Fahrenheit 911

[adreamofequality]

I finally saw this movie. I thought it was good. What are your thoughts about the movie and Michael Moore?

[STABD]

i really enjoyed his speech at the end

[BitchBrew]

It's good, intresting and good. But be aware that Michail Moore isn't just a political comentater, he's a satirical, he makes humor, so I would advise you to take what he says with a pinch of salt.


One of my teachers took my class to see this film in a movie theater, I think most of the school went... :unsure:

[Le People]

It is very good, but to really open your cappie friends' eyes, make them watch Roger and Me. Micheal moore is a very good documentrist, but he does bend stuff a littel. I prefer the straight scope, but his documentries are very entertaining as well as in formative. Did you know he also wrote, dircected, and produced Canadian Bacon?

[adreamofequality]

many of my cappie friends who have watched the movie are still in denial of the truth. they say that moore did twist the facts and most of it is not true. i also have a friend, who is a socialist, that said moore is just as much of a nazi as bush. he said he liked the movie but doesnt like michael moore.

[Taiga]

I really enjoyed the episode of scared and confused Bush. :lol:

[Commandante_Ant]

I enjoyed 9/11 as it really opened my eyes to the lies and deceit that goes in the world today. But i am also aware that Moore isnt a Bush fan so of course his argument is one sided, it isnt balanced..although anyone that can stick up for Bush needs a good slap. I also enjoy reading his books, Stupid White Men is a great read...tails off towards the end but still an enjoyable read.

[Bannockburn]

I enjoyed it. It was about as good as Bowling. Good for the most part, but a lot of propagandhi to fit his ideals. However, that being said, 9/11 fits in good with others such as Weapons of mass deception.

[UnionofSovietSocialistRepublics]

It was okay in terms of the fact that it was trying to get peoples attention to change their mind.
In terms of a political piece it was sub par, relying on emotion far too much.

[timbaly]

It was okay in terms of the fact that it was trying to get peoples attention to change their mind.
In terms of a political piece it was sub par, relying on emotion far too much.

I agree with this as well. There was also too much propaganda such as making Bush and others look like evil men by shaking the hands of Saudi leaders. All diplomats would do that, even those from Iraq would have done the same. There was way too much time spent on those clips of meetings.

[anomaly]

Emotion can often prove a better tool than logic. Of course, in this case, I suppose it wasn't, considering Bush won the election.

Also, do not pass this movie off as 'just' propaganda. Most observers agree that the film was around 95% factual. There were some glaring errors, but these were few. For example, when he claims that the Saudis control "7%" of the american economy, this is simply untrue. But when he says that the US performed periodic bombings on Iraq between the first Gulf War and this one, that is true (and also a very good argument against the Iraq war).

[Ultra-Violence]

Also, do not pass this movie off as 'just' propaganda. Most observers agree that the film was around 95% factual. There were some glaring errors, but these were few. For example, when he claims that the Saudis control "7%" of the american economy, this is simply untrue. But when he says that the US performed periodic bombings on Iraq between the first Gulf War and this one, that is true (and also a very good argument against the Iraq war).

Please tell me more i really wanna know what was ture and what wasnt because when i talk to poeple about it they just say"it was all Propoganda"


:hammer:

[adreamofequality]

yea can u give a few more examples because i was telling people that the thing about the saudis owning 7% of america was true. Now i feel stupid.

[Clarksist]

Fahreneit 9/11 was good, as was Bowling for Columbine, as was Roger & Me, this guy is on a fucking roll.

What I liked is that it had loads of strong humor, and no real grimacing "I-need-a-laugh" lines. Plus, it made the case as to why Bush needs a good kicking out of the White House.

Overall though, it didn't really change many minds, I don't think. It was too overly one sided to real in any centrist-conservatives.

[timbaly]

Does anyone know the story behind why it was not nominated for the best documentary award at the academy awards?

[Hegemonicretribution]

He fights fire with fire. Personally am not a fan, but I highly recommend him to get people interested, his later stuff I think is stronger. I prefered this to earlier work, also in terms of books I think Dude, Wheres my country? is one of his strongest. Annoying, maybe but as things stand I would vote for him (on term only).

[amos]

I preferred the BBC documentary series: The Power Of Nightmares, which compared the rise of fundamentalist branches of Islam to the rise of the Neo-Conservatives in the US.

Cheers
Amos

[Bannockburn]

Power of Nightmeres was really good, and I enjoyed it. I want to find a copy. I really thought Power of nightmeres was more broad than 9/11. Moore was filming about 9/11 and Bush. The former, however was the broader scope of Islam and the Neo-Cons. I enjoyed them both. If you throw "weapons of mass deception" in there with media propaganda, you'll almost have a box set.

[poppy]

Altho ... Micheal Moore is obviously slanted, I don't think you'll find many inaccuracies in his movie. I liked Fahrenheit 911 but I think "Bush Family Fortunes: The Best Democracy Money Can Buy" is a better film. I could be wrong but i think M.Moore gleans the bulk of his info from Greg Palast's investigative reporting. Though Palast lacks the humor, he present the sources and documentation to give his claims credibility.

[rioters bloc]

i didn't like it, i don't really like his documentaries in general


any kind of humourous text, no matter how fact-tional it's alleged to be is bound to be sensationalised


plus i got a little bored of it


i'm not saying he doesn't have a lot of good points, but in an argument with a bush supporter i'd rather not rely on his documentaries because its so easy to be pulled up on certain things unless you REALLY do your research first


in which case i'd rather read


entertainment wise, it's not bad. just don't base your thesis on it.

[RUSH1111]

He's a fucking dumbass, and so are u for believing the hype.. all of that was bull shit

[Le People]

Somebody ban this fascist Bigot.