Guardian: Hezbollah offers to 'help' Farenheit 9/11

[Glocksman]

Guardian Article

Fahrenheit 9/11 gets help offer from Hezbollah

Samantha Ellis
Thursday June 17, 2004
The Guardian

The controversy over Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 just won't go away. The film, which is being advertised with the strapline "Controversy? What controversy?", has been rated R by the Motion Picture Association of America, meaning no one under 17 can see it. Distributors Lions Gate Films and IFC Films, opening the film next week, are appealing against the decision. The rating came partly because the film shows images of US soldiers abusing Iraqi prisoners, images Moore says he had long before the scandal erupted. He told Associated Press he kept quiet because he thought he'd be accused of "just putting this out for publicity for my movie".
Anger at Moore is building up, too. Pro-military lobby group Move America Forward is campaigning to "Stop Michael Moore from profiting in his attacks on America and our military"; Michael Wilson is making a documentary called Michael Moore Hates America; and the website www.moorelies.com is out "to expose America's fakest pseudo-muckraker".

Meanwhile, in the United Arab Emirates, the film is being offered the kind of support it doesn't need. According to Screen International, the UAE-based distributor Front Row Entertainment has been contacted by organisations related to the Hezbollah in Lebanon with offers of help. All in all, Tony Blair must be relieved that Moore is not going to make a film about him; Moore rebuffed the rumour in a message on his website headlined: "Sorry to scare you, Tony. Michael Moore was just kidding."

I wonder if Moore'll talk about this support.

[Vympel]

More controvery, more money for Moore.

"Move America Forward" a "pro-military lobby group"- what a load of utter fucking bullshit- fucking hell, what is it with these morons and equating "the military" (i.e. a tool of government) with "George W. Bush"?

How about "bunch of right-wing fascist censor-mongers?"

[Illuminatus Primus]

Indeed. I believe so much that those toadies spend time lobbying for more vet benefits, soldier pay, arms contracts, and procurement of new weapons systems rather than felating Bush.

[CaptainChewbacca]

Yeah, I'm sure Tony is breathing easy now that Moore said he won't make the movie. When reached for comment, the Prime Minister said "Michael Who?"

Oh, linky to the anti-michael moore movie. Its funny, and good turnabout.

[Illuminatus Primus]

What a bunch of bullshit.

Its whiny feel-good crap for those Americans with little kid mindsets like our current President and want to sit and wank about things.

People criticize because criticism and critique and analysis breathes progress. This country can improve, and should. And a lot of Americans are just little children who cannot and will not grasp the ability to think critically and in an adult manner about where this country is going and where it should go.

[Zaia]

Oh, linky to the anti-michael moore movie. Its funny, and good turnabout.

Editing = lying? They'd rather see every single interview in its full length? Yeah, that's practical.

[Axis Kast]

It's the same thing people here accuse Bush of so confidently, Zaia. Creating false perceptions because most people don't delve deeply enough into what he says to get the full story. Or timing accusations so as to "piggy-back" one emotionally explosive issue on the back of another.

With inventive editing, Moore was able to utterly misrepresent the NRA's position following Columbine, not to mention suppose that Lockheed-Martin was moving WMD when they were really moving rocket boosters.

[Patrick Degan]

It's the same thing people here accuse Bush of so confidently, Zaia. Creating false perceptions because most people don't delve deeply enough into what he says to get the full story. Or timing accusations so as to "piggy-back" one emotionally explosive issue on the back of another.

You've got that a bit backward, old sport. It is exactly because people have been delving into Bush's mealy-mouthed bullshit that the full story about the late war being a big fat lie has been coming out.

[Andrew J.]

The film, which is being advertised with the strapline "Controversy? What controversy?", has been rated R by the Motion Picture Association of America, meaning no one under 17 can see it.

First of all, that's just plain wrong. R-rated movies can be seen by minors if they're accompanied by an adult. It's an understandable mistake, as the British have a different rating system, IIRC.

Anyway, stupid conservatives are always misunderstanding Moore's films and thinking he's anti-American-why should Hezbollah be any different?

[Gil Hamilton]

I wouldn't if anyone realizes that hemming and hawing over Michael Moore publically only increases his ticket sales. The more prominent people and movie makers make a big deal about him, the more the citizens will go see his movie to see what the fuss is about.

[Elfdart]

I wouldn't if anyone realizes that hemming and hawing over Michael Moore publically only increases his ticket sales. The more prominent people and movie makers make a big deal about him, the more the citizens will go see his movie to see what the fuss is about.

There's no such thing as bad publicity in show business. Keep bitching, conservatives, the wallet you're fattening is Michael Moore's!

[Gandalf]

Why would a movie like this get a R rating?

Doesn't that seem horribly odd to some people?

[Axis Kast]

Moore used some video footage of terrorist activities, didn't he? Namely the Berg beheading, IIRC.

[Elfdart]

Moore used some video footage of terrorist activities, didn't he? Namely the Berg beheading, IIRC.

Moore had footage of an interview with Berg. The movie was in the can long before Berg was beheaded.

[Zaia]

With inventive editing, Moore was able to utterly misrepresent the NRA's position following Columbine...

Poor NRA, what did Moore take out of context to misrepresent them so?

[Col. Crackpot]

With inventive editing, Moore was able to utterly misrepresent the NRA's position following Columbine...

Poor NRA, what did Moore take out of context to misrepresent them so?

one scene that craked me up was when he went to open a bank account and got a free shotgun.

[The Kernel]

one scene that craked me up was when he went to open a bank account and got a free shotgun.

And? He DID get a free rifle from opening a new bank account, just not without a waiting period which he never denied, nor did it have anything to do with his point.

[frigidmagi]

People criticize because criticism and critique and analysis breathes progress. This country can improve, and should. And a lot of Americans are just little children who cannot and will not grasp the ability to think critically and in an adult manner about where this country is going and where it should go.

Should America be critcized for it's mistakes? Yes. However I feel that Micheal Moore does not do that in an adult manner. While I'm glad he found the support to make his movie, I still like to point out that Moore plays tricks with the facts, takes only what fits his preconceded ideas and beliefs and at times misrepresents or spins to try to make you believe his side of the story.

We need adults in this arena. Not little children, which seems to be all we have on both sides.

In my opinion he is has bad has any of the Bush team or the Clinton team before him. Of course I believe that both canidates are shitbags. One's a lieing weasel that can't be trusted. One's a dumbshit who good at pissing people off and taking away basic rights.

So take my opinion (in the end that's all it really is isn't it? an opinion) anyway you like.

[Glocksman]

With inventive editing, Moore was able to utterly misrepresent the NRA's position following Columbine...

Poor NRA, what did Moore take out of context to misrepresent them so?

Have you seen the movie?

One example is the cartoon history sequence when he paints the NRA as the successor organization to the KKK. And before anyone says 'Moore didn't say that', no, he didn't come out and say it, but the narrative and the accompanying visuals would lead anyone who didn't know the history of the Klan or the NRA to believe that it was so.

Another example is the Heston speech that was conciliatory as given, but after editing by Moore it sounded belligerent.

Moore's the master of "out of context." Show a scene without explaining the previous 2 seconds, 2 minutes, 2 hours, 2 days, 2 months, or 2 years, and then add a small snide comment to it, and let the audience draw whatever conclusion they may.

It's playing on the ignorance of your audience and its despicable.

[Zaia]

Have you seen the movie?

A number of times, and I own a copy.

One example is the cartoon history sequence when he paints the NRA as the successor organization to the KKK. And before anyone says 'Moore didn't say that', no, he didn't come out and say it, but the narrative and the accompanying visuals would lead anyone who didn't know the history of the Klan or the NRA to believe that it was so.

That has nothing to do with editing statement the NRA said to misconstrue their message.

Another example is the Heston speech that was conciliatory as given, but after editing by Moore it sounded belligerent.

Is his speech available for viewing anywhere in its entirity?

Moore's the master of "out of context." Show a scene without explaining the previous 2 seconds, 2 minutes, 2 hours, 2 days, 2 months, or 2 years, and then add a small snide comment to it, and let the audience draw whatever conclusion they may.

What information was missing that you wanted him to include to make his documentary into a mini-series? Anyone who enters a theatre should understand that cuts have to be made. Why should Moore have to explain every single backstory to every single word he uses?

It's playing on the ignorance of your audience and its despicable.

Playing on the ignorance of your audience--from the trailers I've seen, I'd say that's more up Michael Wilson's alley, not Michael Moore's.

[frigidmagi]

I am given to understand that Moore edited in remarks from a speech in S. Carolinia. While spinning it to look like a part of the Colorado speech. That is low if true.

[Drooling Iguana]

I am given to understand that Moore edited in remarks from a speech in S. Carolinia. While spinning it to look like a part of the Colorado speech. That is low if true.

He used a clip of Heston giving his "cold, dead hands" line, then cut to a few seconds of Moore narrating, then went to the Colorado speech. While Moore didn't really do a whole lot to seperate the two speeches, no real effort was made to make it look like it was all the same speech, either. Heston was clearly wearing different clothes and standing in front of a different backdrop during the two segments, and anyone with half a brain would be able to tell that they're from two different speeches, and even if someone failed to notice and assumes that it's all the same thing, adding Heston's slogan to the start didn't really change the tone of the speech in any significant way. Heston did a fine job of making himself look like an ass without Moore's help.

It seems that most of the critics are accusing Moore of over-estimating his audience. I guess they might be right.

[Glocksman]

Is his speech available for viewing anywhere in its entirity?

Here you go

Why should Moore have to explain every single backstory to every single word he uses?

Oh come on, Reductio ad absurdium doesn't apply here.

There's a damn sight difference between editing for brevity and editing to change context and meaning. I expect edits for brevity. I don't expect edits that change the context and meaning of a statement.

Moore is no documentarian, he's a propagandist and a damned good one.

[Crayz9000]

He used a clip of Heston giving his "cold, dead hands" line, then cut to a few seconds of Moore narrating, then went to the Colorado speech. While Moore didn't really do a whole lot to seperate the two speeches, no real effort was made to make it look like it was all the same speech, either. Heston was clearly wearing different clothes and standing in front of a different backdrop during the two segments, and anyone with half a brain would be able to tell that they're from two different speeches, and even if someone failed to notice and assumes that it's all the same thing, adding Heston's slogan to the start didn't really change the tone of the speech in any significant way. Heston did a fine job of making himself look like an ass without Moore's help..

Maybe he did, but Moore still took it out of context, and continues to do so.

I frankly just don't give a shit about Michale Moore. He can go eat his feet for all I care. If I want to read out-of-context, inflammatory shit, I'll just go talk to Robert Anderson.

[Master of Ossus]

The one that really annoys me is that he altered the text on a campaign advertisement.

That's really where he crossed the line between pretending to be a journalist and admitting he's and idiot.