Don't know the accuracy of the sales reports--but here is what Micheal Moore has to say... >My Oscar "Backlash": "Stupid White Men" Back At #1, "Bowling" Breaks New >Records > >April 7, 2003 > >Dear friends, > >It appears that the Bush administration will have succeeded in colonizing >Iraq sometime in the next few days. This is a blunder of such magnitude -- >and we will pay for it for years to come. It was not worth the life of one >single American kid in uniform, let alone the thousands of Iraqis who have >died, and my condolences and prayers go out to all of them. > >So, where are all those weapons of mass destruction that were the pretense >for this war? Ha! There is so much to say about all this, but I will save >it for later. > >What I am most concerned about right now is that all of you -- the majority >of Americans who did not support this war in the first place -- not go >silent >or be intimidated by what will be touted as some great military victory. >Now, more than ever, the voices of peace and truth must be heard. I have >received a lot of mail from people who are feeling a profound sense of >despair >and believe that their voices have been drowned out by the drums and bombs >of false patriotism. Some are afraid of retaliation at work or at school >or in their neighborhoods because they have been vocal proponents of peace. >They have been told over and over that it is not "appropriate" to protest >once the country is at war, and that your only duty now is to "support the >troops." > >Can I share with you what it's been like for me since I used my time on the >Oscar stage two weeks ago to speak out against Bush and this war? I hope >that, in reading what I'm about to tell you, you'll feel a bit more >emboldened >to make your voice heard in whatever way or forum that is open to you. > >When "Bowling for Columbine" was announced as the Oscar winner for Best >Documentary >at the Academy Awards, the audience rose to its feet. It was a great moment, >one that I will always cherish. They were standing and cheering for a film >that says we Americans are a uniquely violent people, using our massive >stash >of guns to kill each other and to use them against many countries around >the world. They were applauding a film that shows George W. Bush using >fictitious >fears to frighten the public into giving him whatever he wants. And they >were honoring a film that states the following: The first Gulf War was an >attempt to reinstall the dictator of Kuwait; Saddam Hussein was armed with >weapons from the United States; and the American government is responsible >for the deaths of a half-million children in Iraq over the past decade >through >its sanctions and bombing. That was the movie they were cheering, that was >the movie they voted for, and so I decided that is what I should ackno > wledge in my speech. > >And, thus, I said the following from the Oscar stage: > >"On behalf of our producers Kathleen Glynn and Michael Donovan (from >Canada), >I would like to thank the Academy for this award. I have invited the other >Documentary nominees on stage with me. They are here in solidarity because >we like non-fiction. We like non-fiction because we live in fictitious >times. >We live in a time where fictitious election results give us a fictitious >president. We are now fighting a war for fictitious reasons. Whether it's >the fiction of duct tape or the fictitious 'Orange Alerts,' we are against >this war, Mr. Bush. Shame on you, Mr. Bush, shame on you. And, whenever >you've >got the Pope and the Dixie Chicks against you, you're time is up." > >Halfway through my remarks, some in the audience started to cheer. That >immediately >set off a group of people in the balcony who started to boo. Then those >supporting >my remarks started to shout down the booers. The L. A. Times reported that >the director of the show started screaming at the orchestra "Music! Music!" >in order to cut me off, so the band dutifully struck up a tune and my time >was up. (For more on why I said what I said, you can read the op-ed I wrote >for the L.A. Times, plus other reaction from around the country at my >website >www.michaelmoore.com) > >The next day -- and in the two weeks since -- the right-wing pundits and >radio shock jocks have been calling for my head. So, has all this ruckus >hurt me? Have they succeeded in "silencing" me? > >Well, take a look at my Oscar "backlash": > >-- On the day after I criticized Bush and the war at the Academy Awards, >attendance at "Bowling for Columbine" in theaters around the country went >up 110% (source: Daily Variety/BoxOfficeMojo.com). The following weekend, >the box office gross was up a whopping 73% (Variety). It is now the >longest-running >consecutive commercial release in America, 26 weeks in a row and still >thriving. >The number of theaters showing the film since the Oscars has INCREASED, and >it has now bested the previous box office record for a documentary by nearly >300%. > >-- Yesterday (April 6), "Stupid White Men" shot back to #1 on the New York >Times bestseller list. This is my book's 50th week on the list, 8 of them >at number one, and this marks its fourth return to the top position, >something >that virtually never happens. > >-- In the week after the Oscars, my website was getting 10-20 million hits >A DAY (one day we even got more hits than the White House!). The mail has >been overwhelmingly positive and supportive (and the hate mail has been >hilarious!). > > >-- In the two days following the Oscars, more people pre-ordered the video >for "Bowling for Columbine" on Amazon.com than the video for the Oscar >winner >for Best Picture, "Chicago". > >-- In the past week, I have obtained funding for my next documentary, and >I have been offered a slot back on television to do an updated version of >"TV Nation"/ "The Awful Truth." > >I tell you all of this because I want to counteract a message that is told >to us all the time -- that, if you take a chance to speak out politically, >you will live to regret it. It will hurt you in some way, usually >financially. >You could lose your job. Others may not hire you. You will lose friends. >And on and on and on. > >Take the Dixie Chicks. I'm sure you've all heard by now that, because their >lead singer mentioned how she was ashamed that Bush was from her home state >of Texas, their record sales have "plummeted" and country stations are >boycotting >their music. The truth is that their sales are NOT down. This week, after >all the attacks, their album is still at #1 on the Billboard country charts >and, according to Entertainment Weekly, on the pop charts during all the >brouhaha, they ROSE from #6 to #4. In the New York Times, Frank Rich reports >that he tried to find a ticket to ANY of the Dixie Chicks' upcoming concerts >but he couldn't because they were all sold out. (To read Rich's column from >yesterday's Times, "Bowling for Kennebunkport," go here: >http://www.michaelmoore.com/articles/index.php?article=20030406-nytimes. >He does a pretty good job of laying it all out and talks about my next film >and the impact it could potentially have.) Their song, "Travelin' Soldier" >(a beautiful anti-war > ballad) was the most requested song on the internet last week. They have >not been hurt at all -- but that is not what the media would have you >believe. >Why is that? Because there is nothing more important now than to keep the >voices of dissent -- and those who would dare to ask a question -- SILENT. >And what better way than to try and take a few well-known entertainers down >with a pack of lies so that the average Joe or Jane gets the message loud >and clear: "Wow, if they would do that to the Dixie Chicks or Michael Moore, >what would they do to little ol' me?" In other words, shut the f--- up. > >And that, my friends, is the real point of this film that I just got an >Oscar >for -- how those in charge use FEAR to manipulate the public into doing >whatever >they are told. > >Well, the good news -- if there can be any good news this week -- is that >not only have neither I nor others been silenced, we have been joined by >millions of Americans who think the same way we do. Don't let the false >patriots >intimidate you by setting the agenda or the terms of the debate. Don't be >defeated by polls that show 70% of the public in favor of the war. Remember >that these Americans being polled are the same Americans whose kids (or >neighbor's >kids) have been sent over to Iraq. They are scared for the troops and they >are being cowed into supporting a war they did not want -- and they want >even less to see their friends, family, and neighbors come home dead. >Everyone >supports the troops returning home alive and all of us need to reach out >and let their families know that. > >Unfortunately, Bush and Co. are not through yet. This invasion and conquest >will encourage them to do it again elsewhere. The real purpose of this war >was to say to the rest of the world, "Don't Mess with Texas - If You Got >What We Want, We're Coming to Get It!" This is not the time for the majority >of us who believe in a peaceful America to be quiet. Make your voices heard. >Despite what they have pulled off, it is still our country. > >Yours, > >Michael Moore >www.michaelmoore.com >http://www.michaelmoore.com/mailing/unsubscribe.php >
I'm hardly shocked, I watched "Bowling for Columbine" this weekend in a packed theater. Weather you like him or not his documentary is a must see.
He explains away the country's support for the war, but doesn't mention the President's extremely high approval rating. I would be willing to bet that more people approve of GW than approve of Michael Moore.
His solutions are juvenile, but he does bring to light a lot of information and ideas that a lot of politicians would prefer you never found out about.
Like his "documentary", his email is at least partially based on radical interpretation and deception. There is no other way to read this. He is discounting a poll showing 70 freaking percent of the public favor the war by saying they only do so because they want their kids to live. Isn't that what at least half the anti-war people say, that they want our soldiers to come home and not risk their lives? Why would these 70% not respond the same way. I saw all of his movies (I think, at least 3 or 4 including BFC) and they are all very left wing and more about him looking for anything he can find to support his point than observing the truth and then formulating a conclusion.
Yeah you "must see" it stay on the store shelves... Michael Moore took the horrible event of High School shootings and made an enormous amount of money off of it, and tried to politicize it while he was at it. He's a sad human being and I "am ashamed he is from" the United States... lol.
Popularity for the war and the leadership always goes up right after the war starts. In Britain the polls were like 30% and went up over 50% after the war started. A lot of people are unable to differentiate between supporting wars and leaders and supporting troops so the polls don't mean as much as you'd like to make them seem.
Many of those who support the war seem to forget we are liberating the Iraqis to allow them among other things freedom of speech.
It proves that any press is good press. Guns & Roses and Mike Tyson have proven this countless times.
The Bush Admin has been intimidating the media with the "with us or against us" bs and other antics. That counts for censorship (via manipulation) in my books.
Well you would think if he was making all that much money that he could afford a gym membership! But yeah I agree with you assesment he's in it to make $
Yeah, seems to me the point is that there's a commonly promoted misconception by the right that being outspokenly anti-war results in black lists, boycotts, and dropping sales.
Further, other right wing media folks have equated anti-war protests as not just unpatriatoic events but "treasonable" (playing loose with the "giving comfort to the enemy" definition) offenses.
A-MEN! I'll never forget when Ice T had that really awful rap/metal band and released the album with the song "Cop Killer" on it. They were denounced by the then vice president (Dan Quayle) and just hammered in the media. There were also protests about the cover of the record. So, they allowed the record to sell out on shelves (which happened in just a couple of days) and re-released it with new cover art. They ended up selling 3 or 4 million copies of a record that was absolutely hideous. I mean, this was a terrible record by any standard, yet it sold like crazy. Everytime Madonna gets naked or Michael Jackson goes crazy, their sales increase, not decrease. Controversy sells. It's the nature of the business.
I agree, but for whatever reason, I'm not really sure if the same thing always applies to actors and actresses.
