I'm not sure which films he did in the past (without going and doing a quick search), but the previews I have seen for The Village looks like it could be pretty good. (Have not heard any review or anything yet - just the preview on TV.)

I do enjoy his movies, and want to see The Village when it comes out. Did you see the documentary that was done on him on the Sci-Fi channel? Sci-fi usually isn't my cup of tea, but when I saw the ads for this, I was curious. So, I watched it, and it was very interesting.

No pumpkin bread. Many dead because of 20 year history of using pumpkin bread. Attempts to let inspectors search the kitchen are constantly thwarted. Aftermath reveals reciepies for pumpkin bread, and staff of pumpkin bread experts. All proof the guy just wasn't interested in pumpkin bread.

You guys sure do get fired up for a debate, don't you...Ha ha. Anyways, I hate to change the subject, but does anyone else enjoy any of M. Night Shaymalan's work? His newest (The Village) is coming out in 2 days.

["But when the Bush Administration manipulated data, that is dishonest also." Of course. But we are talking about the film Fahrenheit 911 and should stick to that. "] --------- Well one of the main reasons the film was even made was to point out the bad decisions that the Bush Administration had made. So we sort of have to look at both the film, and why the film was made to get the full picture. Moore has said his main goal of the film was to give the side of the story that the Bush Administration, and the main stream press does NOT give. (so basicly us citizans need to take a little of this side, a little of that side - and hopefully somewhere in the middle we can figure out the truth since anyone involved has probable manipulated the talk to help their cause the most.) (I see Moores film as a way to try to off-set the manipulation from the other side.)

Do I think Bush lied? No. Do I think Bush purposly misled America. Yes. Bush was very carefull with his words, his speechs. He would one minute be talking about 9/11, and terrorist. Then in the next breath he would be talking about Saddam. Even though he was carefull on what he said, I believe he manipluated what he said to get what he wanted. (Also note when I say "Bush", most of the time I mean "The Bush Administration" as a whole, not just the 1 person)

WMD - I believe the Bush Administration had data of both - that is data that said there were WMD in Iraq, and data that said there were no WMD in Iraq. So Bush, who wanted a war with Iraq took the information that best suited his need. Did he actually lie? I don't like to say that, but I do believe he knownly misled all Americans.

[When you make this statement: "Just like when Bush was deceiving America, Bush left out the information he did not want the public to know." are you willing to agree that if your statement is proven false that you "lied" to me when you said it?] -------Most of what I say, and basicly anyone else on a message board is opinions. But in my opinion, I'm 100% sure that Bush (BUSH ADMINISTRATION) left out data and fact that hurt their goal - which if you read through the Uncensored Debate board, you can read back on much about that.

[Last statement - AD a teacher or dishwasher] - now lets say I take it a step further. Lets say I have 1 person tell me you are a teacher, and another person that tells me you are a dishwasher. Would I mislead people if I just ignored the data about you being a dishwasher, and told people what I wanted to believe - that you are a teacher?

Independent voters see the difference between documentary and propoganda. This movie changes the minds of no one. Independents will get their facts from the report, not this movie.

Sarasota second-graders

or Bush made a decision to stay so as not to alarm the little children knowing that what was being done about the current crisis would not change if he were to get up and leave at that moment. He was aware that there were people in command of the situation. And while he was very calmly finishing up, behind the scenes the people in authority were taking all the appropriate actions to gather information and deal with the crisis as then situation called for. He knew, probably, that information would be slowly coming in, as it did. What action could he have taken in those seven minutes that would have made a difference? No matter what he did however, people would criticize him for it. The problem with Moore's presentation is that he twists events to look like his interpretation of those events as fact. Was Bush confused? How would you or anyone know for sure? To say yes or no is only a guess. What Bush says about those moments is more important than what a Michael Moore might say. Moore has to guess too.

"But when the Bush Administration manipulated data, that is dishonest also."

Of course. But we are talking about the film Fahrenheit 911 and should stick to that. There is no need to bring in what Bush did or didn't do in comparison to what Moore did. That is digression. The bigger truth here is when ANYONE manipulates events to make them look a certain way, the action is dishonest and it applies equally across the board.

Let me ask you a question. If I asked you, do you 'think' Bush lied about WMD, and you said "yes," and I ask, "Why do you believe that?" "On what basis do you assert that Bush lied?" If you were to say "Because he told the American people something that wasn't true." Then your basis for a lie is when something is told that is not true, that is a lie.

Now if I ask you, "But did Bush know these things weren't true or did he actually believe there were WMD as he was being told by many agencies both foreign and domestic?" If you said, "It doesn't matter. Either way it wasn't true so he lied."

Then....look at this scenario:

When you make this statement: "Just like when Bush was deceiving America, Bush left out the information he did not want the public to know." are you willing to agree that if your statement is proven false that you "lied" to me when you said it?

And..........

Let's say you have a discussion with your wife about Brainking. She asks who this AD guy is. You tell her what you know of me. You say that he is a teacher and teaches Art in an elementary school. She asks how you know this and you say, "He told me." Also, let's say, you asked Radiant, Endgame, and a few of my other friends like CindyInTN and Usurper. They ALL tell you, "Yes, AD is an art teacher in an elementary school." Let's say further that I have links on my profile for my personal websites which include the school webpage I claim to have designed (and indeed is has my real name crediting me for the work).

Then dozens of people ask you, BBW, about AD and you tell everyone that asks that AD is an art teacher. Finally, after so many PM's asking about AD, you post to "General Chat" and announce to one and all that AD is and art teacher in an elementary school.

A year later, it is found out that AD is a dishwasher in a greasy-spoon restaurant. He lives with his sister and her husband and as he never went past the 8th grade he can't get a very good job. He uses her computer whenever he's not at work. The "real name" he gave is one he only pretended. The websites do belong to an art teacher, but they are NOT AD's.

Question is: "Did BBW lie when he said that AD is an art teacher in an elementary school?"

just want you to qualify that one BBW so I know that to which you are referring.

Well I have not had a chance to read all the links in the previous post, but as soon as I have some more time - I will for sure take the time to read through them. But going from memory, here are my replies to the few snippets that you provided in the post.

* "The Bin Laden family did not get to fly out the next day as Moore reported" - Now I heard this "argument" before I seen the film, and when I watched it - I did not find ANYWHERE where it said that they left the next day. I believe it said like on day 2 or 3, many (all) of the Bin Laden family were allowed to leave as soon as possible. I also think I remember it saying that the FBI did interview the family members it thought it should - but the point that I got from Moore was even if they did not think the family members had anything to do with it, Moore was making the point that they should not have been allowed to leave since they probable did have more information then they got.

* "Moore ignores facts that he doesn't want in his fiml" - Yea, that is true. Moore even admits that he tried to make a film with the information that you normally don't see in the main stream media. Just like when Bush was deciving America, Bush left out the information he did not want the public to know. This is sad, but common - and it's usually the best way to get what you want.

* "... reading story to some Sarasota second-graders..." - I don't know how this is not a fact. Moore wanted to make the point that Bush stayed there an additional 7 minutes. That is a fact. Was Bush confused? Probable - along with almost 100% of America. This was something that caugt basicly everyone off guard, and if Bush wasn't confused and ready for this attack - well then that probable would scare me even more!

* "*Moore claims that Saddam never harmed or threatened any American" - Again, I don't remember seeing this in the film, but it might be in there - I don't remeber. I was thinking that something to the effect that Saddam was not a THREAT to America was in there, but I don't remember the above. Again, haven't seen the film for awhile, so I could be wrong. (Will have to watch it again before I can comment any more.)

"Moore clearly manipulates events in his film to make his points. That is dishonest." - I agree 100%. But when the Bush Administration manipulated data, that is dishonest also. What goes around, comes around I guess. :-)

Opinions are truth are separate issues. I may have the opinion Michael Moore is a genius, but that opinion is just one man's idea about a particular thing. Truth, on the other hand, is a verifiable fact, (not always, for something might be truth but we just can't know it) and is independent of any person's opinion.

"Fahrenheit 9/11" is not a documentary. It is a propaganda piece. It's a cut and paste of events put together in such a way as to promote Moore's one-sided-view.

A few snippets that Moore got wrong:

*The Bin Laden family did not get to fly out the next day as Moore reported. True that some flew early, but most flew out after all American could fly again as well. The FBI was NOT prevented from interviewing the Bin Laden family.

*Moore ignores facts that he doesn’t want in his film. When interviewing, he cleverly manipulates the events to put lawmakers in a bad light. Lawmakers to star in Moore film

*In the film Bush is shown reading a story to some Sarasota second-graders when news of the 911 plane attacks reaches him. Moore sarcastically highlights the fact that Bush stayed an additional 7 minutes while he calmly finishes reading the story to the students. Moore implies that the President seems confused and indecisive. But, Lee Hamilton, the vice chairman of the 9/11 commission insists that Bush did the right thing by projecting calm. People should know that when you see only one side of a situation without hearing the complete story, you are likely being manipulated.

*Moore claims that Saddam never harmed or threatened any American. Last year, the Pentagon recorded 366 violations or provocations by the Iraqis in the two no-fly zones -- 221 in the south and 145 in the north

you can read more here

(especially see the bottom for more links)


As yet another innocent person has their head severed by Islamic "extremists," Moore apparently glosses over the fact that democracy, in general – and America, specifically – is under attack. I am innately aware that Michael Moore is first and foremost a provocateur, and he thrives on controversy.

Am I saying Moore doesn’t have a point? No

But when making that point, it would be nice if he’d keep his facts straight and present them honestly. Moore clearly manipulates events in his film to make his points. That is dishonest. Moore was clearly wrong on many points he tried to make in the film. I believe he does this deliberately to promote his ideology.

Moore will be on Fox’s The O’Reilly Factor tonight. It ought to be interesting.

I don't have a lot of time to talk about this now, but hopefully tonight I will have more time.

AD - What parts do you think are "Flat out wrong"?

Personally I believe there are many opinions in the movie which are either right or wrong depending on what opinion you have, but I also have not done much research into everything that is mentioned in the movie.

I like the movie, but I also know that is is COMPLETELY one sided, and even Moore will agree with that.

So I believe some things were left out, but I as of right now I don't know of anything in the movie which is flat our wrong - but would love to hear what parts you think are, plus any link or information on why you think that way would be great.

Hum... starting to sound like a debate board. But hopefully we can stick to the Movies topic of Michael Moores movie, and not get into too much how bush has destoried America. (or not destroied America depending on your view.) :-)

that's an answer? ok no point in continuing

Do you think everything in 911 was completely factual?"

1. yes
2. no

That wasn't my question. I didn't ask if you thought Michael Moore collected "facts." I asked if you thought they were factual. It's one thing to collect data, another to prove that data to be factual.

So the question is: "You think everything in 911 was completely factual?"

I'll make it simple for you SF:

1. yes
2. no

Which is it? 1 or 2

You think everything in 911 was completely factual?

Michael Moore's 911 plays loose with the facts. It will be interesting how he handles himself in his interview tomorrow on Fox. He's a smart guy, so let's see how he handles the parts in the movie where he was flat out wrong.

boring......you can read the highlights in the paper or read it on the net. Then networks will cover the highlights too. So why torture oneself by sitting through the whole thing and risking permanant brain damage? ;)

Anyone here(in america) watching the DNC(democratic natoinal convention)? As a Bush follower and not a Clinton fan, It was all riff-raff to me. All they did was put own the President. Did anyone here enjoy it?

Well, it was about as true as farenheit 911. Some historical facts played as motifs, but other than that, yeah, Bush may as well have played batman...

I haven't seen 911 (and don't plan too).

My kids watch a lot of movies. They are continually asking me..."Is it real". I know LOTS of adults that are that way. There are too many people in this world that are sponges (believe everything they hear/see). There are also too many people in this world that live behind brick walls. No matter the logic or proof, they will not change their mind.

With that said, I don't think someone that does not want to see the movie is "Close-Minded". Almost everyone believes there is an agenda behind the movie. I prefer to get my information from un-biased sources (does anyone know of one?).

I belong to a religion that receives a lot of persecution. I have seen/read a lot of the "Anti" literature put out there against my religion. The most effective ones are the ones that present the facts (while ignoring some others) in such a way that it gives a different meaning. I have learned that you can always present facts to back up your opinion.

So, should I watch this movie to learn what really happened...I think NO! It might be filled with facts, but that doesn't mean it is accurate. It also doesn't mean it is wrong either. It WILL probably give a lot of interesting ideas and maybe even some facts that most people don't know about. But, if someone wants to really know, they need to research it on their own. Don't just take one persons opinion. Especially if presented in movie format. When someone has a different view from mine, I like to discuss it with them. You can't do that with a movie.

I know myself well enough to not be afraid to listen, openly, to other points of view. I am quite open minded, but intelligent enough not to be swayed by emotion. Mostly I don't want to see the movie because it isn't the type of movie I like watching.

This is true.

Yes but that assumes his "argument" is true. That remains to be seen.

The point is that Michael Moore's argument is the one that would never have been heard in the traditional media. AND, the information needs to get out before the election. Haha! Out, WAY out!

(in my opinion) most of the movie is "fact", BUT AGAIN, just the one side.

The movie makes a lot of good & valid points, but does leave out the other side. Even though I love the movie, and would like people to be better educated by the film - I try to warn anyone I know who has seen it that it is just the one side - confuses most people I know since I want them to see it, then I try to point out the "other side" of it. :-)

very true...hard to argue against something you've not gotten a complete picture on..

Propaganda is mean to convince a person of a particular point of view even if doing so means facts must be distorted or even made up. It remains to be seen just how much of the movie is "fact" and how much just one man's (mis)interpretation of things. :)

AD - I'm glad to see that you will go see the movie - I know some people who are so stuck in their own world that they would never watch the film - I guess because they fear things might make since.

Hopefully everyone who see's the movie will be open minded, and also know that only 1 side is covered in the movie (Michael Moore even admits he tells the story from only the one side - basicly because the side he shows is the side that the media has refuse to cover, while the other side is continuasly covered by the media)

Anyway, glad to see open-minded people here - even if you come out of the movie and disagree with everything in it.

News Story - OK, sorry - it's 60%, not 75%

I'm almost positive that the DVD will be out BEFORE the November election - already 3 or 4 studios have been "bidding" on the rights to distribute the DVD (even though Disney in it's blackmail still gets like 75% of all profits from the movie even though they did not want to release it.)

Note - all Disney's 75% profit goes to a charity of Disney's picking. So actually think of it this way - seeing the movie is like helping a charity! :-)

(I'll see if I can find the news story that has the details that I wrote about here.) :-)

I actually began liking Michael Moore after seeing him in an interview on Fox. I'm currently reading one of his books just to see what he has to say.

I'm waiting for the DVD, but as long as it's making money as is, it might be a while. I know a lot of people who rely on Moore's wisdom. I don't know what to think of all this.

Yeah Rose. I wuz kiddin. ;) A friend of mine just gave me $$ to go and see it. I told him I'd wait for it to come out on video but he said to see it now. hmmmmm

It's a propaganda piece. Not everything in it is true. Just because someone makes a movie doesn't mean the content is reliable. Especially when it's cut and edited to make things look a certain way. But I will see it anyway. Have seen parts and some claims of Moore's are not accurate.

Guess 911 not the book? LOL

Listed where as a comedy? :-)
I got to see it last week. Wow. Sure enough in that to keep ya thinking

how come it's listed as comedy ;)

'Cause I want some hahahaha

What are you on?

has anyone here heard or tried this? put on the wizard of oz, after the lion roars for the 3rd time in the opening of the movie (not the lion in the move the one before the movie starts) put on Pink Floyds Dark Side of the Moon. put it on repeat so it keeps playing throughout the movie. the CD/album goes with the movie, its pretty cool. it took 3 times of listening to the album, the first and third were the best. the end was really cool!

Just got this film on DVD. It's hilariously frightening!

Follow this link

ROFL

What better to scare my opponents into making a stupid move! Muhahahahaha *COUGH* *COUGH* - sorry, hair ball.

Cute picture BBW