GREEN CINE Already a member? login
 Your cart
Help
Advanced Search
- Genres
+ Action
+ Adult
+ Adventure
+ Animation
+ Anime
+ Classics
+ Comedies
+ Comic Books
+ Crime
  Criterion Collection
+ Cult
+ Documentary
+ Drama
+ Erotica
+ Espionage
  Experimental/Avant-Garde
+ Fantasy
+ Film Noir
+ Foreign
+ Gay & Lesbian
  HD (High Def)
+ Horror
+ Independent
+ Kids
+ Martial Arts
+ Music
+ Musicals
  Pre-Code
+ Quest
+ Science Fiction
  Serials
+ Silent
+ Sports
+ Suspense/Thriller
  Sword & Sandal
+ Television
+ War
+ Westerns


Public Discussions

topics
GreenCine Movie Talk
In The Theaters
I just saw it and boy does it...
318

Fahrenheit 9/11
Topic by: kamapuaa
Posted: June 23, 2004 - 6:48 PM PDT
Last Reply: September 27, 2004 - 3:05 PM PDT

page  1  2  3  4  5      prev | next
author topic: Fahrenheit 9/11
kamapuaa
post #1  on June 23, 2004 - 6:48 PM PDT  
I'll probably see this movie when it comes out in a couple days (although it shares a release date with "Oasis"). But, I thought it was interesting to see that it was all-but-blasted by the wildly anti-Bush San Francisco Bay Guardian.
Cinenaut
post #2  on June 24, 2004 - 2:25 PM PDT  
I'm hoping to see it this weekend.

I'm sure it can't possibly stand up to all the hype, but as a consumer (and not a movie critic), I'm free to wallow in the unabashed Bush bashing.
hamano
post #3  on June 24, 2004 - 2:40 PM PDT  
Apparently it's a diatribe, but those can be fun if you agree with the diatriber.
sinisterguffaw
post #4  on June 24, 2004 - 10:15 PM PDT  
but those can be fun if you agree with the diatriber.
> ---------------------------------

And How!

I just called to say I love Michael Moore, despite the fact that he is pretty much a glorified propaganda artist. But to say MichaelMooreHatesAmerica, as this Michael Wilson says, is completely idiotic. What could be more patriotic than questioning authority and ensuring the American system of checks and balances remains in tact? Perhaps Moore's tactics are extreme and biased. Well, no perhaps about it really. But the truth behind it is what is important, and F-9/11 brings issues to the forefront that americans need to discuss.

This film serves a great purpose as a catalyst for meaningful discussion on the state of affairs in the Bush era of American history. No matter which side of the political divide.

BTW, Only click on that link I gave if you wanna be seriously annoyed. Or I guess any right-wingers could click it too and find themselves in a place more delightfully out of balance and out of touch than FoxNews.
dpowers
post #5  on June 24, 2004 - 10:36 PM PDT  
that article in the SFBG by ruby rich was one of four opinions on the film, run side by side yesterday. her take comes after what must have been a long, painful exposure to over-praise at cannes. she's in a cantankerous mood lately about What Is To Be Done. i'm sure the comments have merit tho.

i always learn something from mike's movies... i think it's because he goes off so half-cocked sometimes, and he's a lot of fun to talk with, he pulls those weird details out of people that reveal how personally invested they are in the status quo even when they're trying to pitch him on how they're doing the future a favor.
Cinenaut
post #6  on June 25, 2004 - 10:15 AM PDT  
Salon.com did the same sort of thing, running both a positive and a negative review of the film.
DLeonard
post #7  on June 25, 2004 - 12:03 PM PDT  
An interesting little twist to the Fahrenheit 9/11 saga is happening at my local movie house.

The Grand Lake Theatre in Oakland is not enforcing the "R" rating. They will let anyone over the age of 13 purchase a ticket without adult supervision.

Could this be the beginning of theatre owners defying the MPAA? Not bloody likely. But it does set a lovely precedent. The Grand Lake's owner came out the winner in an anti-competition suit (the studios changed policy before any actual court case) against the major studios a while back, so this is one guy who ain't afraid of a fight.

Cinenaut
post #8  on June 25, 2004 - 1:15 PM PDT  
Since my local theater held The Passion of the Christ over for a special four week engagement, I won't be holding my breath on that one, although they did eventually show Bowling for Columbine.
Catullus
post #9  on June 25, 2004 - 5:40 PM PDT  
Interesting News

Apparently they want the dvd out before the elections so the dvds are coming in September!!!

well that will probably influence me to rent it from GC instead of seeing it in theaters (sorry MM)

DEccleston
post #10  on June 25, 2004 - 6:01 PM PDT  
Its not as good as it might be and not as bad as some have said. There are a couple of dull passages but overall it is an interesting film and well worth seeing. There is not a lot of new information but the way it is arranged and presented is fascinating. There was a bit of mumbling throuhout as members of the audience were agreeing with the film.
hardcle
post #11  on June 25, 2004 - 11:43 PM PDT  
I saw it today and I think it's Moore's best work yet. He's on screen less than any of his other films and I think it helps here. There were a couple of sequences with the mother of a soldier who was killed in Iraq that I found absolutley heart-wrenching.

As for new information, it depends on where you usually get your news. If all you watched was mainstream media your jaw would probably drop off with all the new information. I consume as much liberal media as I can get my hands on and I learned a few things. Especially watching Al Gore presiding over the joint session of Congress which certfied the election results. Several Congressmen arose to protest the results but not one Senator (not even Lieberman!) would sign on to officially contest the election.

I live in Missouri, and the line about how we preferred a dead guy to John Ashcroft for Senate got a big round of applause.

There was a voter registration table outside one local theater and they seemed to be doing a good business.

Any Republican who sees this and doesn't at least have questions about Bush and the war isn't being honest with themselves.
JBellows
post #12  on June 26, 2004 - 8:03 AM PDT  
I am definitely going to see this movie because Republican politicians are actually telling people to NOT see this movie.

And, yes, I am not voting Bush again in '04. There's conservativism. And there's Fascism. I would vote for a slice of ham into office if given the choice.
Tinker
post #13  on June 27, 2004 - 12:35 AM PDT  
Can you say: Triple Espresso America? Okay, with a little sugar.

Michael Moore has crafted a devastating film millions of Americans have longed to see, and longed to hear. Moore casts a light over this administration's dubious rise to power, and the awful choices they've made in our names for their wallets, but most importantly Fahrenheit 911 challenges the assumption of the "Morality of Power" profligate by Fox News, the other major news outlets, and many talk radio hosts as well. Moreover, the film outlines the Bushs' money trail and Saudi connections, and neatly puts into perspective the motivating factors behind their guise of patriotism and democratic values--in other words: their own less than Christian greed.

The emperor has no clothes, the emperor is a perversion, the emperor is a fool. But didn't we already know this?

Not largely covered thus far in the media, I feel, is the film's biting indictment of the democratic party as well. How a single senator could have started a debate into the election results of 2000, and failed to do so. How the democrats, with few (Barbara Lee) exceptions, abandoned the trusts of the people who elected them, and gave Bush his war powers, and the Patriot Act. How they sat on their hands and allowed evil a free hand. And most disturbing is the revelation that congress doesn't read most of the bills they're voting on! What? That's an outrage! This should be illegal. How dare they not read the laws they're about to vote on, or leave it to interns and their Cliff Notes to judge such important decisions on. That's got to change. Yes, it will slow up the works, but hey, maybe this will rid us of the government's midnight voting sessions.

Maybe a law that says-- all newly printed legislation going up for its final vote must be held for a period of one week -- would work, with the exception of maybe the budgets.

Anyway the democrats don't come away from this movie smelling like roses is the point. They were supposed to fight for us and they failed & miserably. Makes you wonder if they're in the same bed with the Republicans-- sure, not the Christian Right, they're just a money cow to the latter and a chance to pay lip service to values they've only read about in books-- Okay, maybe such wonderment is short-lived, they are in the same bed as the Republicans, beholden to the same military industrial tycoons, and Saudi interests-- Damn, they own 6-7% of our country! Pissing them off, or letting them meet some il-fated beheading at the hands of the fundamentalist Muslims they allowed to prosper in their country (and who flew the planes on 911) ain't going to happen under Kerry either.

Clearly, our voting has been reduced to sugarcoated verses unsugarcoated. Kerry, [whether pandering to the powers-that-be because he doesn't want to have a little plane accident-- probably over the Midwest which seems to be a favorite death hole for democrats during election years-- or whether its lip service, and once he gets in, he'll actually change things] is still the lesser of three evils. At least we'll be able to start repairing the damage domestically, even though the Bush legacy will haunt whomever assumes the presidency for decades to come.

The first ray of hope is the ouster of Bush, although maybe leaving him in power, letting the country bottom out, or maybe get destroyed, is the best thing? Sometimes I think these folks know some great asteroid is about to strike the planet and they've vowed to live it up because we're all f**ked. Or is that the second coming? Hmmm? Nah! Must be the asteroid.

The tricky part will be after Bush is defeated again. We'll have to hold the line until all the current family members die off. Did they reproduce? God, let's pray not. These folks must never be entrusted with power again.

As for the movie: Wake up America! Your quaint notions of the morality of those in power has received a gauntlet across the face. Challenge it at the risk of your complacency. Moore's film is an excellent vehicle for fueling debate. Truly the only must-see film of 21st century thus far.

JBellows
post #14  on June 27, 2004 - 7:27 AM PDT  
To follow what CKing has said, and to respond to the articles crying foul because Moore manipulates the facts in the film, I really went, "huh?" Dont these people watch PBS or even the Nature Channel? Haven't they ever watched a documentary in Civic Studies in high school? What documentary, pray tell, what documentary does NOT slant the facts to the topic? The film is NOT news reporting, which is also biased, its a personal statement! Which is why it's called a...documentary!

And CKing is right. Everybody who wants a piece of the pie is not squeeky clean. They sit by and watch, or they push enough buttons until young men and women get killed, or encourage suppression of our Constitutional rights, which men and women died to protect, ie "dont go see this movie, theater owners boycott this movie," etc.

Now more than ever I think I am going to write in my vote: a slice of ham for president.
eifert
post #15  on June 27, 2004 - 9:19 AM PDT  
It's funny but uneven. There's a few scenes that should have been removed completly. The state trooper part, for example.

I agree with his politics, but he could have at least mentioned why Saddam is a bad guy - torture, wars, murder. Instead he just showed cute kids playing in Iraqi sunshine.

However, with that said, Bush has responded in a big way. Check out www.georgewbush.com and watch the ad. It takes a discredited Moveon.org ad (the one with Hitler) and edits it together with screaming democrats, clearly making it look like the democrats are like Hitler.

After seeing both Moore's movie and this ad, it's clear that this country is in for some rough seas ahead.
Tinker
post #16  on June 27, 2004 - 11:05 AM PDT  
> On June 27, 2004 - 9:19 AM PDT eifert wrote:
> ---------------------------------
... There's a few scenes that should have been removed completely. The state trooper part, for example. ...
>
I disagree and actually thought the movie could have been longer on the domestic front. In fairness the trooper's admitting that only 8 other troopers patrolled the entire state didn't take into account local police on duty, Coast Guard, and many of other agencies, but I can't imagine the added numbers drastically tipping things in the favor of public safety. Perhaps the movie's little sidetrips, like the trooper's story, was Moore's way of giving us a breather, which was definitely necessary.

I took several people to see this movie, and three of the women were in tears afterwards. Overwhelmed, two of them couldn't even talk about the movie until the next day. How long has it been since a movie did that to anyone? Okay, Herbie goes Monte Carlo, maybe, but I can't think of another, except maybe Shinder's List, or Platoon.

cryptoc
post #17  on June 27, 2004 - 5:07 PM PDT  
> I took several people to see this movie, and three of the women were in tears afterwards. Overwhelmed, two of them couldn't even talk about the movie until the next day. How long has it been since a movie did that to anyone? Okay, Herbie goes Monte Carlo, maybe, but I can't think of another, except maybe Shinder's List, or Platoon.

Grave of the Fireflies. I still tear up just thinking about it. Having missed the very beginning of the film I didn't see the ending coming until it was too late.

There are a number of other films which have personally bothered me as an American though, which is perhaps more relevant to the subject. The Killing Fields, for instance, or Full Metal Jacket.
ALittlefield
post #18  on June 27, 2004 - 7:46 PM PDT  
I agree with Micheal Moore most of the time, so I really enjoyed the film, in fact it's probably his best; it really puts the audience through the ringer, and it is truly rare to see a film that can ellicit outrage, sadness and laughter at the same time. Is he the left wing version of Rush Limbaugh? Well, yes and no; he certainly has a point of view, and he will distort or remove facts that don't push that point, but I still feel that he is less of a bully than Limbaugh, who's attacks are often made at the powerless (those horrible welfare moms!) instead of the powerful.
eifert
post #19  on June 28, 2004 - 12:01 AM PDT  
> On June 27, 2004 - 11:05 AM PDT cking wrote:
> ---------------------------------
> > On June 27, 2004 - 9:19 AM PDT eifert wrote:
> > ---------------------------------
> ... There's a few scenes that should have been removed completely. The state trooper part, for example. ...
> >
> I disagree and actually thought the movie could have been longer on the domestic front. In fairness the trooper's admitting that only 8 other troopers patrolled the entire state didn't take into account local police on duty, Coast Guard, and many of other agencies, but I can't imagine the added numbers drastically tipping things in the favor of public safety. Perhaps the movie's little sidetrips, like the trooper's story, was Moore's way of giving us a breather, which was definitely necessary.
>
But that's where Moore is inconsistant. He had a scene earlier, a funny one, where middle America is going into panic mode because of all the terrorism threats. It's clear that they aren't going to hit small town American cities. At least that's what Moore was saying. Then he does the state trooper thing in the northwest. Which is it? Is the Bush admin. making people panic about terrorism or are the threats real and we need more police everywhere. See what I mean? He throws up every critisim of Bush he can (which I enjoy) but he's not focused. He doesn't seem to have a direction in the movie sometimes. Same for the Army troops. One minute they're a bunch of hard core rap fans killing children and women; then we're crying about the death of one of them. Feel like a ping pong ball...
>
>
> ---------------------------------

Cinenaut
post #20  on June 28, 2004 - 9:00 AM PDT  
> On June 28, 2004 - 12:01 AM PDT eifert wrote:
> ---------------------------------
> But that's where Moore is inconsistant. He had a scene earlier, a funny one, where middle America is going into panic mode because of all the terrorism threats. It's clear that they aren't going to hit small town American cities. At least that's what Moore was saying. Then he does the state trooper thing in the northwest. Which is it? Is the Bush admin. making people panic about terrorism or are the threats real and we need more police everywhere. See what I mean?
> ---------------------------------

I think Moore's point is that if the administration is serious about beefing up "homeland security," they'd actually be beefing it up (i.e. providing funding for more troopers), instead of just breaking down civil liberties.

page  1  2  3  4  5      prev | next

about greencine · donations · refer a friend · support · help · genres
contact us · press room · privacy policy · terms · sitemap · affiliates · advertise

Copyright © 2005 GreenCine LLC. All rights reserved.
© 2006 All Media Guide, LLC. Portions of content provided by All Movie Guide®, a trademark of All Media Guide, LLC.