SegaXtreme

Home	Forums	What's new	Resources

Celsius 41.11

Xavier - Oct 24, 2004

		Xavier		Oct 24, 2004
			Well this movie and others like it have gotten absolutley no media attention . Its the exact opposite to Michael Moores latest movies , its only 73 mintes long . It isnt edited as well the soundtrack is much weaker and there was less than a dozen people in the theatre also I noticed emiotions didnt run as high as everyone stayed in thier seats and kept all food items and foul words to themselves . I would say this piece is less opionated but still lists at least 2-3 things as facts that are either dead wrong or just speculation . I liked the footage of Michael Moore saying on there is no such thing as a terrorist threat , the footage of the anti-war protesters and vintage footage of Kerry in his college days . It sheds a different light of him in my opion. The press has shown pictures but not much footage of his vioce . -'s the film doesnt delve to deeply into very much and is presented like a linear sales presentation basically touching alot of topics and showing some guests stating there feeling facts and opinions on them . This film will never sell out because people want sensationalism and somthing that shocking and that brings down the system. This film offers little of that . Id say its a better documenntary than 9-11 but has much less entertaining value . One funny thing i found was that on imdb 300 people rated this movie giving it a 0% rating almost a month ago and the movie came out 2 days ago nationwide , but there was sneak previews that 300 people attended and you can buy the movie allready on dvd for $25 . But still these numbers dont add up and shows what kind of people dont like it the kind that rate a movie without seeing it but just knowing what is about and have nothing but time on thier hands . trailer...

		it290		Oct 25, 2004
			Hmm, first I'd heard of it. I checked out a couple of reviews (from newspaper critics - not imdb), and it seems they felt it falls a bit flat as a rebuttal.... not that critics can be trusted, anyway. I think the numbers thing can be broken down in a couple of other ways, though: a> Michael Moore is obviously a much better promoter, not to mention his film has a much catchier name.. , and b> the right don't really have anything to be genuinely pissed off about right now. I'm curious, though - when the film touches upon the Iraq war, does it stick with the Administration's current defense, or does it offer some other perpsective?

Xavier

Oct 25, 2004

	
	
		
		
			Originally posted by it290@Oct 25, 2004 @ 06:06 AM



I'm curious, though - when the film touches upon the Iraq war, does it stick with the Administration's current defense, or does it offer some other perpsective?



[post=121609]Quoted post[/post]

Yeah thats where 2 of the 3 wrong facts come into play .

They want to talk about wmd's yellow cake and al queda links .

Again to me the reason for a pre emtive strike in Iraq was over a decade of its noncompliance plain and simple santions and random bombings didnt work , removing Sadam is just icing and I could really care about making the world a democracy and these were all points that got brought up later after the 2 time of pleading the case of invasion to the UN .

Even the president is all mixed up now and apologized during the debate for not finding wmd's .

		reX dart: eskimo spy		Oct 25, 2004
			I hear Farenhype 911 is a superior rebuttal. It features quite a lot of people whom Michael Moore interviewed explaining how he misrepresented what he or she said. And I think it has a pretty good rebuttal name. Link for those who are interested: http://fahrenhype911.com/... And for those conservatives who'd rather see a movie slamming the other side, rather than one defending their own, there's Stolen Honor. It's main claim to fame is all the efforts taken to prevent it from being seen. According to the main page, "After tremendous pressure from liberal groups and media, Sinclair Broadcasting will air only part of 'Stolen Honor.' Kerry's aides have even threatened Sinclair, hinting that if they are elected they will exact revenge. Trial attorneys have hit Sinclair and the group behind this film with a barrage of legal threats and law suits." Hence its tagline, "the film Kerry doesn't want you to see!" It seems like trying to suppress a film almost inevitably backfires, doesn't it? Its address: http://www.newsmax.com/adv/stolenhonor/?refid=938... Personally, I'm not really interested in either film. As far as political discourse goes, I prefer to read an article than watch a movie. These documentaries almost always have to rely on some kind of manipulation, even if its as innocent as dramatic music. Personally, I feel that such things cheapen the importance of the argument they're trying to make.

ExCyber

Oct 25, 2004

	
	
		
		
			According to the main page, "After tremendous pressure from liberal groups and media, Sinclair Broadcasting will air only part of 'Stolen Honor.'

They don't care what "liberal groups" and "media" think; they changed their plans because their regular advertisers feared boycotts and their shareholders were pissed. It doesn't take a degree in economics to figure out that alienating a big chunk of your audience by running what amounts to an hour-long "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" infomercial in prime time, and blowing a huge amount of income by not running any ads amounts to pretty bad business for a broadcaster.

Lyzel

Oct 26, 2004

	
	
		
		
			Originally posted by it290@Mon, 2004-10-25 @ 05:06 AM



Hmm, first I'd heard of it. I checked out a couple of reviews (from newspaper critics - not imdb), and it seems they felt it falls a bit flat as a rebuttal.... not that critics can be trusted, anyway. I think the numbers thing can be broken down in a couple of other ways, though: a> Michael Moore is obviously a much better promoter, not to mention his film has a much catchier name.. , and b> the right don't really have anything to be genuinely pissed off about right now. I'm curious, though - when the film touches upon the Iraq war, does it stick with the Administration's current defense, or does it offer some other perpsective?



[post=121609]Quoted post[/post]

Like the liberal media would report on it? I don't think so.

Quadriflax

Oct 26, 2004

	
	
		
		
			Originally posted by Lyzel@Tue, 2004-10-26 @ 03:21 AM



Like the liberal media would report on it? I don't think so.



[post=121691]Quoted post[/post]

I really hope that was sarcasm.