'Fahrenheit 9/11' Moores new film

[nzlegend 1]

Seems to be a very controversial film. Mirimax which was to distribute it have been vetoed by their parent company Disney which wants to distance it self from the heat.

Now Disney has created a phenom, you know that people will go and see it now regardless, just because Disney thought it was too hot to handle.

 

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/05/06/MNGIH6GI6C1.DTL

[stripper on coke 0]

This is too bad, but, like you say, also good - a lot of people will now go and see the film just because of the publicity involved.

 

If this movie is anything like his previous flicks, or at all similar to his writen work, it should be well worth seeing. Having read a number of his books, and seen what he has already writen about the Bush family (and fomer presidents as well), I can understand Disney wanting to distance themselves. However, why did they get involved anyway ? ? ? ? ? Surely Disney, and Miramax, had an idea of the type of controversy Micheal Moore is capable of.......

 

In my opinion, hats off to Micheal Moore. If more people listened to him, and less of the dribble ouzzzzzing from the White House, we might not even have a reason for him to make his movie in the first place.......

 

Just wonder when it will come out here.......

[see4 0]

The guy makes me laugh, love his stuff.

[LiquidX 0]

I'll be checking it out.

[bobby12 0]

All fans of Micheal Moore should also check out Louis Theroux.

 

Louis Theroux is a British guy (Paul Theroux's son, for travel novel fans) who used to work for micheal moore then made his own series. Hes also much funny due to his British subtlety. He basically did a series called 'weird weekends' where he spent time with various random weirdo groups in the USA, such as American Wrestlers, Nazis, Porn Stars, Hypnotists, and so on.

[frannyo 2]

I want to see it.

 

WASHINGTON, May 4 ・The Walt Disney Company is blocking its Miramax division from distributing a new documentary by Michael Moore that harshly criticizes President Bush, executives at both Disney and Miramax said Tuesday.

 

The film, "Fahrenheit 911," links Mr. Bush and prominent Saudis ・including the family of Osama bin Laden ・and criticizes Mr. Bush's actions before and after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

 

Disney, which bought Miramax more than a decade ago, has a contractual agreement with the Miramax principals, Bob and Harvey Weinstein, allowing it to prevent the company from distributing films under certain circumstances, like an excessive budget or an NC-17 rating.

 

Executives at Miramax, who became principal investors in Mr. Moore's project last spring, do not believe that this is one of those cases, people involved in the production of the film said. If a compromise is not reached, these people said, the matter could go to mediation, though neither side is said to want to travel that route.

 

In a statement, Matthew Hiltzik, a spokesman for Miramax, said: "We're discussing the issue with Disney. We're looking at all of our options and look forward to resolving this amicably."

 

But Disney executives indicated that they would not budge from their position forbidding Miramax to be the distributor of the film in North America. Overseas rights have been sold to a number of companies, executives said.

 

"We advised both the agent and Miramax in May of 2003 that the film would not be distributed by Miramax," said Zenia Mucha, a company spokeswoman, referring to Mr. Moore's agent. "That decision stands."

 

Disney came under heavy criticism from conservatives last May after the disclosure that Miramax had agreed to finance the film when Icon Productions, Mel Gibson's company, backed out.

 

Mr. Moore's agent, Ari Emanuel, said Michael D. Eisner, Disney's chief executive, asked him last spring to pull out of the deal with Miramax. Mr. Emanuel said Mr. Eisner expressed particular concern that it would endanger tax breaks Disney receives for its theme park, hotels and other ventures in Florida, where Mr. Bush's brother, Jeb, is governor.

 

"Michael Eisner asked me not to sell this movie to Harvey Weinstein; that doesn't mean I listened to him," Mr. Emanuel said. "He definitely indicated there were tax incentives he was getting for the Disney corporation and that's why he didn't want me to sell it to Miramax. He didn't want a Disney company involved."

 

Disney executives deny that accusation, though they said their displeasure over the deal was made clear to Miramax and Mr. Emanuel.

 

A senior Disney executive elaborated that the company had the right to quash Miramax's distribution of films if it deemed their distribution to be against the interests of the company. The executive said Mr. Moore's film is deemed to be against Disney's interests not because of the company's business dealings with the government but because Disney caters to families of all political stripes and believes Mr. Moore's film, which does not have a release date, could alienate many.

 

"It's not in the interest of any major corporation to be dragged into a highly charged partisan political battle," this executive said.

 

Miramax is free to seek another distributor in North America, but such a deal would force it to share profits and be a blow to Harvey Weinstein, a big donor to Democrats.

 

Mr. Moore, who will present the film at the Cannes film festival this month, criticized Disney's decision in an interview on Tuesday, saying, "At some point the question has to be asked, `Should this be happening in a free and open society where the monied interests essentially call the shots regarding the information that the public is allowed to see?' "

 

Mr. Moore's films, like "Roger and Me" and "Bowling for Columbine," are often a political lightning rod, as Mr. Moore sets out to skewer what he says are the misguided priorities of conservatives and big business. They have also often performed well at the box office. His most recent movie, "Bowling for Columbine," took in about $22 million in North America for United Artists. His books, like "Stupid White Men," a jeremiad against the Bush administration that has sold more than a million copies, have also been lucrative.

 

Mr. Moore does not disagree that "Fahrenheit 911" is highly charged, but he took issue with the description of it as partisan. "If this is partisan in any way it is partisan on the side of the poor and working people in this country who provide fodder for this war machine," he said.

 

Mr. Moore said the film describes financial connections between the Bush family and its associates and prominent Saudi Arabian families that go back three decades. He said it closely explores the government's role in the evacuation of relatives of Mr. bin Laden from the United States immediately after the 2001 attacks. The film includes comments from American soldiers on the ground in Iraq expressing disillusionment with the war, he said.

 

Mr. Moore once planned to produce the film with Mr. Gibson's company, but "the project wasn't right for Icon," said Alan Nierob, an Icon spokesman, adding that the decision had nothing to do with politics.

 

Miramax stepped in immediately. The company had distributed Mr. Moore's 1997 film, "The Big One." In return for providing most of the new film's $6 million budget, Miramax was positioned to distribute it.

 

While Disney's objections were made clear early on, one executive said the Miramax leadership hoped it would be able to prevail upon Disney to sign off on distribution, which would ideally happen this summer, before the election and when political interest is high.

[stripper on coke 0]

Just saw this on Michael Moore's website - when is this movie coming here ? ? ? ? ?

 

 

Tuesday, May 11th, 2004

Wacko Attacko, Response #1

 

While my new film Fahrenheit 9/11 has not been seen yet, it seems to have already generated a wee bit of interest.

 

Here's the latest. This morning, a columnist for the Wall Street Journal ‹ who has not seen the film - has decided, instead, to review a "synopsis" of the film. That's right, a "synopsis" from a fax of an early version of a press release someone gave him from the studio. Based on this, he accuses the film of being inaccurate. But guess what? Everything he says about the film in his column is completely false. I mean, seriously, NOTHING of what he describes is in the film!

 

Most real journalists would be embarrassed to do such a thing. What's next - "I can't see the film, I can't see the synopsis - so I'm reviewing the poster!" I worry that Fahrenheit 9/11 is already driving otherwise sane people to lunacy.

 

What would you expect from the WSJ, the biggest pro-business, pro-war paper in the country. As they so aptly put in their paper today: "The bad news is that in today's freewheeling media environment, consumers seem increasingly unable to distinguish truth from fiction, news from polemic, reality from fantasy." This morning, they proved their own adage to be correct. They gave us fiction, not the truth.

 

Here's a radical idea: Why don't we wait for the film to come out before attacking it? I promise you the film is much better than the "synopsis."

 

- Michael Moore

[stripper on coke 0]

Michael Moore also has this to say about the matter.......

 

http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php

[Yuki's Passion 1]

here is some more information:

 

Disney has been widely criticized for barring its subsidiary Miramax from distributing Fahrenheit 911, Moore's new documentary examining 9/11 and the ties between the Bushes and the Bin Ladens. Peter Hart from Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) reveals that a powerful member of the House of Saud, Al-Walid bin Talal, owns a major stake in Eurodisney. [includes rush transcript]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In a letter to his fans and supporters this week, filmmaker Michael Moore said his latest film Farenheight 9/11 will hit American theaters well before November’s presidential election despite what Moore calls the Disney Corporation’s attempts to censor the film. The New York Times revealed last week that Disney executives have forbid Miramax films from distributing it. The film explores the Bush family's close personal and financial ties to the Saudi royal family, and describes how the current Bush administration helped evacuate relatives of Osama bin Laden from the United States after the September 11 attacks in 2001.

Disney executives were quoted in the New York Times as saying that when Michael Eisner was the company’s top executive, he “expressed particular concern that it would endanger tax breaks Disney receives for its theme park, hotels and other ventures in Florida, where President Bush's brother, Jeb, is governor." But the media watchgroup FAIR released a statement giving another potential motive. FAIR said, “Disney may have another reason, not mentioned by the Times, to reject a film that might offend the Saudi royal family: A powerful member of the family, Al-Walid bin Talal, owns a major stake in Eurodisney and has been instrumental in the past in bailing out the financially troubled amusement park. The project is facing a new cash crunch, and Al-Walid has been mentioned as a potential rescuer. In a moment, we will be joined by Peter Hart from FAIR.

 

But first, we turn to an interview I had with Michael Moore last October. We discussed an incident that happened in the days after the September 11th attacks when all flights in the U.S. were grounded.

 

American skies were empty, yet at the same time 140 influential Saudis were effectively chaperoned out of the country, without ever being questioned by the FBI. Among them, were several dozen members of the bin Laden family.

 

Despite the fact that 15 of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, top White House officials approved the evacuation of Saudi citizens at a time when all other planes were grounded. This is what Michael Moore had to say.

 

============================================

If you have power and money, Democracy means nothing. Just look at Bush

[cal 6]

These are funny

 

http://www.bushin30seconds.org/view/2232_large.shtml

[bobby12 0]

Disney has sold the movie so it will now be distributed by someone else. i think this means disney has no further involvement with it (ie. no profits etc).

 

So it looks like we'll be able to see it this year before the election :-)

[Worm 0]

Found this on the subject

 

10 REASONS BUSH WANTS TO BAN MOORE FILM May 20 2004

 

 

..like it could make him lose the next election

 

By Ryan Parry

 

 

A NEW film is sending shockwaves through the United States in general and the White House in particular - and it hasn't even been released yet.

 

Fahrenheit 9/11, which this week got the longest standing ovation in Cannes Film Festival history, tells what its director Michael Moore sees as the truth behind the war in Iraq and on terror.

 

It is said to be so powerful it could tip November's US presidential election against George W Bush. As Moore says: "We were able to get film crews embedded with American troops without them knowing it was Michael Moore. They are totally f***ed."

 

Disney has refused to distribute the film in the States, saying its content could upset the presidential elections. Moore says that's precisely why the public should see it.

 

These are the 10 killer questions the film poses.

 

1, AFTER the 9/11 attacks, why was the only plane to fly out of the US carrying 24 members of Osama bin Laden's family?

 

IN the wake of the attacks, the US became a no-fly zone. Moore asks: "Why did Bush allow a private Saudi jet to fly around the US in the days after September 11 to pick up members of the bin Laden family and fly them out of the country without a proper FBI investigation? Might it have been possible that at least one of the 24 bin Ladens would have known something?"

 

2, ARE the media covering up abuse of Iraqi prisoners and the disillusionment of American troops?

 

MOORE'S film shows soldiers hooding and mistreating Iraqi detainees, and even shows troops taking it in turns to sexually abuse a drunk elderly man.

 

He says: "This occurred outside the Abu Ghraib prison walls. The media is there every single day. Why haven't they seen this? I don't think we've heard American soldiers in the field talk as they do in this film about their disillusionment and their despair; about their questioning of what was going on."

 

3, IS Bush deliberately creating a culture of fear to get poor American youth to fight his war?

 

MOORE accuses the Bush administration of deliberately creating a climate of fear, particularly by the instigation of the Department of Homeland Security, to increase numbers signing up for the armed forces. He calls this "the immoral act of sending kids to war on the basis of a lie".

 

4, HOW deep does the connection between the Bush family and bin Laden family actually run?

 

MOORE exposes business links between the bin Ladens and the Bushes over the last 25 years. Bush Snr became a highly paid consultant for the Carlyle Group, one of the nation's largest defence contractors. One of the investors in Carlyle - to the tune of at least $2million (｣1.2m) - was the bin Laden family.

 

The campaigner says: "The bin Laden family have extensive dealings with large companies in the US. They have donated $2m to Bush's alma mater, Harvard. They own property in Texas, Florida and Massachusetts. In short, they have their hands deep in our pants."

 

5, JUST how sinister was the White House's doctoring of Bush's military record?

 

MOORE suggests that, far from being simply an exercise in proving that Bush attended to his Texas Air National Guard duties, the White House version also sought to hide evidence that Bush and his associates had close ties with various Saudi oil companies. He also suggests that a former military pal of Bush's, James R Bath, once sold a plane to the bin Laden family.

 

6, DID Bush miss an opportunity to nail bin Laden during secret talks with the Taliban?

 

MOORE claims that while Bush was governor of Texas he built a relationship with the Taliban rulers of Afghanistan. They met in Texas to discuss a project to build a natural gas pipeline from Turkmenistan through Taliban-controlled Afghanistan and into Pakistan.

 

Representatives of the Bush administration met the Taliban in the summer of 2001. Moore says they ignored the bin Laden issue and were pre-occupied with oil. He asks: "Was Bush discussing their offer to hand over bin Laden? Was he threatening them with force? Was he discussing a new pipeline?"

 

7, WHY does the Bush family have a "special relationship" with the Saudi royal family?

 

"MORE than 1.5 million barrels of oil needed in the US daily from the Saudis could vanish on a royal whim, so we begin to see how not only Bush, but all of us, are dependent on the House of Saud," says Moore. "This can't be good for national security."

 

Moore also refers to Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the Saudi ambassador to the US, who is nicknamed Bandar Bush because of his close links with the president. Despite increasing evidence linking the September 11 atrocity to Saudi militants, Bush still met Prince Bandar for dinner two days later.

 

8, WAS Bush spending too much time on holiday to concentrate on terrorism?

 

BUSH was on holiday for 42 per cent of the eight months before September 11, letting his guard down, according to Moore. At a 9/11 commission hearing, CIA director George Tenet admitted he had known since August 2001 that Zacarias Moussaoui, the only man charged in connection with 9/11, had been taking lessons on how to fly a 747. Tenet claimed he didn't tell Bush because the president, "was on vacation".

 

9, DID Bush panic when he was told about the attack on the twin towers?

 

ON the morning of September 11, President Bush was posing for cameras at a children's literacy event in Florida.

 

Moore has previously unseen footage showing the rabbit-in-car-headlights expression on the president's face when he is told about the second plane hitting the twin towers.

 

A stopwatch appears in the corner of the screen, as the minutes tick by and the president keeps reading My Pet Goat, not knowing what to do without his advisers to tell him.

 

Moore says: "Was Bush thinking he should have taken reports the CIA had given him the month before more seriously? That he had been told al-Qaeda was planning attacks in the US and planes would possibly be used. Or was he scared witless?"

 

10, DID Bush manipulate the major US media companies to fix his 2000 election win?

 

BUSH'S cousin John Ellis, a Fox News executive, was instrumental in "calling it" for Bush/Cheney on election night and cowed the other networks into joining in. This confusion helped set the scene for the debacle that ended in his election despite Al Gore winning the popular majority.

 

At the start of Fahrenheit 9/11, the major players are seen smirking and preening themselves. "Here they are," Moore narrates, "the whole corrupt gang who fixed the 2000 election."

[kintaro 0]

oh come on!! Micheal Moore is an idiot propogandist...just on the flip side of the coin.

[Yuki's Passion 1]

I dont take Michael Moore any more serious than I do Rush Limbaugh - yeah, he is just as extreme but at least he questions the policy making of this administration, hardly anbody else does, at least in the mainstream media.

[NoFakie 45]

I've never heard Rush Limbaugh, only heard of him, but he's his latest one. It has been quite widely reported.

 

 Quote:

Hours before President George W. Bush announced plans to address the Arab world to condemn the abuse of Iraqi prisoners by U.S. military personnel at the Abu Ghraib prison, Rush Limbaugh justified the U.S. guards' mistreatment of the Iraqis, stating that they were just "having a good time," and that their actions served as an "emotional release." As reported by Wonkette.com, Limbaugh's comments can be found on his website. From the May 4 Rush Limbaugh Show, titled "It's Not About Us; This Is War!":

 

CALLER: It was like a college fraternity prank that stacked up naked men

 

LIMBAUGH: Exactly. Exactly my point! This is no different than what happens at the Skull and Bones initiation and we're going to ruin people's lives over it and we're going to hamper our military effort, and then we are going to really hammer them because they had a good time. You know, these people are being fired at every day. I'm talking about people having a good time, these people, you ever heard of emotional release? You of heard of need to blow some steam off?"

 

The day before, on his May 3 show, Limbaugh observed that the American troops who mistreated Iraqi prisoners of war were "babes" and that the pictures of the alleged abuse were no worse than "anything you'd see Madonna, or Britney Spears do on stage."

 

LIMBAUGH: And these American prisoners of war -- have you people noticed who the torturers are? Women! The babes! The babes are meting out the torture.

 

LIMBAUGH: You know, if you look at -- if you, really, if you look at these pictures, I mean, I don't know if it's just me, but it looks just like anything you'd see Madonna, or Britney Spears do on stage. Maybe I'm -- yeah. And get an NEA grant for something like this. I mean, this is something that you can see on stage at Lincoln Center from an NEA grant, maybe on Sex in the City -- the movie. I mean, I don't -- it's just me.

Michael Moore is not the most diligent of alternative media reporters, but he operates on a much higher level than the above while still reaching the US public in a way that more reputable dissidents (Chomsky, Goodman, etc.) do not. If the film does raise the points listed above, then it is merely echoing the concerns of many reporters and ex-officials who have come out against the current administration. If anything, it strikes me as a relatively conservative (and therefore wise) choice of topics. There are deeper and apparently more sinister mysteries concerning 9-11 and the so-called "War on Terror", but to touch upon them would be lay oneself open to charges of conspiracy theories. That the official version is itself often a groundless conspiracy theory (Iraq having WMD being the prime example) is of course not questioned in the media.

[r45 4]

Hes already won an award for it:

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/film/3739325.stm

 

Director Michael Moore's controversial anti-Bush documentary Fahrenheit 9/11 has won the prestigious Palme d'Or best film award at the Cannes festival.

It was the first documentary to win the top prize since Jacques Cousteau's The Silent World in 1956.

 

The film received a 15-minute standing ovation when it was screened on Monday.

 

Fahrenheit 9/11 explores the Iraq war and alleges connections between President George W Bush and top Saudi families, including the Bin Ladens.

 

The documentary uses Moore's customary satirical style to accuse Mr Bush of stealing the presidential election in 2000, ignoring terrorism warnings before 11 September 2001 and fuelling fears of more attacks to secure Americans' support for the war in Iraq.

 

'Overwhelmed'

 

"What have you done? I'm completely overwhelmed by this," Moore said in his acceptance speech.

 

 

"I want to make sure if I do nothing else for the rest of this year that those who died in Iraq have not died in vain."

 

Thanking the jury headed by cult director Quentin Tarantino, he added: "You will ensure that the American people will see this movie...You have put a huge light on this."

 

Among other awards at Cannes:

 

 

The film Old Boy, by South Korean director Park Chan-wook, won the Grand Prize

 

Jury Prizes went to Thai director Apichatpong Weerasethakul's film Tropical Malady and to actress Irma P. Hall for her part in The Ladykillers

 

French film-maker Tony Gatlif won the director's award for his film Exiles

 

Yagira Yuuya, a 14-year-old Japanese boy, was named best actor for his role in the film Nobody Knows

 

The best actress award went to Maggie Cheung from Hong Kong for her performance in the film Clean

 

Keren Yedaya's Or won the Golden Camera award for best film by a first-time director.

 

Positive

 

Michael Moore's film was originally set to be released in the US through Disney subsidiary Miramax, before Disney blocked it. It is now expected to be released through a third party.

 

The critical reaction to the film has generally been positive, with praise coming from The Washington Post, Time Magazine and British newspapers including the Independent and the Telegraph.

 

However, others have been more critical of the film. The Hollywood Reporter said Moore was "pioneering a reality film as an election device."

 

 

And trade paper Variety described it as "rather less incendiary than expected" and said it was "a blatant cinematic 2004 campaign pamphlet".

 

Fahrenheit 9/11 was competing against 18 other films for the Palme d'Or.

[bobby12 0]

It looks like someone taped the shoing at Cannes because it is available for download right now. I'll post here again once I have got it if its a real file and not some fake.

[r45 4]

Excellent. I'd like to see that.

[mikazooki 0]

can u whack it on a cd and post it to me?

 

cheers

[bobby12 0]

sorry i dont have a cd burner. if you wanna download it, just download 'overnet' and do a search for it in there.

[grungy-gonads 54]

Seen it yet?

[bobby12 0]

it finished downloading overnight but I just checked it and its a fake.

[scouser 4]

So what did you download in the end then? Porn?

[bobby12 0]

50 seconds of an art house movie at DVD quality. :-(

[scouser 4]

Cool. Not find the real thing yet?