FoxNews gives Micheal Moore's F911 THUMBS UP

Psychoblues

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2003
2,701
142
48
North Missisippi
'Fahrenheit 9/11' Gets Standing Ovations

Tuesday, June 15, 2004

By Roger Friedman



'Fahrenheit 9/11' | Jacko | Clive Davis

'Fahrenheit 9/11' Gets Standing Ovations

The crowd that gave Michael Moore's controversial "Fahrenheit 9/11" a standing ovation last night at the Ziegfeld Theatre premiere certainly didn't have to be encouraged at all to show their appreciation. From liberal radio host and writer Al Franken to actor/director Tim Robbins, Moore was in his element. But once "F9/11" gets to audiences beyond screenings, it won't be dependent on celebrities for approbation. It turns out to be a really brilliant piece of work, and a film that members of all political parties should see without fail.

As much as some might try to marginalize this film as a screed against President George Bush, "F9/11" — as we saw last night — is a tribute to patriotism, to the American sense of duty, and at the same time a indictment of stupidity and avarice. Readers of this column may recall that I had a lot of problems with Moore's "Bowling for Columbine," particularly where I thought he took gratuitous shots at helpless targets like Charlton Heston. "Columbine" too easily succeeded by shooting fish in a barrel, as they used to say. Not so with "F9/11," which instead relies on lots of film footage and actual interviews to make its case against the war in Iraq and tell the story of the intertwining histories of the Bush and Bin Laden families.

First, I know you want to know who came to the Ziegfeld, so here is just a partial list. Besides Franken and Robbins, Al Sharpton, Mike Myers, Tony Bennett, Glenn Close, Gretchen Mol (newly married over the weekend to director Todd Williams), Lori Singer, Tony Kushner, "Angela's Ashes" author Frank McCourt, Jill Krementz and Kurt Vonnegut, Lauren Bacall (chatting up a fully refurbished Lauren Hutton), Richard Gere, John McEnroe and Patti Smythe, former Carter cabinet member and ambassador Richard Holbrooke, Carson Daly, NBC's Jeff Zucker, a very pregnant Rory Kennedy, playwright Israel Horovitz, Macaulay Culkin, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Kyra Sedgwick, Linda Evangelista, Ed Bradley, Tom and Meredith Brokaw, director Barry Levinson, NBC anchor Brian Williams, Vernon Jordan, Eva Mendez, Sandra Bernhard and the always humorous Joy Behar.

If that's not enough, how about Yoko Ono, accompanied by her son, Sean, who's let his hair grow out and is now sporting a bushy beard that makes him look like his late, beloved father John Lennon?

And then, just to show you how much people wanted to see this film, there was Martha Stewart, looking terrific. I mean, talk about eclectic groups!

Now, unless you've been living under a rock you know that this movie has been the cause of a lot of trouble. Miramax and Disney have gone to war over it, and "The Passion of the Christ" seems like "Mary Poppins" in retrospect. Before anyone's even seen it, there have been partisan debates over which way Moore may have spun this or that to get a desired effect.

But, really, in the end, not seeing "F9/11" would be like allowing your first amendment rights to be abrogated, no matter whether you're a Republican or a Democrat. The film does Bush no favors, that's for sure, but it also finds an unexpectedly poignant and universal groove in the story of Lila Lipscombe, a Flint, Michigan mother who sends her kids into the Army for the opportunities it can provide — just like the commercials say — and lives to regret it. Lipscombe's story is so powerful, and so completely Middle American, that I think it will take Moore's critics by surprise. She will certainly move to tears everyone who encounters her.

"F9/11" isn't perfect, and of course, there are leaps of logic sometimes. One set piece is about African American congressmen and women voting against the war with Iraq and wondering why there are no Senators to support them. Indeed, those absent senators include John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, and Ted Kennedy, among others, which Moore does not elaborate upon. At no point are liberals or Democrats taken to task for not speaking out against the war, and I would have liked to have seen that.

On the other hand, there are more than enough moments that seemed to resonate with the huge Ziegfeld audience. The most indelible is President Bush's reaction to hearing on the morning of September 11, 2001, that the first plane has crashed into the World Trade Center. Bush was reading to a grade school class in Florida at that moment. Instead of jumping up and leaving, he instead sat in front of the class, with an unfortunate look of confusion, for nearly 11 minutes. Moore obtained the footage from a teacher at the school who videotaped the morning program. There Bush sits, with no access to his advisers, while New York is being viciously attacked. I guarantee you that no one who sees this film forgets this episode.

More than even "The Passion of the Christ," "F9/11" is going to be a "see it for yourself" movie when it hits theaters on June 25. It simply cannot be missed, and I predict it will be a huge moneymaker. And that's where Disney's Michael Eisner comes in. Not releasing this film will turn out to be the curse of his career. When Eisner came into Disney years ago, the studio was at a low point. He turned it around with a revived animation department and comedy hits like "Pretty Woman" and "Down and Out in Beverly Hills." But Eisner's short-sightedness on many recent matters has been his undoing. And this last misadventure is one that will follow him right out the doors of the Magic Kingdom.


I know many here won't accept this without a link/reference so here it is:

http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,122678,00.html

Psychoblues
 
Funny how some groups are trying to stop this movie.


Group puts heat
on ‘Fahrenheit’
Move America Forward pressuring theater owners not to show film
By Nicole Sperling
Hollywood Reporter
Updated: 11:53 a.m. ET June 15, 2004LOS ANGELES - A group opposing Michael Moore’s documentary “Fahrenheit 9/11” is urging U.S. movie theaters not to screen the film, which is set to open June 25.

advertisement

California-based Move America Forward, which says its goal is “supporting America’s war on terrorism,” has launched an electronic campaign, both via e-mail and through its Web site, encouraging theaters not to play Moore’s film, which is critical of the war in Iraq.

Additionally, Move America Forward has listed on its Web site the movie theaters that either have agreed already to screen “Fahrenheit 9/11” or have not yet decided on a course of action. The Web site lists e-mail addresses of executives at 23 theater chains, both large and small, along with their business addresses, and it urges the public to contact them with their objections to the film.

According to Sal Russo, chief strategist of Move America Forward and a partner in the public relations film Russo Marsh & Rogers, which started the organization last month, the group has heard anecdotally of some theaters that will not show the film. But he was unable to identify any of those theaters.

“Moore’s credibility as a documentarian has been shattered,” Russo said. “Even supporters of the film say it is distorted.”

A spokesman for Moore’s film did not return phone calls asking for comment.

Tom Ortenberg, president of Lions Gate Films Releasing, which is managing the distribution of the film, said the company is still in the process of booking theaters.

“We are still finalizing our distribution pattern and we are still very much on target to open ‘Fahrenheit 9/11’ in something north of 500 theaters on June 25,” Ortenberg said. “I think the one message that everybody can take from ‘Fahrenheit’ — whether you support the war in Iraq, oppose the war or are undecided — is that we need less censorship in this country not more. For any organization to call for the censorship of this film is particularly distressing and misguided. If anybody wants to debate the issues raised in the picture, that is terrific, but to call for censorship of the film could not be more wrongheaded.”

It remains to be seen whether the effort by Move America Forward will affect the ultimate performance of the film. Unlike the usual specialty released documentary, which opens in limited engagements and then expands based on its performance, “Fahrenheit” will bow to a much wider audience.

Said John Fithian, president of the National Association of Theatre Owners: “Any time any organization protests against a movie, they ensure that the movie will do better at the box office than it would have done otherwise. If they have any doubt about this, just ask Mel Gibson.”

Although it opened amid a firestorm of controversy this spring, Gibson’s “The Passion of the Christ” has grossed $370 million domestically.

“The movie theater is a place of public discourse, and all views and philosophies are welcome,” Fithian said. “It’s the right place for the public to debate public issues.”

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5216323/

Note that MSNBC fails to mention Russo Marsh & Rogers' strong ties to the GOP.
 
Originally posted by DKSuddeth
I knew it wouldn't be long before this made it here.

I'm still not going to watch the movie. :sleep:
hell no, not after that other piece of shit he made. if i wanna take a nap, i dont have to pay 8.00 to do it
 
It's not a "movie", DK. It's a partisan influenced award-winning documentary that is still open to your personal interpretation and the critisims that it will no doubt propagate. I just hope the critisisms are as thorough and documented as the documentary itself. We all get tired of being called nasty names when our accusers of aspersions offer nothing other than juvenile name calling and obvious but unsubstantiated disagreement.

Psychoblues
 
Originally posted by OCA
http://www.bowlingfortruth.com/

All you need to know about the "facts" and "tactics" that will also be used in Farenheit.

no offense, but I don't put alot of stock in sites supported by organizations that do nothing but vehemently deny, contradict, attempt to expose, or otherwise ridicule something that may or may not expose an embarrasing account of political parties.
 
Originally posted by Psychoblues
It's not a "movie", DK. It's a partisan influenced award-winning documentary that is still open to your personal interpretation and the critisims that it will no doubt propagate. I just hope the critisisms are as thorough and documented as the documentary itself. We all get tired of being called nasty names when our accusers of aspersions offer nothing other than juvenile name calling and obvious but unsubstantiated disagreement.

Psychoblues

Speaking of nasty names and the like.

Fahrenheit 9/11 turns up the heat


ANTONIA ZERBISIAS

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

— Arthur Schopenhauer

Now that George W. Bush is disappointed to learn that the rah-rah Ronald Reagan funeral coverage won't be extended until the November election — or the capture of Osama bin Laden, whichever comes first — it is time to look back at his least Reaganesque moment.

It happened at 9:05 a.m. on Sept. 11, 2001, when White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card, the man who would, a year later, talk of "marketing'' the Iraq war, informed Bush that "a second plane has hit the World Trade Center."

Bush just sat there, blinking, listening to second graders stumble through a story about pet goats. As he would later tell London's Daily Telegraph: "I'm trying to absorb that knowledge ... I'm sitting in the midst of a classroom with little kids, listening to a children's story and I realize I'm the Commander in Chief and the country has just come under attack."

Bush, who had never got the memo (so to speak) titled "Bin Laden Determined To Attack Inside The U.S.," just! sat! there! realizing that he's the man.

At least Reagan would have said something kindly to the kids before jumping into action.

According to Michael Moore's much-hyped Fahrenheit 9/11, the documentary that will hit 1,000 screens in North America this month, what was really running through Bush's mind is how to blame Saddam Hussein.

Which is a stretch, and probably a joke. I think.

Still, it is a testament to how the mainstream media rallied round the leader that none of them have ever connected the dots, at least not in any comprehensive way, from that horrible moment all the way to Falluja.

If you want to see the video of that moment, you have to go to alternative Web sites, or see Moore's film. It's the first one-stop info shop for the masses who, because the mainstream media haven't the facts together in any cohesive or comprehensive manner, may have missed the stories of the Bush family connections to Saudis who subsidize terrorists and how members of the bin Laden family were flown out of the U.S. while American planes, which could have been carrying more hijackers, were diverted to Canada.

Fahrenheit 9/11, Moore tells Playboy in a lengthy interview this month, is "the temperature of hysteria that has allowed the Bush administration to get away with a series of unconscionable acts since 9/11."

Needless to say, Moore has been denounced as a traitor by those who heat up the airwaves with their own poison gas attacks on critics of the current administration. Among them, former comic Dennis Miller who jokes that he likes to "trade" the Abu Ghraib prison photos with his friends and Ann Coulter who refers to former President Bill Clinton as a rapist. (For a complete catalogue of all their refreshing views, visit mediamatters.org)

Rush Limbaugh, who is heard over Disney's WABC in New York where, last ratings check, the neophyte liberal Air America radio was beating him, says that the Mickey Mouse corporation was right to refuse to distribute Moore's film because it is so anti-American.

These people are "patriots." But Moore, who courageously questions the administration and the media, well, according to Fox News' Bill O'Reilly, deserves death.

The irony is, they complain about Moore being allowed to inflame partisan emotions during an election campaign when these right-wing gasbags never stop doing exactly that.

Which brings us to the Great Pink North where Vancouver's Lions Gate has the Fahrenheit 9/11 distribution rights for the U.S. while Alliance Atlantis has them for Canada.

Last week, on the financial editorial page of the National Post, Paul Kedrosky got his brow all furrowed over how Lions Gate, which has benefited from some $40 million in taxpayer support over the past three years, was helping to "topple" the U.S. government.

(This was before the news that Alliance Atlantis won the domestic rights.)

Picking up on suggestions that it could be "the first film to get a president fired," Kedrosky complained that this could be very bad for "cross-border economic ties."

But he's not for censorship, oh no.

Neither is Dennis Miller who says "We should fight to preserve a country where people such as Michael Moore get to miss the point as badly as he misses it. Michael Moore represents everything I detest in a human being."

Yeah. He's all for dissent too.

No wonder the Bush boosters are now saying that Reagan deserves a place on Mount Rushmore, even though a more fitting memorial would be the reformation of Dubya's stem cell research policy so that a cure for Alzheimer's may be found.

The truth is, 50 years from now, when Reagan's many failings will have faded from memory, he will be remembered in the history books for the part he played in ending the Cold War.

Bush, thanks to Fahrenheit 9/11, will be recalled as the guy who blinked, hesitated ... and lost the war he started.

[CORRECTION: Bill O'Reilly of Fox News is quoted herein as saying he believes Moore "deserves death." In fact, a transcript of O'Reilly's Feb. 2 TV show makes it clear that a comment he made to that effect wasn't meant to be taken seriously or literally.]

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Co...le&cid=1086991811111&call_pageid=968867495754
 
Originally posted by Psychoblues
LOL, OCA, you didn't read the post or follow the link, did you? Tsk, tsk.

Psychoblues

Psycho i'll watch the movie, for free when I download it because why would I want to contribute to the coiffers of a traitor. Yes I did follow the link but given his past history of falsifying facts and twisting the truth I didn't put much stock into the article. Really all Moore does is lie and twist in order to line his own pockets. He's just another whore. But hey the left has never been known to follow pillars of virtue, have they?

Again hit the link I provided and follow for yourself the lies propogated in his last film or better yet go to Littleton, CO and see just how loved he is there.

Or better yet have another beer and some pills and escape further away from reality, that is what you do best right Psycho?
 
Originally posted by DKSuddeth
no offense, but I don't put alot of stock in sites supported by organizations that do nothing but vehemently deny, contradict, attempt to expose, or otherwise ridicule something that may or may not expose an embarrasing account of political parties.

Nah there is nothing truthful on that site:rolleyes:
 
Originally posted by OCA
Nah there is nothing truthful on that site:rolleyes:

to quote alot of people on this board, 'legitimate source'.

do you have one? or just an exact replica on the opposite side of the coin that moveon.org sits on?
 
Just in case you missed it unintentionally, OCA, Roger Freidman goes into some detail concerning his critisisms of "Bowlin For Columbine" within the article. He goes further to relate his genuine appreciation for the thoroughness of Mr. Moore in this piece of highly lauded documentation and goes on to say that this piece of work should not be confused with any of Mr. Moore's previous work, in so many words. FoxNews? Whodathunkit?

Psychoblues
 
Originally posted by DKSuddeth
to quote alot of people on this board, 'legitimate source'.

do you have one? or just an exact replica on the opposite side of the coin that moveon.org sits on?

I love that site hehehe its almost as non-partisan as michaelmoore.com. and that op-ed piece posted by Brown a few posts back.
 
Originally posted by Psychoblues
Just in case you missed it unintentionally, OCA, Roger Freidman goes into some detail concerning his critisisms of "Bowlin For Columbine" within the article. He goes further to relate his genuine appreciation for the thoroughness of Mr. Moore in this piece of highly lauded documentation and goes on to say that this piece of work should not be confused with any of Mr. Moore's previous work, in so many words. FoxNews? Whodathunkit?

Psychoblues

1 man's opinion. In my eyes all future work of this Moore will be the work of a charletain. Sorry he's the Milli Vanilli of filmmaking.
 
Lemme get this correct. OCA is saying that Moore, in the vein of Milli Vanilli, didn't actually produce or direct anything on this documentary or just what is it to earn the comparison? And somehow this is classic? I thought the article did a great service by offering a mention of prior critisisms of Mr. Moore's work, just for balance I presume, and then lending gratitude for the improvements in objectivity that Mr. Moore demonstrates in this most recent piece, Fahrenheit 9/11. Maybe I just mistook the meaning?

Psychoblues
 
Psycho, the thing is that Michael Moore has already cemented his reputation as a lying windbag who cares about nothing but making money by saying the most inflammatory remarks possible about the Right. So to say "well, his first four movies were all BS, but this one is not"... it's too late. Michael Moore could put out a press release stating that the sky is blue and I'd still have to stick my head out the window before I believed him.
 
Any open, honest discussion of the events leading up to the war in Iraq gives Dubbyuh's supporters a chill as they know that they haven't a leg to stand on.
 

Forum List

Back
Top