Posted on 07/04/2004 6:20:01 AM PDT by Brian Mosely
MOORE: 'I DON'T LIKE THIS FILM BEING REDUCED TO BUSH VS. KERRY'
Sun Jul 04 2004 08:59:00 ET
New York – “I don’t like this film being reduced to Bush vs. Kerry,” Fahrenheit 9/11 director Michael Moore tells TIME’s Richard Corliss in this week’s cover story. Moore tells TIME, “When Clinton was president I went after him. And if Kerry’s president, on Day Two I’ll be on him.”
This election year, with stakes and tempers high, a potent non-fiction genre is emerging: the agit-doc, dealing with high-octane political issues, often in a confrontational tone, Corliss writes. Trailing on Moore’s box office clout, they are surging into the mainstream. One agit-doc, The Hunting of the President, co-directed by Clinton pal Harry Thomason, was originally to go to 30 theaters; now its distributor has revved the number to 125, and has put the film’s trailer on many screens showing Fahrenheit 9/11. The Army and Air Force Exchange Service, which books films to be shown on military bases around the world, has contacted Fahrenheit’s distributor to book the film, TIME reports.
“We’ve underestimated the audience’s desire to see [political] material,” says Robert Greenwald, director of Uncovered: The War on Iraq, a sober and devastating critique of Bush foreign policy. “I don’t think it’s about hating the President. It’s that politics has been brought home to the deepest part of ourselves. People now feel ‘Politics is Me’.”
Today people get their news and, just as important, their attitudes from more rambunctious sources: from the polarized polemicists on talk radio and cable news channels, from comedians and webmasters. That’s poli-tainment, and as practiced by Rush Limbaugh and a host of right-wing radio hosts, and by Matt Drudge on the internet, it hounded Bill Clinton’s presidency while spicing and coarsening the standards of political discourse, Corliss writes.
Fahrenheit 9/11 may be the watershed event that demonstrates whether the empire of poli-tainment can have decisive influence on a presidential campaign, Corliss writes. If it does, we may come to look back on its hugely successful first week the way we now think of the televised presidential debate between John Kennedy and Richard Nixon, as a moment when we grasped for the first time the potential of a mass medium to affect American politics in new ways. In which case, expect the next generation of campaign strategists to precede every major election not only with the traditional TV ad buys but also with a scheme for the rollout of some thermonuclear book or movie or CD or even video game, all designed to tilt the political balance just in time, Corliss writes.
Andrew Sullivan asks: Is Michael Moore Actually Mel Gibson’s Alter Ego? In a related essay, Sullivan writes, “There are times when the far right and the far left are so close in methodology as to be indistinguishable. And both movies are not just terrible as movies—crude, boring, gratuitous; they are also deeply corrosive of the possibility of real debate and reason in our culture. They replace argument with feeling, reasoned persuasion with the rawest of group loyalties.”
I am happy to report that a local newspaper accepted my letter to the editor regarding Moore's movie:
"Regarding Michael Moore's movie Fahrenheit 9/11, have we so blurred the lines between actual news and entertainment that people can no longer tell the difference?
Moore insinuates that President Bush permitted the bin Laden family to leave the country without FBI approval after 9/11. Richard Clarke testified to the 9/11 Commission that he took direct responsibility for permitting the family to leave but only after the FBI cleared them.
The Patriot Act is so despised by Moore that it's surprising he would suggest that over 100 family members, most of whom were estranged from OBL, should be held in the country against their will.
Moore insinuates the Taliban met with Bush in Texas and the war in Afghanistan was to help Unocal Corporation build a pipeline in that country. The Taliban never met with Bush although they did meet with Clinton administration officials twice in 1997 and 1998. Unoral ultimately withdrew from planning to build the Afghanistan pipeline in 1998.
Moore claims there was no relationship between bin Laden and Hussein, ignoring the fact in 1998 the Clinton administration obtained a federal indictment against bin Laden which specifically mentioned the terrorist's connections with Saddam and the agreement they had to work cooperatively on weapons development.
Despite some initial mis-reporting by the press, the 9/11 Commission has detailed many connections between the terrorist and Saddam but they could find no operational role in 9/11 between AQ and Iraq. Even that was countered a few days later by the Commission Co-Chairmen when they said that a high ranking member of Iraq's Fedayeen military was present during at least one pre-9/11 planning meeting.
The list of falsehoods in the movie is a long one and does not distinguish Moore or those who get their "news" from the entertainment industry."
Moore is insane. No wonder TIME has him on their cover. I pray for vindication for our president and that his enemies, foreign and domestic, do not break his spirit as he seeks another term. We need him.
"sigh..."
Yes, the week that Saddam faces his 1st day in court, the Times chooses to use this as its cover story. - Sick.
Julie - Please ask the forum admin. to delete your post about your letter.
It hasn't been printed in a newspaper yet and they all seem to conduct internet plagarism searches and will think you plagarized this letter.
I wrote a letter to the editor once about the economy and before it was accepted in a newspaper, I posted it on Free Republic. I received two letters from different newspapers they could not publish the letter because it was on the internet. I tried to convince them that I am peach but, of course, they had no way of knowing that.
Yours is an excellent letter and I'm so glad freepers are writing them, but do ask that your post be deleted so your letter has a chance of being printed in the newspaper.
AFTER it is in a newspaper, post it again for other freepers to see!
"And both movies are not just terrible as movies—crude, boring, gratuitous; they are also deeply corrosive of the possibility of real debate and reason in our culture. They replace argument with feeling, reasoned persuasion with the rawest of group loyalties.”
Andrew Sullivan just didn't get The Passion, though he's right that both films evoke very strong feelings.
One leaves The Passion full of love and forgiveness, inspired by the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. It's a beautiful movie.
But I think I'd have a rage-inspired stroke if I sat through F-9/11.
The one big difference that Sullivan misses is that The Passion unflinchingly reflects the truth, while F-9/11 is full of lies and distortions.
Wow. That picture is gonna win votes with the gun crowd. Let's see. Finger in the trigger guard and gun pointed level in one direction while JFK is looking the other direction and yelling to someone. This guy should be teaching a gun safety course.
When he does a film about Kerry's participation in the VVAW meeting Nov. 12-15, 1971 in Kansas City, then I might take him seriously. For now, he is a RAT propagandist slob. I've heard him defend our Rapist impeached and disgraced ex-president.
Amazing, another one who doesn't know a thing about guns playing irresponsibly with them. I was gonna post this, glad someone did. More concerned with the press and the publicity than the fact that his finger is still on the trigger and he has no idea what is downrange. Who invited him to play, I wonder?
That's pretty much my take on comrade Moore......
Pray for W and Our Troops
Moore is a left wing discontent/malcontent. He voted against Clinton in 96 and Gore in 2000 because they weren't left enough. He voted Nader both times. I think, he can best be described as the Pat Buchanan of the left.
who joined with us on that day, in the bold and doubtful
election we were to make for our country, between submission or the sword;
MUSLIMS hear this and remember it!
We CHOSE the SWORD rather than submit!
Time & Moore. Never in my house.
You know what it looks like, like he is posing so it will look like he is getting shot in the head. And this guy is a John Kennedy fan? He`s running for President and he thinks getting shot in the head is funny? He`s like a little kid, he truly is. I wrote in another post that most people get over the self-absortion thing in their late teens early 20`s, this guy is in his 50`s and he still hasn`t. He drives around with license plates on his car that say "Purpleheart3" and he flip flops on anything and everything to whatever makes HIM look best. He has absolutely no strong ideals or beliefs except for one thing, himself. And they have the gall to call Bush arrogant. The only reason he is running for President is to stroke his ego, just like when he came back from Vietnam and put the spotlight on himself with the anti-war crowd. This guy makes Clinton look like Mr. Modesty by comparison.
At some point conservatives will realize that the media and the beltway establishment are friends of the state, not of conservative or libertarian principles. FNC and Rush Limbaugh are voices, but they exist at the pleasure of the permanent state apparatus. They give us the illusion of "freedom" when in fact they are just instruments of social control. There may come a time when we are presented with a real choice: stand up for our principles, or suck it up and avoid trouble. Which will we choose?
At that point, of course, it may not even look like a choice, if the media have been doing their jobs well.
Sounds like Moore is afraid that he won't be able to advertise his film.
It's a horrible movie.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.