Somebody help me out here. Wasn't Pat Robertson selling a tape about Clinton being being a drug trafficer among other things? Was this tape still sold around election time? What was the reaction to this tape? Some of you probably own it.
The Anti Moore Film Festival! Bet he's getting a kick out of this. Michael and Them: Moore Foes Hold Fest By Paul Bond LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) - Just as his "Fahrenheit 9/11" opens nationwide, several filmmakers are readying documentaries aimed at debunking Michael Moore (news), and a new film festival is being planned that will feature such works as well as other documentaries well to the right of Moore's films. Scheduled Sept. 9-11 in Dallas, the American Film Renaissance, as the festival will be known, has just been announced by co-founder Jim Hubbard, who said it is bankrolled primarily by some "big-time conservative donors." Hubbard currently is negotiating to show two films critical of Moore. The first is "Michael Moore Hates America," made by newcomer Michael Wilson and funded partially by Brian Cartmell, who made a small fortune when he sold his Internet domain registration company, eNic, to Verisign. The feature film, made for $200,000 and featuring appearances from Penn Jillette and John Stossel, among others, is looking for a theatrical and DVD distribution deal. The second is the bigger-budget effort "Michael & Me" that was made by talk-radio star and soon-to-be TV host Larry Elder. The 90-minute documentary takes on Moore's 2002 anti-gun documentary, "Bowling for Columbine," Elder said. "My film is a defense of those who own guns and of the Second Amendment," said Elder, whose "The Larry Elder Show" from Warner Bros. Prods. starts Sept. 13 on CBS affiliates in most major markets http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=598&u=/nm/20040625/film_nm/film_conservative_dc&printer=1
McCain-Feingold came after Clinton last ran for office so McCain-Feingold wouldn't have applied. I'm not sure he used any paid advertisements to sell such a tape, either. If he hawked it on his show, the line would be blurred (same thing here, there's no prohibition on Michael Moore going on a TV talk show and discussing the movie and even showing clips from it. That's not an advertisement. And while Pat Robertson's show is partisan, it also isn't paid advertising. But like I said, that's an issue that never needed discussing since McCain-Feingold was after Clinton last ran for office).
Wow, even now, people still don't get that Bowling for Columbine was about American's penchant for violence. It's been a while, but I don't remember Moore sayin that guns need to be banned outright. Why else would he point out that there are more guns per capita in Canada, yet less violence?
I'm saying people didn't watch it yet have debates about it and try to argue against without even talking about what the movie was actually about. I don't find that funny in the least bit, it's sad.
I find Michael Moore's work highly amusing, especially Roger and Me, and I look forward to his new film with great anticipation. However, I am certain that the cinematic rebuttals from these talk-radio types will be truly hilarious. They are sure to make Dodgeball look like Citizen Freaking Kane. I cannot wait - bring 'em on!
Many parts of the movie have been "leaked" to the press from people who have seen it. That's what people are debating.
By the by, the numbers are a bit misleading since these two theaters account for eight screens. The per-screen average was still very respectable at $10,500, but unless those theaters are in regular practice of dedicating those number of screens to a single film, the fact that they broke records is irrelevant. It's like noting that the Tennessee Titans set franchise attendance records in Nashville once their new stadium opened. While it's still an accomplishment to sell the tickets, the fact that their new stadium was bigger than anything they played in before was the reason for the record, not because the support was just better in Nashville. Still very, very good for a documentary (though really not even unprecedented for a very limited release).
Buzz Around Moore's Movie May Be Able to Shake the Election By Terry M. Neal washingtonpost.com Staff Writer Friday, June 25, 2004; 7:16 AM The booze was flowing and the room was buzzing at the swanky new Leftbank restaurant in Washington's Adams Morgan neighborhood Wednesday night. The cause for celebration was the D.C. premiere of "Fahrenheit 9/11," and director Michael Moore's pals picked up the tab. They could afford it. Harvey and Bob Weinstein, the brothers who donate big money to Democrats and who bought the rights to the controversial new film, are already rich. But their decision to distribute the movie after Disney, Moore's original distributor, refused, will make them that much richer -- and possibly influence a presidential election. The question that started every conversation at the party was, "What did you think?" To be certain, most of the crowd consisted of Democrats and left-leaning activists and journalists. So you know what they think. But a good number of moderate and conservative types attended the premiere too, if only out of curiosity. And many of them came out agreeing that the film is powerful and entertaining. During the screening at the Uptown Theatre, I sat next to a newspaper reporter who was raised in an activist Republican party family, whose sister worked previously for the Bush White House and who considers herself moderate. She cried through the second half of the movie, which featured graphic images of injured and killed Iraqi civilians and U.S. soldiers and focused on the U.S. military's efforts to recruit minorities and poor whites. She and others who don't hew to Moore's hardcore lefty vision of the world gave him credit for, if nothing else, presenting an incredibly cohesive and emotionally stirring piece of work. "There's no way people are not going to come out of this hating Bush," she said. Which, of course, is exactly what the GOP fears. Conservative opposition is not based on the belief that this is just some commie-pinko rant that'll be ignored by the masses. The White House, furious about the Bush-bashing, anti-war movie, has wisely decided to take a low-key approach, allowing surrogates to do most of the work – and they've done it with zeal. One California-based organization, Move America Forward, has orchestrated a letter-writing campaign to theaters around the country, demanding that they refuse to show Moore's movie. Conservative talk radio and television hosts have filled their segments with rants against it. And the president's father called Moore a "slimeball." The conservative group Citizens United announced Thursday that its president, David N. Bossie, had filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission, asserting that television ads for the movie are restricted under some of the new campaign finance rules created by the McCain-Feingold legislation. The announcement was originally scheduled for Tuesday, and, at Wednesday night's party, Chris Lehane, the former spokesman for Al Gore's presidential campaign and new media strategist for Moore, seemed almost disappointed. "We wanted to thank them for sending people to the movie," he said, flashing a broad smile at Moore. I caught up with Moore at the party just after midnight as he was leaning on a booth, daintily picking at a small plate of sliced tenderloin. Lehane was nestled up to the ear of his new client -- no doubt planning their defense against the conservative assault on the movie that opens Friday in 900 theaters nationwide. That's nine times as many theaters than carried his last film, the anti-NRA "Bowling for Columbine." Moore was animated when talking about his critics. "That's the difference between our side and their side. Even when we disagree, we're respectful of freedom of speech," he said. "But when they disagree, they try to shut you down. Well, it's un-American. And it's wrong, and people are not going to stand for it. People in this country don't like to be told they can't watch something or see something." Moore said his movie is "two hours of irrefutable facts." The movie breaks little news. What it does, however, is string together old news in a way that fits Moore's ideological perspective. Is it propaganda? Of course it is. Moore makes it no secret that he wants Bush out of the White House, and this is his case for why that should happen. Echoing the common view among liberals that the mainstream media has been soft on Bush and lazy in general, he said his movie is simply a bridge to span the void. The only difference between Moore's movie and the opinions that conservatives such as Rush Limbaugh and Fox News's Bill O'Reilly spout every day on radio and TV is that it comes from the left and it's condensed to two hours rather than spread over hundreds of hours on the airwaves. Democrats and liberals are so excited about Moore because they believe he is one of the rare polemicists on the left who manages to balance preachiness with entertainment. The attacks from the right have only seemed to embolden Moore. Clearly he relishes the fight, which not only allows him to play the role of David to the GOP's Goliath, but helps drum up publicity for his film. Typically efforts to suppress free speech have the opposite effect. Just ask former Broward County, Fla., sheriff Nick Navarro, who famously propelled the talentless "rappers" 2 Live Crew to fame in the early 1990s by trying to put them out of business. Critics, academics and others are predicting that the movie will become a cultural phenomenon, somewhere on the order of Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ." The film has shattered records at two New York City theaters where it has already opened. But of course, New York is not the entire country. The film seems unlikely to change minds that are set in stone. But judging by the reaction of the crowd in Washington, it does have the potential to move people off the fence. If this year's presidential election is as close as the one in 2000, it won't have to move many to make a difference in the outcome. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A4566-2004Jun25.html
Wow, didn't realize these folks weren't American citizens, guess Ronald Reagan is spinning in his grave. It's very funny that people can post reviews of stuff they have not read or seen, even an excerpt.
I really don't think anyone will even remember this movie a month from now, much less base their presidential vote on it 4 months from now. The people who love it are voting for Kerry anyway. The people who hate it are voting for Bush anyway. The people who are on the fence probably won't even see it. BTW, I really don't get the whole "you haven't seen it, you can't comment on it" argument. It's no secret what the movie is about. There are already tons of reviews out about the movie and they've been out for weeks.
I think you are quite wrong, but agree with you about people basing their vote on it. Just keep in mind that Moore is a provocateur, not a documentary film maker.
Via Opinion Journal: "The Chicago Tribune reports on an apparent conflict of interest: Richard Ben-Veniste, a Democratic member of the 9/11 commission, showed up the other night at a Washington screening of "Fahrenheit 9/11," Michael Moore's agitprop piece blaming President Bush for the terrorist attacks on America. "When asked whether he had any qualms about attending a highly partisan screening one month before the panel releases its report on the attacks, Ben-Veniste huffed, 'What a foolish question.'_"
I wish they weren't. I wish we could give back to England most of New England and give Mexico back California. It'd be a much better country then. We wouldn't have the leftists constantly giving the Democrats a few gimme electoral college votes every cycle. It really is two America's , a socialist one in the blue states (switch that around to red) and a more freedom based agenda in the red states. I just find it funny how much the left here is kissing Moore's fat ass like he's some kind of messiah that will "save" them from Bush. He's a liar, a punk and the kind of American that makes me say "with 'patriots' like that, who needs enemies!" He is a disgusting, America-hater and I think the best thing the right can do is simply ignore his mockumentary for the idiocy that it is and let him slither back into the slime pit where he belongs.
