the fact that basically no one has seen it yet. I guess it was a simple matter of a stereotypical assumption from a conservative. My mistake.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Yes I saw it, I was sitting with the real killers from the WTC, they thought it was a hoot and told me to say hi.

I thought because you were appealing to everyone to be civil in the mass media thread that you were going to start showing people the same respect that you are asking of them. I guess that's two mistakes.

Every time you start to earn my respect, you blow it. Eventually I will go the way of Host and roachboy and simply stop trying.

Ustwo · 09-03-2006, 08:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charlatan

I can assure you that Channel Four (the producers of the film) do not need to make a film to get publicity. They have a large audience of people who will gladly tune in... an audience that for which the Toronto Film Festival appearence has no bearing really.

The marketing of this film, as little to do with the making of this film.

Ah yes the great channel 4. I mean why would anyone be looking for world wide publicity when you have the marketing, loyal audience, and power of channel 4!

Charlatan · 09-03-2006, 02:29 PM

Ustwo, I need not reply as your sarcasm belittles yourself and displays your ignorance for all to see.

lindalove · 09-05-2006, 01:13 PM

I don't know what to think of it. On the one hand, I'm all about creativity, storytelling as a way to examine issues, freedom of speech, etc., but on the other hand... My knee jerk reaction is that it's just not right- a story about the death of someone real who's alive. I'm not sure whether that reaction is based in logic though, or if it's just visceral.

ETA: Just out of curiosity, why would Bush attend an anti-war rally? That almost sounds satirical. It would make the film less believable, I guess, detracting from the assumed inappropriateness of assasinating a sitting prez.

lindalove · 09-13-2006, 03:52 PM

Here's part of the video:

http://us.video.aol.com/video.index....pmmsid=1715489

Elphaba · 09-13-2006, 04:41 PM

Oh gawd. This seems so wrong to me. It reminded me of the assassination of the Kennedy brothers, MLK, the attempted assassinations of Wallace and Reagan. Too friggin' much for me to view this film in any positive or useful way. Blood pouring from Bush's chest? Just lurid sensationalism as far as I'm concerned.

politicophile · 09-13-2006, 05:28 PM

Certainly not very tasteful. I would protect it as an expression of free speech, but this is more borderline than most other cases.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Willravel

WHERE CAN I SEE IT?!

A peculiar response, I must say. The internet is a funny place when it comes to interpreting people's tone, so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. I interpret the use of all caps and the exclamation mark after the comma to denote excitement. Are you extremely excited to see a film about George Bush getting assassinated?

Ustwo · 09-13-2006, 07:08 PM

As expected its a left wing crap fest.

You see the president is killed but an innocent musslim man is accused when he was really killed by the greaving parent black soldier killed in Iraq.

Gee I'm so shocked.

Typical left wing wishfull drivel.

Oh and it was picked up by a US company to show in the US. Guess maybe the great channel 4 wanted more money after all.

Seaver · 09-13-2006, 07:15 PM

The situation holds promise if done correctly. One can make it into what kind of reaction the government's would have to their leader being assasinated in a time of war. Done in such a way it could be very intelligent and politically non-aligned.

I doubt it will be so, and if Ustwo is correct in the plotline it appears to follow my feelings.

Jinn · 09-13-2006, 07:23 PM

Quote:

Are you extremely excited to see a film about George Bush getting assassinated?

I don't know about him, but I certainly am.

Elphaba · 09-13-2006, 10:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

As expected its a left wing crap fest.

You see the president is killed but an innocent musslim man is accused when he was really killed by the greaving parent black soldier killed in Iraq.

Gee I'm so shocked.

Typical left wing wishfull drivel.

Oh and it was picked up by a US company to show in the US. Guess maybe the great channel 4 wanted more money after all.

How typical of you u2. You have accused me of being one of the "looney left" but you ignore my disgust regarding this film. You can always be counted on for the "Johnnie One Note" response, which requires no thinking at all.

shakran · 09-14-2006, 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elphaba

How typical of you u2. You have accused me of being one of the "looney left" but you ignore my disgust regarding this film. You can always be counted on for the "Johnnie One Note" response, which requires no thinking at all.

When you're wrong, and you have no actual fact-based methods to convince people that you're correct, one liner talking points are your only recourse.

Stompy · 09-15-2006, 06:06 PM

I'll watch it... hoping... that one day dreams come true.

Ustwo · 09-15-2006, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stompy

I'll watch it... hoping... that one day dreams come true.

Thank you for proving my point

Willravel · 09-15-2006, 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by politicophile

A peculiar response, I must say. The internet is a funny place when it comes to interpreting people's tone, so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. I interpret the use of all caps and the exclamation mark after the comma to denote excitement. Are you extremely excited to see a film about George Bush getting assassinated?

First and foremost I love thrilling and challenging entertainment. I love watching movies that engage me and are able to keep me interested. Recently, movies have kinda sucked in that area. I'm excited to see a movie not driven by corporate interests and focus groups filled with boring stupid people. Sometimes It's fun to see simple entertaining movies like Crank or Superman. It's good to relax. But it's when I watch films like Schindler's List and Constant Gardner, I can actually think. I miss that. A movie about the assasination of a current world leader is really challenging.

I do not want to see George W. Bush dead. I'd like to see him retire or maybe be heald responsible for what he's done in a court, but wishing someone death is inexcusable. I hope people in here are able to seperate distrust and dislike from murderous hatred.

Charlatan · 09-15-2006, 06:55 PM

Exactly will...

It isn't a matter of whether you agree with the premise or the conclusion of the film (though I would argue you can't really do much than be outraged at the premise if you haven't seen the film). What matters is that this is a film that is attempting to grapple with a contemporary issue.

For what I can tell, not having seen the film, the actual assination is context rather than the meat of the film. Get over it. They are making a film that is attempting to explore the world that the current administraion has created. They are suggesting a certain outcome based on what they believe would happen given these circumstances.

It is a fictional film. Get over yourselves. Fictional films are made all the time that deal with contemporary figures. This one is just ballsy enough (maybe foolish enough) to show the assination of a current head of state. To me, it suggests more immediacy to the plot.

Is it "leftist"... perhaps (I haven't seen the film). Does this offend me anymore than if it were "rightist"? Not really. IT'S FICTION.

Get over yourselves.

Ustwo · 09-15-2006, 07:00 PM

I have to wonder if film makers will have the balls to make a movie showing the face of modern Islam...

These fine young men are protesting the pope quoting a long dead emperor. I wonder if they know they are proving the dead mans point with their reactions?

More interestingly its ok for film makers to say, assinate a current US president and turn it political, but lets not be insensative to the culture causing all the drama lately. You would swear they would cut your head off or something for calling them into question.

The enemies of western civilization are on the march again, and yet it is best to fight amoungst ourselves, and feel guilty over what we have achieved.

dc_dux · 09-15-2006, 07:20 PM

Great pic, Ustwo

It reminded me of a pic of Randall Terry at a Terri Schiavo rally last year, shaking his fists and calling for retribution against godless judges and politicians.

But I would not presume suggest that he is the face of modern Christianity.

Once again, you take the most extreme and try to pass it off as representing something broader that it is.

Charlatan · 09-15-2006, 07:27 PM

I am sure there are filmmakers who will take on this subject. Why not?

The question remains... is there a market it for it?

Is there a demand for that film? What does it add and what does it subtract from the debate? Does it say anything new? Who is the intended market?

The west likes to talk about it's leadership. It loves to push the limits of "freedom of expression". This includes making films like like "Death of a President", films about 9/11, "The Day After", etc. We speak to ourselves with a multitude of voices.

I support this. I don't expect to agree with or like everything that is made.

That's the thing about people having different opinions about the truth or reality. It's inturpretation by an artist is always going to be subject to those who don't get understand it, don't like it, don't tolerate a different point of view.

Bring on the film that explores Islam. It would be a welcome addition. Chances are it has already been made and languishes in a producer's collection unable to find an audience due to the timidity of some programmer or distributor. Now that I think about it, portions of Syrianna apply to this (of course, it would be seen as too anti-American by many here despite the fact that it offers a much more complex approach than simple anti-Americanism).

The world of Islam has a different cultural base. I do not expect them to match us film for film, book for book.

Willravel · 09-15-2006, 08:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

Once again, you take the most extreme and try to pass it off as representing something broader that it is.

Quoted for tremendous truth. The "There are hundreds of millions of Muslims in the world, and they are all terrorist extreemists" thing is so overdone and is so blatently wrong that it gives me heart burn.

I loved Paradise Now. It portreyed the hidden side of Palestinian suicide bombers. Brilliant film making.

dc_dux · 09-16-2006, 04:38 AM

To take this thread a little off topic, re: the face of Islam.

I am not an apologist for Islam extremists. It is a deadly serious issue that the vast majority of the more than 1 billion good and decent practicing muslims must address, but consider the fact that Islam is 600 years younger than Christianity as a religion.

And what were good Christians doing in the 15th century? I give you the Spanish Inquisition and persecution of non-Christians throughout Europe, where tens of thousands of Jews and other "heretics" were tortured and murdered. This follows on the heels of two centuries of the crusades where thousands of Muslims were slaughtered in the Holy Land and continued in the New World through the 17th century with witch burnings.

Think carefully before considering yourself "holier than thou" for your history is not one without its own atrocities. (for the record, I am Jewish).

Seaver · 09-16-2006, 07:09 AM

Quote:

Now that I think about it, portions of Syrianna apply to this (of course, it would be seen as too anti-American by many here despite the fact that it offers a much more complex approach than simple anti-Americanism).

As my Palestinian-Born Middle Eastern Studies teacher put it, "Syriana makes Star Wars look like a true historical documentary."

Mojo_PeiPei · 09-16-2006, 10:18 AM

I like that people still use and more specifically misrepresent the MYTH of the Spanish Inquistion, or "Black Legend", as fact of Christian (Catholic) cruelity, and a seeming justification, or apologist position for the behavior of muslims.

The Black Legend.
http://www.catholic.net/RCC/Periodic.../article4.html

Quote:

"The Myth of the Spanish Inquisition," a 1994 BBC/A&E production, will re-air on the History Channel this December 3 at 10 p.m. It is a definite must-see for anyone who wishes to know how historians now evaluate the Spanish Inquisition since the opening of an investigation into the Inquisition's archives. The special includes commentary from historians whose studies verify that the tale of the darkest hour of the Church was greatly fabricated.

In its brief sixty-minute presentation, "The Myth of the Spanish Inquisition" provides only an overview of the origins and debunking of the myths of torture and genocide. The documentary definitely succeeds in leaving the viewer hungry to know more. The long-held beliefs of the audience are sufficiently weakened by the testimony of experts and the expose of the making of the myth.

The Inquisition began in 1480. Spain was beginning a historic reunification of Aragon and Castile. The marriage of Ferdinand of Aragon and Isabella of Castile created a unified Hispania not seen since Roman times. Afraid that laws commanding the exile or conversion of Jews were thwarted by conversos, i.e. synagogue-going "Catholics," Ferdinand and Isabella commissioned an investigation or Inquisition. They began the Inquisition hoping that religious unity would foster political unity, and other heads of state heralded Spain's labors for the advent of a unified Christendom. The documentary clearly and boldly narrates the historical context, which intimates that the Spanish were not acting odd by their contemporary standards.

The Inquisition Myth, which Spaniards call "The Black Legend," did not arise in 1480. It began almost 100 years later, and exactly one year after the Protestant defeat at the Battle of Mühlberg at the hands of Ferdinand's grandson, the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V. In 1567 a fierce propaganda campaign began with the publication of a Protestant leaflet penned by a supposed Inquisition victim named Montanus. This character (Protestant of course) painted Spaniards as barbarians who ravished women and sodomized young boys. The propagandists soon created "hooded fiends" who tortured their victims in horrible devices like the knife-filled Iron Maiden (which never was used in Spain). The BBC/A&E special plainly states a reason for the war of words: the Protestants fought with words because they could not win on the battlefield.

The Inquisition had a secular character, although the crime was heresy. Inquisitors did not have to be clerics, but they did have to be lawyers. The investigation was rule-based and carefully kept in check. And most significantly, historians have declared fraudulent a supposed Inquisition document claiming the genocide of millions of heretics.

What is documented is that 3000 to 5000 people died during the Inquisition's 350 year history. Also documented are the "Acts of Faith," public sentencings of heretics in town squares. But the grand myth of thought control by sinister fiends has been debunked by the archival evidence. The inquisitors enjoyed a powerful position in the towns, but it was one constantly jostled by other power brokers. In the outlying areas, they were understaffed - in those days it was nearly impossible for 1 or 2 inquisitors to cover the thousand-mile territory allotted to each team. In the outlying areas no one cared and no one spoke to them. As the program documents, the 3,000 to 5,000 documented executions of the Inquisition pale in comparison to the 150,000 documented witch burnings elsewhere in Europe over the same centuries.

The approach is purely historical, and therefore does not delve into ecclesial issues surrounding religious freedom. But perhaps this is proper. Because the crime was heresy, the Church is implicated, but the facts show it was a secular event.

One facet of the Black Legend that evaporates under scrutiny in this film is the rumor that Philip II, son of Charles V, killed his son Don Carlos on the advisement of the aging blind Grand Inquisitor. But without a shred of evidence, the legend of Don Carlos has been enshrined in a glorious opera by Verdi.

The special may be disturbing to young children. There are scenes of poor souls burning at the stake, and close-ups of the alleged torture devices. Scenes depicting witches consorting with pot-bellied devils are especially grotesque. For kids, this is the stuff of nightmares.

Discrediting the Black Legend brings up the sticky subject of revisionism. Re-investigating history is only invalid if it puts an agenda ahead of reality. The experts - once true believers in the Inquisition myth - were not out to do a feminist canonization of Isabella or claim that Tomas de Torquemada was a Marxist. Henry Kamen of the Higher Council for Scientific Research in Barcelona said on camera that researching the Inquisition's archives "demolished the previous image all of us (historians) had."

And the future of the Black Legend? For many it may continue to hold more weight than reality. There is the emotional appeal against the Church. The dissenters of today may easily imagine Torquemada's beady eyes as a metaphor of the Church's "dictatorial, controlling, damning" pronouncements. The myth is also the easiest endorsement of the secular state: "de-faith" the state and de-criminalize heresy. Who will be the revisionists in this case? Will the many follow Montanas' lead in rewriting history?

Our 20th century crisis of man playing God - usurping power over conception, life, and death - leaves us with no alternative but to qualify our demythologization of the Inquisition with a reminder: 3,000 to 5,000 victims are 3,000 to 5,000 too many.

Oh yeah and DC, the Crusades were all fought at the heels of Dogma and Catholic intolerance, right? It was more a problem of religion, then say, Geopolitics?

Willravel · 09-16-2006, 10:43 AM

There are extreemists of every religion, but that has little to do witha movie about the president being assasinated. In the movie, I think he is killed by an American, btw.

Stompy · 09-16-2006, 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Thank you for proving my point

What point?

Out of all the posts in this thread, I do have to say you sound quite brainwashed.

That's pretty creepy.

Charlatan · 09-16-2006, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seaver

As my Palestinian-Born Middle Eastern Studies teacher put it, "Syriana makes Star Wars look like a true historical documentary."

Well duh...

It's a fictional film. It isn't a documentary.

It is why I said, "portions" and all I was looking for was an example that deals with the contemporary. I think the storyline about the suicide bomber is a very interesting story that deals with the recruitment and deployment of suicide bombers.

Cynthetiq · 09-16-2006, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seaver

As my Palestinian-Born Middle Eastern Studies teacher put it, "Syriana makes Star Wars look like a true historical documentary."

well it did happen "a long long time ago in a galaxy far far away...."

host · 09-16-2006, 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stompy

What point?

Out of all the posts in this thread, I do have to say you sound quite brainwashed.

That's pretty creepy.

Ya think?

Quote:

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Pol...ophy/HL380.cfm

,,,,,,,,Indeed, I will go so far as to warrant that 90 percent of the stories in both the electronic and print media which deal with the political bias in the industry have their origins in the <a href="http://www.mrc.org">Media Research Center.</a>.......

..........Imagine, if you will, a future wherein the media willfully support the foreign policy objectives of the United States. A time when the left can no longer rely on the media to promote its socialist agenda to the public. A time when someone, somewhere in the media can be counted on to extol the virtues of morality without qualifications. When Betty Friedan no longer qualifies for "Person of the Week" honors. When Ronald Reagan is cited not as the "Man of the Year," but the "Man of the Century."

The news and entertainment media will continue to effect the cultural health of America. If we succeed in our mission to restore political balance to this institution, future generations win benefit and thank us. It's worth fighting for, now.

L. Brent Bozell, III is Chairman of the Media Research Center in Alexandria, Virginia.

He spoke on January 21, 1992 at The Heritage Foundation in the Resource Bank series of lectures featuring leaders of conservative education and public policy organizations.

Quote:

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/B...hristians_show
NBC's "crazy christians" show
By Brent Bozell III
Friday, September 15, 2006

...........Two major characters fight over how their romance broke up when the woman sang hymns on "The 700 Club." Again, Sorkin aims low, insisting Pat Robertson is a vicious racist. "You put on a dress and sang for a bigot." When the woman replies that the faithful audience of the show inspires her, he cracks, "Throw in the Halloween costumes and you got yourself a Klan rally."

Sorkin actually pushed a similar plot for the first episode of "The West Wing," in which lovable liberal President Josiah Bartlet instructed a clueless, caricatured Christian evangelist who didn't know the order of the Ten Commandments and then unloaded a long sermon on vicious Christian pro-lifers threatening his 12-year-old granddaughter. He told the conservative Christians to get their fat (bottoms) out of his White House.

Maybe cursing out the Christians is his show-opening good luck charm.

While Sorkin has an obvious problem with Christianity, it's actually broader than that. He thinks religion in general is bunk. In 2002, he told a crowd at the Sinai Temple in Los Angeles that "I was turned off on religion." The rabbi interviewing him asked him if he believed in God. He said he viewed the wide array of religions as "many fairytales" that "seem hardly to be doing what they intended." For Sorkin, spirituality was "a meditative thing that has to do with helping others and not waiting for it to come from a divine source."

What this means is Sorkin -- and all the Sorkins in Hollywood -- are probably never going to write a daring, potentially offensive script with the concept of mocking "crazy atheists." Instead, in our upside-down popular culture, the unbeliever is the sacred cow.

Quote:

From the New York Times, Oct. 30, 1980

Christians For Reagan, a right-wing religious lobby organized to capture the fundamentalist vote for the Republican candidate, announced yesterday that it plans to air a series of television advertisements attacking President Carter for his support of homosexual rights. Gary Jarmin, national director of the lobby, said the ads would run in several key Southern states and in southern Ohio, ''where there exists a large concentration of fundamental, evangelical Christian voters.'' Mr. Jarmin said the group decided to conduct this sort of campaign for evangelicals because ''if there's any reason at all they should oppose Carter, this is it.'' The ads stem from a position paper submitted by Mr. Carter and adopted into the Democratic National Platform that says: ''We must affirm the dignity of all people and ... protect all groups from discrimination based on race, color, religion, national

Quote:

ROBERTS, STEVEN V.
Dateline: OKLAHOMA CITY, Sept. 26
Section: D
Publication title: New York Times. (Late Edition (East Coast)). New York, N.Y.: Sep 29, 1980. pg. D.13

Special to The New York Times

In a large shopping mall, two bookstores give prominent display to ''Listen, America,'' a political tract by the Rev. Jerry Falwell, the television evangelist. At the Oklahoma State Fair, the ''modern living'' building is full of booths offering Bibles and John Birch Society literature.

Fundamentalist churches, which have wide appeal in this area of the Sun Belt, have traditionally stayed out of politics, but this year they have entered the secular arena with a vengeance.

The churches are promoting political viewpoints ''even from the pulpit,'' said Jeanette Bode, a Republican activist who was working in the party's booth at the state fair. ''They want to get God back into government. God is very much a part of this campaign.''

The fundamentalist churches have linked hands with political and economic forces such as the American Conservative Union and the Conservative Caucus. The result is a highly organized, highly conservative alliance that may help swing Oklahoma and other Sun Belt states behind Ronald Reagan's Presidential bid.

Shifting Sentiment of Voters

Lately, however, a few storm clouds have been gathering here that could dampen Mr. Reagan's campaign. As voters start focusing on the election, at least some of those who had been leaning toward Mr. Reagan are having second thoughts about whether they want him as President.

Nadine Willis was visiting the state fair with her daughter and two grandchildren, and she discussed the campaign over a fried chicken lunch. ''I thought I really liked Reagan,'' said Mrs. Willis, the owner of an X-ray supply business. ''But as time goes on, he just doesn't seem like a strong enough man.''

''At first I was going for Reagan,'' said Ann Cross, who was selling fudge at the fair. ''But the more I really got into some of his feelings, I found that I didn't agree, or didn't like the way he put things. I was particularly upset about his statement that Vietnam was a noble cause. I wouldn't want that feeling reflected in the future.'' .....

It's the same story, Stompy, for at least the last 26 fucking years, contrived, (Gulf of Tonkin, '64...) aggressive war by an imperialistic hyper power, against a small, technologically backward, poorly armed "enemy" country,,,,and Jesus...GOOD!

....queers....and liberal media, BAD! Since the entire "message" is broadcast incessantly, by one guy, L. Brent Bozell III and his MRC.org, nephew of William Buckely of the National Review....yeah....brainwashing is an accurate description, IMO.....

09-01-2006, 05:17 PM	#1 (permalink)
Bittertalker Upright Location: Massachusetts.	Fake TV Documentary 'Death of a President' Praised, Panned Reading the news on the Internet Movie Database as I do every weekday I came across an interesting article, which I feel is easily and interesting as topic for discussion. For ease I decided just to cut and paste the article, but it can be found at this address, Studio Briefing "A controversial British film titled Death of a President, which takes place in the not-too-distant future and revolves around the assassination of President Bush in 2007 is due to have its world premiere at the Toronto Film Festival on Sept. 10, the film's producers, Britain's Channel 4, announced Thursday. The film, which resembles an actual documentary, had previously been listed by the festival as '"D.O.A.P.". Gretchen Essell, spokeswoman for the Republican Party in Texas, told the British wire service Press Association, "I cannot support a video that would dramatize the assassination of our president, real or imagined. ... I find this shocking, I find it disturbing. I don't know if there are many people in America who would want to watch something like that." But Peter Dale, head of Channel 4's digital channel More4, which plans to air the film on Oct. 9, said: "It's a pointed political examination of what the War on Terror did to the American body politic. ... It's not sensationalist or simplistic but a very thought-provoking, powerful drama. I hope people will see that the intention behind it is good.' "

09-01-2006, 05:25 PM	#2 (permalink)
highthief Junkie Location: Ontario, Canada	I know, I know, there will be outrage. But really, I could care less. Where's the outrage when San Francisco get wrecked in the disaster movie of the week, or when Steven Seagal aces some thinly disguised stand in for whatever world leader is on America's shit list this week? Get over it, if you haven't already. __________________ Si vis pacem parabellum.

09-01-2006, 06:45 PM	#3 (permalink)
djtestudo Baltimoron Location: Beeeeeautiful Bel Air, MD	How many presidents have the producers of "24" killed? Personally, I think this is just British revenge for "King Ralph". __________________ "Final thought: I just rented Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine. Frankly, it was the worst sports movie I've ever seen." --Peter Schmuck, The (Baltimore) Sun

09-02-2006, 04:11 PM	#9 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	Its about free publicity. Its close to viral marketing. Make a so so film, include something that will upset some people or seem shocking, let the talking heads and water cooler do the advertizing for you. __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

09-03-2006, 02:29 PM	#15 (permalink)
Charlatan Getting it. Super Moderator Location: Lion City	Ustwo, I need not reply as your sarcasm belittles yourself and displays your ignorance for all to see. __________________ "My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars." - Old Man Luedecke

09-01-2006, 07:03 PM	#4 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	WHERE CAN I SEE IT?!

09-01-2006, 08:26 PM	#5 (permalink)
ASU2003 immoral minority Location: Back in Ohio	Not in the United States. It made the front page of Yahoo today or CNN and they had a video with some still shots. Interesting concept, but it's a good way to get the secret service to watch you.

09-05-2006, 01:13 PM	#16 (permalink)
lindalove Registered User	I don't know what to think of it. On the one hand, I'm all about creativity, storytelling as a way to examine issues, freedom of speech, etc., but on the other hand... My knee jerk reaction is that it's just not right- a story about the death of someone real who's alive. I'm not sure whether that reaction is based in logic though, or if it's just visceral. ETA: Just out of curiosity, why would Bush attend an anti-war rally? That almost sounds satirical. It would make the film less believable, I guess, detracting from the assumed inappropriateness of assasinating a sitting prez. Last edited by lindalove; 09-05-2006 at 04:20 PM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost

09-13-2006, 03:52 PM	#17 (permalink)
lindalove Registered User	Here's part of the video: http://us.video.aol.com/video.index....pmmsid=1715489

09-13-2006, 04:41 PM	#18 (permalink)
Elphaba Deja Moo Location: Olympic Peninsula, WA	Oh gawd. This seems so wrong to me. It reminded me of the assassination of the Kennedy brothers, MLK, the attempted assassinations of Wallace and Reagan. Too friggin' much for me to view this film in any positive or useful way. Blood pouring from Bush's chest? Just lurid sensationalism as far as I'm concerned.

09-13-2006, 07:08 PM	#20 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	As expected its a left wing crap fest. You see the president is killed but an innocent musslim man is accused when he was really killed by the greaving parent black soldier killed in Iraq. Gee I'm so shocked. Typical left wing wishfull drivel. Oh and it was picked up by a US company to show in the US. Guess maybe the great channel 4 wanted more money after all. __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

09-13-2006, 07:15 PM	#21 (permalink)
Seaver Junkie Location: Fort Worth, TX	The situation holds promise if done correctly. One can make it into what kind of reaction the government's would have to their leader being assasinated in a time of war. Done in such a way it could be very intelligent and politically non-aligned. I doubt it will be so, and if Ustwo is correct in the plotline it appears to follow my feelings. __________________ "Smite the rocks with the rod of knowledge, and fountains of unstinted wealth will gush forth." - Ashbel Smith as he laid the first cornerstone of the University of Texas

09-15-2006, 06:06 PM	#25 (permalink)
Stompy Banned from being Banned Location: Donkey	I'll watch it... hoping... that one day dreams come true. __________________ I love lamp.

09-15-2006, 06:55 PM	#28 (permalink)
Charlatan Getting it. Super Moderator Location: Lion City	Exactly will... It isn't a matter of whether you agree with the premise or the conclusion of the film (though I would argue you can't really do much than be outraged at the premise if you haven't seen the film). What matters is that this is a film that is attempting to grapple with a contemporary issue. For what I can tell, not having seen the film, the actual assination is context rather than the meat of the film. Get over it. They are making a film that is attempting to explore the world that the current administraion has created. They are suggesting a certain outcome based on what they believe would happen given these circumstances. It is a fictional film. Get over yourselves. Fictional films are made all the time that deal with contemporary figures. This one is just ballsy enough (maybe foolish enough) to show the assination of a current head of state. To me, it suggests more immediacy to the plot. Is it "leftist"... perhaps (I haven't seen the film). Does this offend me anymore than if it were "rightist"? Not really. IT'S FICTION. Get over yourselves. __________________ "My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars." - Old Man Luedecke

09-15-2006, 07:00 PM	#29 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	I have to wonder if film makers will have the balls to make a movie showing the face of modern Islam... These fine young men are protesting the pope quoting a long dead emperor. I wonder if they know they are proving the dead mans point with their reactions? More interestingly its ok for film makers to say, assinate a current US president and turn it political, but lets not be insensative to the culture causing all the drama lately. You would swear they would cut your head off or something for calling them into question. The enemies of western civilization are on the march again, and yet it is best to fight amoungst ourselves, and feel guilty over what we have achieved. __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps. Last edited by Ustwo; 09-16-2006 at 08:12 AM..

09-15-2006, 07:20 PM	#30 (permalink)
dc_dux Location: Washington DC	Great pic, Ustwo It reminded me of a pic of Randall Terry at a Terri Schiavo rally last year, shaking his fists and calling for retribution against godless judges and politicians. But I would not presume suggest that he is the face of modern Christianity. Once again, you take the most extreme and try to pass it off as representing something broader that it is. __________________ "The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire

09-15-2006, 07:27 PM	#31 (permalink)
Charlatan Getting it. Super Moderator Location: Lion City	I am sure there are filmmakers who will take on this subject. Why not? The question remains... is there a market it for it? Is there a demand for that film? What does it add and what does it subtract from the debate? Does it say anything new? Who is the intended market? The west likes to talk about it's leadership. It loves to push the limits of "freedom of expression". This includes making films like like "Death of a President", films about 9/11, "The Day After", etc. We speak to ourselves with a multitude of voices. I support this. I don't expect to agree with or like everything that is made. That's the thing about people having different opinions about the truth or reality. It's inturpretation by an artist is always going to be subject to those who don't get understand it, don't like it, don't tolerate a different point of view. Bring on the film that explores Islam. It would be a welcome addition. Chances are it has already been made and languishes in a producer's collection unable to find an audience due to the timidity of some programmer or distributor. Now that I think about it, portions of Syrianna apply to this (of course, it would be seen as too anti-American by many here despite the fact that it offers a much more complex approach than simple anti-Americanism). The world of Islam has a different cultural base. I do not expect them to match us film for film, book for book. __________________ "My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars." - Old Man Luedecke

09-16-2006, 04:38 AM	#33 (permalink)
dc_dux Location: Washington DC	To take this thread a little off topic, re: the face of Islam. I am not an apologist for Islam extremists. It is a deadly serious issue that the vast majority of the more than 1 billion good and decent practicing muslims must address, but consider the fact that Islam is 600 years younger than Christianity as a religion. And what were good Christians doing in the 15th century? I give you the Spanish Inquisition and persecution of non-Christians throughout Europe, where tens of thousands of Jews and other "heretics" were tortured and murdered. This follows on the heels of two centuries of the crusades where thousands of Muslims were slaughtered in the Holy Land and continued in the New World through the 17th century with witch burnings. Think carefully before considering yourself "holier than thou" for your history is not one without its own atrocities. (for the record, I am Jewish). __________________ "The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire

09-16-2006, 10:43 AM	#36 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	There are extreemists of every religion, but that has little to do witha movie about the president being assasinated. In the movie, I think he is killed by an American, btw.