Fahrenheit 911

[dusken]

Anyway...

I would say the movie is not going to be all good and all bad. His previous movies were not all good or all bad. If you do not care, that is one thing. But leave presumptions out of criticism.

[Darorinag]

I'd rather sit home and count my pennies again.

That's what I'll be doing too.

[patlajan]

I would say the movie is not going to be all good and all bad. His previous movies were not all good or all bad. If you do not care, that is one thing. But leave presumptions out of criticism.

Only problem is he calls them "documentaries".

[Anonymouse]

An excellent point made by Jeffrey Tucker on the LRC Blog:

Tom's post argues that Moore's film focusses so much energy on exposing Bush and the Republicans, to the exclusion of the regime in the broadest sense, that one receives a distorted view: the problem isn't the state as such but rather the bad guys and interest groups that control the state.

Tom's point is exactly right. However: this is precisely the same mistake that the Clinton haters made in the 1990s. I recall hoping that all this Clinton bashing, including the attempted impeachment, would impart the bare-bones point that the government cannot be trusted. Surely, the rank-and-file would be less likely to favor government power in the future, after witnessing all of Clinton's abuses.

But no: the Clinton haters managed to somehow miss the broader point. I still hear GOPers going on about the big-government presidency of Clinton, as if they had been asleep for years. The adoration afforded Bush--the biggest big-government, arbitrary-power, shred-the-constitution, imperial president ever--is proof enough that these people never learn.

The two wings of American politics both favor some form of presidential dictatorship and only cry "Tyrant!" when the other guys are in power. Right now, the Left seems less threatening than the Right but only to the same extent to which the Right seemed less threatening than the Left during the 1990s. Libertarians have a nice solution to this problem: despise them all.

[dusken]

I listened to part of an interview with Moore who said he was also anti-Clinton as well. Or was it anti-Democrat? I cannot remember. Funny either way.

[Siggie]

Did I say I watched the movie? No I didn't. Based on two of his movies I've seen I'm not gonna watch his next movie because I think he's a joke.

I'll watch the movie on cable when I need a good laugh. But my money is not going toward promoting more misinformation for the sake of humor.

Did I say THIS current movie? NO, I didn't. You said he bends facts in his MOVIES. Plural.
I am asking for examples of this fact bending.

[Anonymouse]

I already posted a link for Bowling In Colombine. It's called www.bowlingfortruth.com. Go enlighten yourself.

[Siggie]

I already posted a link for Bowling In Colombine. It's called www.bowlingfortruth.com. Go enlighten yourself.

I havn't read the entire site, but from what I've seen it says the title is incorrect becaues the boys didn't go to bowling class that day... WHO THE HELL CARES? Does that matter?

and "was it fair to blame K-Mart?"

Did we see the same movie? I don't remember him blaming K-Mart. I remember him showing how easy it is for children to get ammunition and advocating stricter laws.

You think that saying children shouldn't be able to buy bullets at K-Mart is wrong?

-- like I said, i havn't read the entire thing and i dont have time to do it now, but at first glance at least, it seems to be misinterpreting messages of the movie or making assumptions about what they were at the very least and picking out petty, insignificant, falsities.

You can't say that Moore got it wrong that the boys went to bowling class that morning, so that discredits everything he says.

--------

** edit to add:
I read "Dude, Where's My Country?" and he does cite sources of information.

[patlajan]

I havn't read the entire site, but from what I've seen it says the title is incorrect becaues the boys didn't go to bowling class that day... WHO THE HELL CARES? Does that matter?

and "was it fair to blame K-Mart?"

Did we see the same movie? I don't remember him blaming K-Mart. I remember him showing how easy it is for children to get ammunition and advocating stricter laws.

You think that saying children shouldn't be able to buy bullets at K-Mart is wrong?

-- like I said, i havn't read the entire thing and i dont have time to do it now, but at first glance at least, it seems to be misinterpreting messages of the movie or making assumptions about what they were at the very least and picking out petty, insignificant, falsities.

You can't say that Moore got it wrong that the boys went to bowling class that morning, so that discredits everything he says.

--------

** edit to add:
I read "Dude, Where's My Country?" and he does cite sources of information.

Read the part that explains the scene at the bank where he gets a free gun took two months and was set up in advance.
Also in the movie "The Big One", about people losing their jobs in the midwest, his movie said 30 thousand people lost their jobs when it was 10 thousand. His responce was that these are still people that lost their jobs and it doesn't matter if it was 30 thousand or 10 thousand. If that is so, why did he stretch the numbers?

[dusken]

Re: The Marilyn Manson Interview...

Even though I do not like Marilyn Manson and his "music," I would like to point out how unfair and hypocritical that critique is.

First of all, the author of that site somehow got the idea that if he shows how Moore's and Manson's arguments against the government were flawed, it would somehow validate pointing the finger at Marilyn Manson. Any attempt at pointing ones finger at a single thing for being the indirect cause of something like this is presumtuous and speculative.

Then there is this:

Moore then asks what Manson would say if he could talk directly to the kids at Columbine and the people in that community? What would he say?

Manson (solemnly): "I wouldn't say a single word to them. I'd listen to what they had to say. That's what no one did."

Clever way to dodge the question.

He did not dodge the question. Only a person who is an idiot and has a tendency for rhetoric in place of valid arguments would say such a thing.

Fans of Manson's work or not - looks at quotes and writings by the Columbine boys compared to Manson's lyrics - appears as though they shared a writer.

Really? From whose Republican, literature-doctorate perspective is that? "Um...this is violent and, um...that is violent. Wow, how similar they are." No. I used to listen to Manson's shytty music and I can tell you right off, that not only did most of it not make sense (it was evasive and abstract and said nothing directly) but it never really suggested that something was proper action on the part of the audience. And, he never said that the audience's peers were enemies in any way.

Oh, and how about that beauty, "Fans of Manson's work or not..." Laughable. Clever way to overlook the fact that THEY WERE NOT INFLUENCED BY MARILYN MANSON. When was that last time you hated an artist while not only respecting what they said and how they said it, but being extremely familiar with every word they wrote?

Let me add this:
Did anyone single out Chuck Palahniuk for "Fight Club"? Did anyone single out Arnold Schartzenegger for being in one action movie after another, at least one of which is shown on television everyday? Did anyone single out any of the other thousands of bands that at some point in time wrote violent or explicit lyrics? No. Is the reason they did not single out anyone else because all of the parents and the entire nation were already authorities on everything Marilyn Manson? No. They were just phucking stupid and did not want to blame themselves. I mean come on! The guy has paint on his face!