Disney blocks next Michael Moore film

DCillusion · Sat 29/05/2004 19:40:43

This might be confusing to members outside the United States, but the their are strict laws in place about exterior sources influencing an election during the election year. The candidates themselves are allowed to say whatever they like, but beyond that, the idea is that citizens determine the who they want based on known works before they made a bid for the presidency. Organizations like the press are, sadly still influenced, but they aren't supposed to be. Disney plans to release the movie following the election. Disney isn't an ethical company by any means, but there were actuall legal concerns about the release dates.

The fact that Mr. Moore was SOOOOOO violently angered by a fall release, as opposed to a spring release, makes me wonder if his "Documentary" is a little more biased then he would like people to believe. If he made an "unbiased" film, why would he care about a 6 month posponement?

DGMacphee · Sun 30/05/2004 04:07:12

Moore's already stated that his film will bring down the Bush administration.

Las Naranjas · Sun 30/05/2004 04:12:25

I don't think that at any time anyone ever thought that it's an unbiased film.

But it's a bias that is evident, since it's purpose is stated, and it's clear to the audience that the film maker has an goal, and is striving towards an objective, rather than objectivity.

As opposed to say, Fox News, which is equally biased, but claims the mantle of Fair and Balanced.

DGMacphee · Mon 31/05/2004 04:10:19

Have a read of some of the Q&As of Ebert's Movie Answer Man this week:

http://www.suntimes.com/output/answ-man/sho-sunday-ebert30.html

DGMacphee · Tue 01/06/2004 08:00:57

And the plot thickens:

Moore Filmed Interview with Berg

Michael Moore filmed an interview with slain American businessman Nicholas Berg in Arlington, VA last December in which Berg discussed his concern for his safety before going to Iraq, Berg's family said Saturday. Moore confirmed that he had shot the interview for his award-winning documentary Fahrenheit 9/11 but said he would not make it public. He did send a copy of the interview to the family. Berg's brother David complimented Moore for handling the situation with "dignity, respect and discipline." He told the Associated Press: "Michael Moore has really been a total class act with this whole thing. ... He could have sold this to the media or stuck it in his movie."

From IMDB.

jetxl · Tue 01/06/2004 12:22:04

Quote from: Farlander on Fri 28/05/2004 20:06:45
And you watch too much Sesame Street.

I wished you watched some sesame street. You could learn something about morals and values of life. And some people skills as well.

Nacho · Tue 01/06/2004 12:24:07

Hilarious! The man who faced the community for two boobs talks of people skills!

jetxl · Tue 01/06/2004 12:54:54

Hilarious! Your rotten attitude says it all

Nacho · Tue 01/06/2004 13:02:43

Rotten attitude? Come on! You can be more harsh, try it again!

But please, do it in PM, this guys don't deserve to see their Forums infected with flame wars.

Ali · Tue 01/06/2004 13:21:06

Quote from: DCillusion on Sat 29/05/2004 19:40:43
If he made an "unbiased" film, why would he care about a 6 month posponement?

This has been rebutted quite effectively by Las Naranjas, but I still want to make the following statement:

Having a point to make is not bias, stopping a recount because you're not happy who might actually have won the election is. I'm tired of closed-mindedness and bias becoming synonimous with acting upon well-founded beliefs.

Igor · Tue 01/06/2004 13:41:39

Agree with those who say that the more appropritae title for Moore's movies would be "mockumentaries" or even "propaganda" movies. Not that this is a bad thing... they make people think (in similar way as political caricatures does) and their impact is much stronger.

jetxl · Thu 03/06/2004 13:10:56

Micheal Moore found a distibutor for his movie!
http://www.michaelmoore.com/index_real.php

Andail · Thu 03/06/2004 13:32:02

Ali, well said.

The movie will be released in June. I wonder how many times certain people will include the word "biased" in their posts after having watched it.

"He's saying bad things about George W Bush! That's so biased!1!!1"

juncmodule · Thu 03/06/2004 17:11:34

I'm going to say it before someone else does: "That movie sucked."

Now that it is coming out I'm sure people will go see it expecting it to be some kind of life altering, anger inducing, great epiphany. It will just be a movie with a guy bitching. Intertwined with the bitching he will present some facts about Bush that some people won't like and some will like.

Basically my point is, first person that says "I don't see what the big deal was" or something to that affect is an idiot. Although, even before seeing it, I don't see what the big deal is.

Oh, a just a note, I'm not sure if this has been mentioned yet. I found some interviews from Michael Moore that are about two years old. He mentions the Bin Laden/Bush connection in the interview and cites his source, an author from the "New Yorker". I just thought it was interesting that this is actually old news that he has covered before (Some of The New Yorker articles were published in September of 2001.) Only with the release of his movie does it get international attention. A lot of which is mockery of Michael Moore rather than paying attention to the actual subject matter.

June 22nd...I'm pretty excited about this...

later,
-junc

voh · Sat 19/06/2004 18:50:01

You are all gimboids, but yeah, I'm awaiting the release of the movie as well. Even though it might not get into cinemas here in the Neths, it's probably 'available through other means' swiftly enough.

Sutebi · Sat 19/06/2004 19:21:10

I think it's been said, I don't know a lot of people are speaking rather muddled (that or I'm just tired from a lot of work this morning), but yes, Moore's film is biased, but there is no problem with that.

I believe it was Teddy Roosevelt who first used the phrase, but I guess Moore could kind of be seen as a Muckraker, except he is doing a very poor job of that. Moore is saying that he hopes his film will stimulate the "Anti-Bush" vote. So, he doesn't want people to vote for the best candidate, no, he wants them to just not vote for Bush. Frankly, I will vote for Bush because he is the best candidate. I mean, he may not be perfect and I do not agree with everything that he does and says, but he is the best candidate and he is a strong leader who stands by his words and is not afraid to take action.

And, I actually think this movie will be bad because it'll basically be nothing we haven't heard before from Moore and his like (the broadcasters on the quickly dieing Air America, et. al.). I think the movie will just be the same old tired connections. You may aruge, "Oh, but Steve! He won an award in France for the film!" The only thing that brings the French together is Anti-American sentiments, so of course they would give Moore an award that bashes America.

As a side note, Moore no longer has the Palme D'Or because after recieving it, he promptly ate it.

MrColossal · Sat 19/06/2004 22:27:37

Did you rant and rave over the French not helping us in the "war"? I just want to know because I like how you completely generalize every French person.

Also, are you serious that Bush stands by his words?

And what's with this idea of "tired old connections"? So if someone brings up the truth a lot it just gets tiring after a while? Damn that truth... Lies are much more interesting.

And again, do you think Micheal Moore is bashing The United States or the Bush administration?

Nacho · Sat 19/06/2004 22:52:59

How were going to French going to help the US in the war, or the Germans? 90% of the petrol refineries in Iraq belong them, take a look to the petrol companies located in Iraq before the war.

Now that this possibility has gone, they're helping again... That shows that French and Germans go to war or not deppending on their interests (like the U.S. of course...)

Fortunately, the U.S. hadn't that attitude in 1944, if so, the French would greet us saying "Hallo, mein Name is Remy, wie heiBen Sie? Ich bin gut, Danke!"

c.leksutin · Sun 20/06/2004 01:58:15

this is all done guys.

C.

PS: look at my sig

voh · Sun 20/06/2004 04:18:52

Quote from: Farlander on Sat 19/06/2004 22:52:59
Fortunately, the U.S. hadn't that attitude in 1944, if so, the French would greet us saying "Hallo, mein Name is Remy, wie heiBen Sie? Ich bin gut, Danke!"Ã,Â

I'm getting sick of people going "If America hadn't stepped in everybody would've spoken German".

The Americans were happily providing weapons to both causes, and it took them 4 damn years to finally step in. WW2 wasn't won by America. It was won by America, Canada, Britain, and on the other side the Russians, who were the ones who actually invaded Germany and hit the Germans at their own game - in their own country.

Bah.