Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 wins Cannes Film Award
 

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5039229/

:eek: :hmm: :eek:



-SF

maybe it is a good film.
it is hard to tell, not being able to see it yet.

yay. i knew it would too.. just because of how gripping bowling for columbine was.

I am sure that it is an award-worthy piece of fiction.

They're certainly not truthful (though annoyingly portrayed as the truth), but Moore does know how to make a good film.

Hey, I found a typo:

“Fahrenheit 9/11” was the first "documentary" to win Cannes’ prestigious Palme d’Or since Jacques Cousteau’s “The Silent World” in 1956.

Has anyone seen bowling for columbine? If so how was it? And did I hear right that they might not release Fahrenheit 9/11 In the U.S.? Well, I guess I should have finished reading the article at the top before I posted but I am glad I caught it before I hit Submit Reply.

I find it quite interesting that you already assume it to be full of lies, having yet to see it. While I am sure M.Moore has put his usual twist into the film, much of his earlier films were also full of dreadful facts. Some may simply wish to deny them as real, your perogative.

This article was more amusing: Moore tells Bush to watch the pretzels :p

It was a good movie. Most people who dislike it are those who dislike Moore because he's liberal and because he so openly attacks Bush.

It'd be like if Ann Coulter made a documentary on how Bush is the most perfect president in our nation's history. Most of it would be based on facts that you could verify, however, someone somewhere could provide a theory on how or why it's wrong, yadda yadda (such is politics).

It definitely opens your eyes to certain truths about the country that you might not have realized before.

For example, local news reports generally report on nothing but murders/killings for the first half of the broadcast, which in turn makes people more afraid than they really should be. It gives this false impression that things are worse than how they actually are.

There's this certain part of the movie where he has this strange conspiracy theory that Dick Clark was (in some way) part of the reason why a 6 year old brought a gun to school and shot another child. IMO, that's just as closed minded and ridiculous as someone saying Marilyn Manson was partly at fault for Columbine.

Aside from that, it's a pretty informative (and factual) movie. Granted, someone will come along and give counter arguments against it, but that's kinda expected in politics. You just have to draw your own conclusions ;)

Thanks for your opinoin.

She's a conservative journalist/author. Conservatives love her just like liberals like Moore/Al Franken/etc..

Not 100% sure if *everything* is the truth, but most if it I've verified as well as experienced (Detroit news reports are definitely fear-mongering media).

If you ask a conservative, they'll most likely point you to http://www.bowlingfortruth.com/, which, as I said before, is expected in politics. You present a truth, someone will present some facts to counter that truth, but in turn someone presents facts to counter THAT, etc.. a never ending cycle ;)

I believe that most of what was presented was truthful, but I also kept in mind that there's two sides to every story.

Put it this way: he wouldn't have the fame/reputation he has if it was BS. Naturally a conservative will scoff at the film if they were to watch it.

I wonder how many who bash these movies have actually seen the two? Regardless, I won't be seeing it, documentaries bore me. ;)

You're the fuckin' man.

Moore's worse than Limbaugh, except Limbaugh is actually funny to listen to. Moore is just an obnoxious whiner whose material is the equivalent to having Bush's picture pinned onto a dart board. There's my opinion.

I love Micheal Moore and his work. But whether you like him or not.... isn't not releasing a movie against the US constitution .... its called free speech I think :)

Err, no.

No one is preventing MM from releasing his movie.

It is up to him to find a distributor (which of course he will).

The US Constitution however does not FORCE anyone to distribute his movie.

I'm looking forward to the movie. I had some problems with Bowling for Columbine, so I'm interested to see if Michael Moore has cleaned up his act factually or not.

If you look, you'll find that this has already been covered, including the fact that Moore knew a year ago that Disney didn't want to distribute his film, but he went ahead to generate publicity.

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthr...threadid=54631

That being said, Disney is under no legal or moral obligation to distribute ANY film.

so did this surprise anyone? I mean a bunch of hollywood liberal types get together with a bunch of frenchies and they give out an award to a "documentory" that is anti-bush. OMG I just can't believe it, it was such a surprise. Do you think anyone else even had acceptance speeches ready?

What problems did you have with Bowling for Columbine? I am going to get the movie and watch it tonight. I am really interested in watching it.

I just wanted to show you this: http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/wackoattacko/

Sure, it'son his site, but it links to sources not on his site. :)

www.bowlingfortruth.com

deals with Moore's "response" to his critics.

Just like BFC.

Do not confuse out-of-context statistics with facts.

I didn't, I was following the politics long before Mr. Moore made his films, and was aware of much of the "facts" without a Hollywood take. But, thanks for your concern.

Moore's movies may not technically be documentaries, but that doesn't mean they aren't truthful or factual. They just present the facts from a biased viewpoint with significant editorializing tacked on.
I think a good comparison for Moore's work would be Fox News. Both purport to objectively tell the truth, but we all know that both selectively choose the information they present in order to push their respective agendas. They'll both occasionally even get facts wrong or present unverified stories. This doesn't mean they are liars or that there is nothing to be gained by watching them.

I think most of us here are informed enough to see Moore's films and Fox News for what they are. The problem is that there are plenty of people out there who are complteley uninformed and there is the fear that they will be unable to critically consider what they see on the screen and just take it to be the whole truth when there is usually more to the story.
I'm going to reserve judgement on this particular movie until I see it.

Inspired, truly inspired.

The problem with a comparison like that is Fox News, as well as a "liberal" network like CNN or newspaper like the Washington Post, has an obligation to report the news as fact. Any editorializing is generally done seperate from the news reports. They would lose all credebility as journalists if they purposely mixed the two.

Moore, being a filmmaker and not a journalist, doesn't have the same responsibility as a place like Fox News, and therefore can twist the facts any way he wishes to prove his point.

Despite my Republican leanings, I trust the actual news coming from the Post, or the local Baltimore Sun, or CNN, and other sources considered liberal. That's because I know they seperate the news and opinions enough to identify what is what. If Moore was able to say, "Here's the facts, now here's my opinion on what they mean," and still be entertaining, then most people would have less of a problem with him.

I can't wait to see his new movie. Bowling for Columbine was a great movie. And sure there are haters, there always will be. Just seems to be the haters that go out of their way to make their opinion known. Seems desperate.

I, personally, laugh at the pseudo-intellectuals that beleive Mr. Moore's films are factual. ...heh... It seems as though these same people take whatever this man says as gospel. ...funny, that is exactly what Moore wants you to do.

No... ...he's not in this business to create a scene, he really wants us to know whats going on.

/sarcasm

-SF

I went to rent this tonight and it was rented out and due back tomorrow. So, I well have questions soon.

I love Micheal Moore, he is the in your face, I don't care what the government thinks kinda person this world needs, Bowling For Columbine, what a masterpiece, the man gets to the bottom of things, and is usually right, which has been proven because it can't pick up a distributor, booo don't be pushed around by big brother

If you're going to quote me, please make your reply have some sort of relevance to my post. Thanks.

I bet this thread will be closed by...5:48 PM CST Tuesday. Who else wants to take a guess?

Woo i say Monday 6:53 PST!:D

i'll reserve judgment til i actually see it because you never judge a book from its cover

You're all idiots, and I'm the only one that's right!!!

[Just kidding!!!] Don't ZAP me moderators!! :)

I think that maximusveritas has a fairly mature take on all of this...its very hard, nearly impossible to find any media source capable of presenting truly objective material.

Its simply human nature to:

1. Put a personal spin on everything based on how we perceive the "truth".

and

2. Look for someone else to DECIDE for us, what the real "truth" is. Otherwise, its as if we'd somehow be responsible...so its much easier to pile on someone elses "truth bandwagon".


The bottom line is: Nearly EVERYONE has THEIR OWN truths - some may find that their truths resemble others, some may not. You kind of have to judge these types of things based on how well the "artist" paints the picture, not for the content - just how well its portrayed. In that sense, MM does a fairly good job I think in painting HIS view of the world. I do not necessarily agree with him, and if you ask my more carnal opinion - I hope he explodes from eating too much - but, of course, that's just MY opinion.

Actually, I think if you look at the posts above in support of Mr. Moore, you will see they do not consider his productions gospel. Most of the replys, admit failings in the facts and focus instead on "like" for the movies. It seems the only blanket remarks (those that are straight black and white) are from the detractors.
Personally I very much enjoyed the hot seat portrayal of Charlton Heston in "Bolwling", I hope that wasn't CGI.lol

I won't read all the tripe above, because a kook like Moore isn't worth taking seriously, even if he didn't make up his own material.

Moore is a fraud, as evidenced in the link below:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Conten...4/127ujhuf.asp