Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: xrtoronto on June 18, 2004, 02:38:42 PM
-
they haven't seen it, yet they want it banned? (http://www.click-smilies.de/sammlung0304/lachen/laughing-smiley-017.gif)
C&P
US conservative groups have launched a campaign to have Michael Moore's "misleading and grotesque" film Fahrenheit 9/11 banned from cinemas.
The film alleges connections between President George Bush and top Saudi families, including the Bin Ladens.
Move America Forward has begun a letter-writing campaign, while Citizens United is making TV and internet adverts which criticise Moore.
The documentary film will be shown around the US from 25 June.
'Support'
Move America Forward members were behind a letter-writing campaign that led US channel CBS to drop TV movie The Reagans last November, claiming the film distorted history.
The group has received several thousand e-mails of support for its Fahrenheit 9/11 campaign, said executive director Siobhan Guiney, a former Republican Party lobbyist.
"Since we are the customers of the American movie theatres it is important for us to speak up loudly and tell the industry executives that we don't want this misleading and grotesque movie being shown at our local cinema," the group said on its website, listing contact details for various US cinemas.
Ms Guiney said: "(Moore) is critical of what's happening right now, and there's no problem with being critical - but his movie is not a documentary, it's a piece of propaganda."
Citizens United is headed by former Republican congressional aide David Bossie, who is also targeting George Soros, a billionaire who donated nearly $13m (£7m) to groups seeking to defeat President Bush.
Mr Bossie said: "Look, this guy (Moore) is simply producing and advertising this movie at this time to try to affect the election."
"It seems to be left to us to make sure that the media is educated, as well as the American people are educated, as to just what they're up to."
Despite the campaign by the two independent groups, US cinema chain Regal Entertainment Group said it intended to go ahead and screen the film as planned.
And US liberal advocacy group MoveOn.org has asked its supporters to write to cinemas on Move America Forward's list, urging them not to give in to pressure to block the film.
Fahrenheit 9/11's US distributor Lions Gate Films believes the plan to have the film banned will fail.
"My guess is that their efforts will backfire and only rally support for the film, which will be terrific as far as I'm concerned," said president Tom Ortenberg.
"We need less censorship in this country, not more."
Fahrenheit 9/11 won the Palme d'Or at this year's Cannes Film Festival, and will be released in the UK on 9 July.
source (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/3817993.stm)
-
sounds like the want a boycott. I don't think "Ban" is the right word here.
-Sik
-
But of course we all know it will be shown and will be available to those that choose to see it.
So what's the big deal?
-
F9/11 is probably the only movie of his I am interested in seeing. While he still has the habit of asking people questions and then not showing their answers, the film looks interesting.
-
wonder if someone came out with a movie showing the evils of the kennedys starting back with ole joe and the mob and how his son stole the 1960 election and called it a "documentary", who would be trying out the boycotts then? would the french give it an award?
-
I wonder if people that publicly announce that they want to boycott or ban a film/book realise it only makes it more popular? Many that had no intention of reading/watching those things will do so only to see what the big deal is.
-
Originally posted by Eagler
would the french give it an award?
FYI: Only 1 judge at Cannes was French...and 4 were American
-
Here is an example of what I was referring to. As long as you keep in mind that this "documentary" has an agenda behind it, so be it. I agree with SaburoS, this boycott group is going to have the opposite effect.
===========
In one clip, Moore accosts members of Congress, trying to enlist their support to get them to urge their sons and daughters to enlist in the Army and fight in Iraq. One clip from his film features Rep. Mark Kennedy, R-Minn., shooting Moore a strange, perhaps dismissive look after Moore asks him to do so.
Unfair Editing?
But Kennedy tells ABC News that Moore unfairly cut his response from the film.
"I have a nephew that has been called up as part of the Army Guard and he is waiting for orders," Kennedy said. "Originally he was told that he was likely going to Afghanistan. I have another nephew that just retired from Navy, and I have cousin who just returned from a trip to Iraq."
A transcript of the interview run by the Minneapolis Star-Tribune features Moore asking Kennedy to help urge his colleagues "to get their kids to enlist in the Army and go over to Iraq."
"I'd be happy to," Kennedy says."Especially those who voted for the war."
But Kennedy's response was cut from the film, perhaps creating the impression that Kennedy had no relatives involved in the armed forces nor did he think such tasks should be taken up by his relatives.
-
Originally posted by xrtoronto
FYI: Only 1 judge at Cannes was French...and 4 were American
looks like french to me:
http://www.cannes-fest.com/cine/films/fiche.php?id=585&PHPSESSID=8f83dcd8d341cf3d304fea0bc23d8e72
-
heh, typical censorship. They got nothing and they themselves have been led a fool. Moore knows what hes doing, its all propoganda.
-
I agree.
-
Originally posted by Eagler
looks like french to me:
http://www.cannes-fest.com/cine/films/fiche.php?id=585&PHPSESSID=8f83dcd8d341cf3d304fea0bc23d8e72
Get a clue.
http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/showbiz/story/0,5348,250543,00.html
h
-
I'll wait till it comes out on video and the store has rented out all their copies of Waterworld and the Blair Witch Project. For the kind of entertainment this film promises, I need look no further than this BBS. :p
I'll see it eventually though. It looks interesting in a Viet-Nam era shockumentary kind of way.
-
Anyone got the addy to whoever it is that needs support in banning Mullethead Moore?
-
Nothing says "God bless America" like good old fashioned censorship.
Kudos to those "Right Thinkers" for reminding me why I vote Democrat.
-
Yeah, and while we're at it - lets all gather 'round a bonfire and burn dem dere books. That there smut be taintin' our chillins' heads.
-SW
-
Originally posted by rpm371
Nothing says "God bless America" like good old fashioned censorship.
Kudos to those "Right Thinkers" for reminding me why I vote Democrat.
Well, looks like you idiot communists aren't doing a good job of keeping the fools under control.
-
So let me get this straight, only those with liberal ideas are allowed the freedom of speech? I want to be clear on this, 'cause I hear from the left all the time.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
Nothing says "God bless America" like good old fashioned censorship.
On September 3rd, the new campaign finance “reform” law will force the NRA to pull all of its voter education messages that criticize politicians running for federal office off TV and radio all across America.
Has this been confirmed as being true or false? Just curious.
-
Originally posted by majic
So let me get this straight, only those with liberal ideas are allowed the freedom of speech? I want to be clear on this, 'cause I hear from the left all the time.
No... liberals only want freedom of speech unless someone like Limbaugh is on the radio. Naturally, this is bad... radio puts up what produces funds (relating to "what people want to listen to") so they try and pass a law that "promotes balanced points of view" and "try" to force it on the public that pays the bill. My bet is... the law will get laughed out of the Supreme Court. If not, lots of folks will turn off the radio lol.
Thankyou Mr communist/liberal/"Democrat" whacko, once again your showing what you are.
-
No, you see the major difference here is nobody is trying to keep Limbaugh from sending his message. Rush is free to rant about whatever he wants. Moore has the same right. Freedom of speech means everyone, Republican, Democrat, Independant and heck even the Communist. If you do not like the message, don't listen.
-
alot of folk listen to Howard Stern too ..want to get into that one? ..
I thought not ......
you can always find a tit for tat
-
Originally posted by majic
So let me get this straight, only those with liberal ideas are allowed the freedom of speech? I want to be clear on this, 'cause I hear from the left all the time.
really? what was the last pro-republican film that had a cmpaign to get it censored from the theaters. (make no mistake, this is censorship, not a boycott. boycotting this film means you wouldn't go to see it, and refuse to spend your movie going dollar on it. censorship is bullying the theater to not let anyone see it there).
-
Has there been a pro-Republican film out of Hollywood in the last 30 years?
If so, remind me of it.
Again, a tempest in a teapot.
Probably another of Moore's publicity stunts like the last one about Disney.
The film is going to be shown by whoever chooses to pay the fee to the distributor.
That's not censorship at all.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
No, you see the major difference here is nobody is trying to keep Limbaugh from sending his message. Rush is free to rant about whatever he wants. Moore has the same right. Freedom of speech means everyone, Republican, Democrat, Independant and heck even the Communist. If you do not like the message, don't listen.
What's the difference between a bunch of yokels boycotting Moore's film, and NOW boycotting Rush?
Did I miss something in the article?
-Sik
-
Toad, you certain Moore's films are pro-Democrat?
If anything, they are pro-stupidity. Still, thats not grounds for a ban.
And Toad, this quote came right from the posted link: "US conservative groups have launched a campaign to have Michael Moore's "misleading and grotesque" film Fahrenheit 9/11 banned from cinemas."
THAT is censorship.
-SW
-
Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
Toad, you certain Moore's films are pro-Democrat?
If anything, they are pro-stupidity. Still, thats not grounds for a ban.
And Toad, this quote came right from the posted link: "US conservative groups have launched a campaign to have Michael Moore's "misleading and grotesque" film Fahrenheit 9/11 banned from cinemas."
THAT is censorship.
-SW
Yes, that's the headline, but the story doesn't talk about banning anything. The groups are asking theater chains to boycott the film.
I don't agree with thier position at all, but I don't see their behavoir as anything special.
-Sik
-
Actually, I didn't comment about that at all. I merely asked Apathy if he could recall a "pro-Republican" film.
I actually watched BFC; Moore doesn't really impress me as either a documentarian or filmmaker. A more talented individual could have made a pretty fine film about that even along Moore's lines. Moore's simply not that good at his chosen profession, IMO. Hey, it happens. Even with making regular films, some guys are good, some aren't.
launched a campaign to have Michael Moore's "misleading and grotesque" film Fahrenheit 9/11 banned from cinemas."
THAT is censorship.
No, it isn't.
It is an ATTEMPT at censorship.
You and I both know it will come to naught and thus is not really worth the electronic ink we spend on it.
Various and sundry organizations launch campaigns to do lots of things. Some are good, some are bad and some are stupid.
I think this one clearly falls into the last category, but unfortunately those folks are not alone in that. They'll have lots of company.
-
Wouldn't it just be easier to just not watch the film? I don't think I have ever seen a moore film, yet this guy gets more publicity than anyone i've ever seen. And you guys help him out. We have choice here, choose not to see it and stop giving him free publicity.
-
A group called, "Move America Forward" advocates censorship. That's rich.
-
these ppl are exercising the same freedoms asking for a ban as this dumb dik did making it...
and yes it is pro democrat - slams bush and his admin - written/shot at the moron level for its targeted audience
-
For the moment all the uproar is a tempest in a teapot. Unless you were at the screening in Cannes, you haven't seen the film. Neither have I. After we have seen it and have an informed opinion, then I'll listen to your complaints. It's hard to form an intellegent viewpoint without ever viewing the point in question.
-
Interesting revisionist redefinitions of "banned" and "censorship" being used here...
-
Some people always feel the need to stop someone else from doing something that isn't hurting anyone.
If some folks want to go watch a film they should go. If others don't like the film, they should not go.
how freaking hard is that?
throwing the blame to the right or left is sillly, both sides play the same ignorant games.
-
Originally posted by Kanth
Some people always feel the need to stop someone else from doing something that isn't hurting anyone.
If some folks want to go watch a film they should go. If others don't like the film, they should not go.
how freaking hard is that?
throwing the blame to the right or left is sillly, both sides play the same ignorant games.
Truer words were never spoken!
-
I have not heard that anyone is seeking to get the film banned... I think that is silly... can't be done in any case.
I won't be in any big rush to see it. I truely belive that all of moores films are unfair to the people he dislikes... he is a master of editing so that what you see is allmost the oppossite of whart really happened
he also is prone to flat out lie in his films (when he "read" the plaque on the b29 in bowling for instance). He only lies tho to pander to the left.
I believe that moore is a perfect example of all that is wrong with the left and that his type of untruthfullness will eventually backfire (tho it may have short term effect).
His reign as golden boy of the left has short leggs IMO... he is hanging on by his fingernails.... His dishonesty has made him vulnerable (a common mistake of the left) and if he ever strays even a little off the path..... the guard dogs will turn on him and tear him to shreds...
contrast this with Lott who held lefty ideas on gun control but wrote a truthful book based on solid, sound and honest research. the lefties turned on him when he strayed but he wasn't vulnerable because he had wrote an honest thorogh book.
moore is lazy and dishonest but so far he is pandering well to those who control entertainment.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
I have not heard that anyone is seeking to get the film banned.
umm....look at the title of the article and its contents...geeeez!:rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by xrtoronto
umm....look at the title of the article and its contents...geeeez!:rolleyes:
The contents of the article contradict the title.
-Sik
-
From MoveAmericaForward.com:
(http://www.moveamericaforward.org/NewsMax/Images/StopMoore.jpg)
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...
-
Still curious about the question I asked a little earlier...
-
I vote we buy a razor and hire a personal trainer for the slob. Maybe if he get's laid, he will make a real movie.
-
I dont like the man at all, his techiniques are questionable and distastefull. But these people who want to ban this "anti-american" film, who feel they are "pro-americans" are looking pretty bad trying to controll freedom of speech and media and all that :P
-
Amazing, I never heard of this guy before the war. He takes the anti war stance and gets everyone to want to see the movie. The anti war crowd, the anti bush crowd, just because it fits their agenda. The crowd that sees it just because is so talked about. And the anti moore crowd goes to see it just so they can pick it apart. This guy must be making millions. The guy is a genius. He is like the polar opposite of Rush Limbaugh(a genius himself). I can't wait til they both get together for a Freddy vs Jason kinda thing. I am sure there will be plenty of suckers for that too.
-
(http://www.michaelmoore.com/images_la/f911-home-interim_03.jpg)
-
Moore makes bush look like a saint :)
( yes, i am bored) hehehe :)
http://ftp://yuccah:cwjqhn@yuccah.netfirms.com/www/f911-home-interim_03.jpg
-
Originally posted by xrtoronto
(http://www.michaelmoore.com/images_la/f911-home-interim_03.jpg)
:rofl :rofl :rofl
-
Hey,if they don't like Mike Moore..Why don't THEY make a movie about him?
-
Damn straight.
The NRA could make its own movie about guns and people would eat it up. And the republicans could make their own movie about dumbarse and even dangerous democrats and people would flock to it, right?
Hah.
There's a reason that wouldn't happen, I don't know exactly what it is, but yeah... put up and/or shut up.
It's hilarious watching the party of personal freedom constantly trying to deny it to others as well as to themselves.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
From MoveAmericaForward.com:
(http://www.moveamericaforward.org/NewsMax/Images/StopMoore.jpg)
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...
...It apparently is an opinion. See, people in the US are allowed to voice said opinion even if it is contrary to yours. Just like Moore is allowed to show his film, others are allowed to voice their displeasure. On of the ways they can do that is to write letters and/or to boycott said film and those that show/support the film. See how it works? There is nobody seeking to have Congress ban this film. No executive order is coming down the pipe decreeing copies of the film be destroyed, just citizens voicing their opinion.
-
Wha?
"...It apparently is an opinion. See, people in the US are allowed to voice said opinion even if it is contrary to yours. Just like Moore is allowed to show his film, others are allowed to voice their displeasure. On of the ways they can do that is to write letters and/or to boycott said film and those that show/support the film. See how it works?"
"Just like Moore is allowed to show his film"....
Wait a sec, I thought they were trying to bully the theaters into NOT showing this film.
"One of the ways they can do that is to write letters and/or to boycott said film and those that show/support the film."
Both of those things would be pretty hard to do when, as is the goal of this group, the film DOESN'T EVEN GET SHOWN IN THE FIRST PLACE.
"See how it works?"
Nope.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
I truely belive that all of moores films are unfair to the people he dislikes... he is a master of editing so that what you see is allmost the oppossite of whart really happened
Come on now.... That's so widespread, left and right, conservative and liberal, that you can't apply it just to Moore.
And if someone feels like googling it (I don't), I know for a fact there is a movie about Michael Moore, where someone does the same thing to him what he does to others.
-
Come on Nash, you are smarter than that. Their goal is to get their opinion heard. They know theaters will still show the movie, hell, they are calling attention to it. But with a highly public campaign like this, they get their opinion out there too.
Now, if you asked me if I thought what they were doing was smart, well, that's a different story. They will come out looking like tulips most likely.
It just annoys me to no end when hypocrites come out and say they have no right to voice their opinion against someone elses opinion. Remember the Dixie Chicks on the cover of Rolling Stone with the Constutional catchphrases written all over them? Oh, woe is them. There was no censorship there, and none here.
-
http://www.michaelmoorehatesamerica.com/trailer_sm.html
I spoil you guys.
-
Originally posted by majic
Come on Nash, you are smarter than that. Their goal is to get their opinion heard. They know theaters will still show the movie, hell, they are calling attention to it. But with a highly public campaign like this, they get their opinion out there too.
That's reading more into it then they are stating in their own posters. The goal is to keep the movie from being seen.
Now... if they came out with a boycott, I'd be completely in thier support to do so.
The difference is subtle, but there is a difference.
-
Originally posted by majic
It just annoys me to no end when hypocrites come out and say they have no right to voice their opinion against someone elses opinion.
Majic - I would agree with you, but in this case the one group's opinion is to not allow the other group's opinion to even get voiced in first place.
It's like saying "my constitutionally protected right of opinion is that I don't want anybody to hear yours".
They should go see the movie.... or not... then say "This was a bad movie because...."
They should not say "We don't want anyone to see this movie", then follow it up with taking action to ensure that they get their way.
You are right. They do like like arses.