So, have YOU seen "Fahrenheit 9/11"?

[Verto]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


Man, you really don't have a clue what either Moore or chegitz were saying.

Take a breather, read the post slooooowly and keep it all in context.

I understand what he meant. But it is hard to be influenced by an event when they probably didn't even know it was going on. But it could be argued other wars, like WW2 or Vietnam, could have had an effect on them.

[chequita guevara]

Verto, how could anyone not know that we were at war? Do you think there are people who don't know we've invaded Iraq?

[Atahualpa]

He was at the same time pointing out that we are a violent and warlike society, and that a culture of violence (for which Lockheed is the representitive) is going to breed violence in its children.

America's Army

[Verto]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Verto, how could anyone not know that we were at war? Do you think there are people who don't know we've invaded Iraq?

Simple cluelessness. I do believe it is possible. I knew people who didn't know we had gone into Iraq for several months after it occurred. And Iraq has been extremely publicized.

EDIT: But I will admit this is stretching it. I still doubt it affected them at all, though.

[Imran Siddiqui]

He was deliberately trying to make an absurd point, in order to point out the absurdity of blaming a goth rocker or a video game. He was at the same time pointing out that we are a violent and warlike society, and that a culture of violence (for which Lockheed is the representitive) is going to breed violence in its children.

So he was trying to make an absurd point and say L-M is somewhat responsible at the same time . I'm not exactly sure L-M is the representative for a 'culture' of violence. I wonder if Moore will ever go and **** on Hollywood... nah, that's where the liberal live.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
But he never makes clear where the culture of violence comes from. He goes through and trashes the myths of the right and the left as to why we have so much violence. I did not come away from that movie thinking that Moore had an answer other than we should treat each other with dignity and respect.

It's true, he doesn't really seem to have any kind of central statement in that movie.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

So he was trying to make an absurd point and say L-M is somewhat responsible at the same time . I'm not exactly sure L-M is the representative for a 'culture' of violence. I wonder if Moore will ever go and **** on Hollywood... nah, that's where the liberal live.

The "point" about Lockheed Martin as I saw it was this: Lokheed Martin is the main employer in this part of Colorado, and the main business of it is the business of war. Now, ***** all you want about Hollywood, but while hollywood my show pretend death, it is LM and "the military-industrial complex" that makes the instruments of REAL death.

It is a teneous point, but if anything, just as valid, if not more valid than the oft made "liberal media" connection you are so inelequently restating. He is at most presenting a possible alternative viewpoint. As such, it can't possibly be seen as a "lie", since it isn't anything but another narrative to counter the anti-hollywood one.

[SpencerH]

Why would I pay to watch a movie and enrich someone that I despise?

[MRT144]

the problem with people *****ing about the truth of michael moore is they dont want truth from their side...

its always "look at what the other guy is doing but not me". moore does it as a career, but hes entertaining and harmless about it. people running the country arent.

[DanS]

I'm curious. How big was the theater you went to and how full was it?

[Gibsie]

Originally posted by Verto
For the umpteenthtime, I have seen BfC. So, speaking of libel.

My apologies. I mistook some of Giancarlo's rantings about the latest movie as being yours.

[Verto]

zing!

[Agathon]

I saw it in a packed theatre downtown. Easily Moore's best film. After reading some of the criticisms of it I can see that the right don't have much. For example, complaining about his ambushing congressmen without making it clear that the whole exercise takes place after we have just seen a woman howl her guts out over her dead son.

Anyway, the movie doesn't say much that is new. What it does do is make it clear, in a way anyone could understand, how thoroughly the political right have been pwned over every single argument to do with the war. Hence the bluster and misrepresentation in the place of any substantive criticism.

In a clear indication that the movie must be on the ball, that corpulent fool Christopher Hitchens is its most vocal critic – the same Hitchens who claimed that "Mother Theresa is evil" and "Bill Clinton is a rapist".

PS. There's a horrible sequence of an official Saudi public beheading. Of course the Saudis are our eternal allies in the struggle against people who commit such barbaric acts.

[Agathon]

I wish the movie had dealt in more detail with the question of how Bush was able to play so many apparently rational people for saps.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Agathon
I wish the movie had dealt in more detail with the question of how Bush was able to play so many apparently rational people for saps.

one word . . . . .


propaganda