Completely OT : Cannes, Mickael Moore and the Iraq War

[AMF]

Cool, now I got it.

Why are you "sorry"? especially for how you "honestly feel"? gads, one should never be sorry for that, of all things! Oh, but, wait, you probably mean "sorry" in the sense of not apoligizing for an action but apologizing for perceived offense given. Well, no offense taken here, so no worries there. Sorry!

Did't see your reply earlier. Thansk for the clarification. My bad.

Originally posted by Atrocities:
I guess the point your trying to make is that I should see the movie before commenting on it. I understand that POV however knowning the Man who made the movie allows me an insight into what the movie will have to say. I simply do not wish to suffor that kind of one sided arguement.

I have neither read or seen anything about this movie that would redeem it enough in my eyes for me to consider seeing it.

I am sorry, but that is how I honestly feel.

Edit
I did respond to your question. (OBTW good question too )

quote:
Thought experiment: if "Farenheit 9/11" had been made by Rush Limbaugh but was otherwise exactly the same, would you see it?

No I would not. Again it boils down to a one side view. I just want the full picture not someones subjective views on it who refuse to listen to or suffor counter opinions.

[Will]

Just a question, regarding "Bowling for Columbine" for those who have seen it... when I saw it, I really did not come away with any anti-NRA feelings at all. Opponents of the documentary seem to cite the anti-NRA message a lot, especially the sliced-and-diced interview with Charlton Heston. I didn't really think it made him into a defenseless target, since (IIRC) he was just portrayed as refusing to discuss about a situation with a child being killed with a gun while having no prior knowledge of the specific case.

What I did come away with was what I thought was the central thesis to the film: many problems in the US, with guns and other things, has mainly to do with the constant fear-mongering by the political and media systems. Did anyone else come away from it with the same message?

And AT, I do hope that you eventually go see F9/11. As long as you know the (apparent) bias in the film, you will come away with a better understanding of the viewpoints opposite of your own, and can then strengthen or amend your own views based on that knowledge.

[Atrocities]

Damn it! I missed the season finally of the Shield!

[Unknown_Enemy]

Originally posted by Will:
What I did come away with was what I thought was the central thesis to the film: many problems in the US, with guns and other things, has mainly to do with the constant fear-mongering by the political and media systems. Did anyone else come away from it with the same message?

Very glad to find someone from the same advice as me. It really seemed to me the film was more a charge versus US media system than versus the NRA.

[Fyron]

There was definitely a pot shot taken against Charleton Heston, but the film as a whole had nothing to do with the NRA.

[Slynky]

Originally posted by Atrocities:
Damn it! I missed the season finally of the Shield!

In Atlanta, it comes on 2 more days (our recorder missed the Last minute!)

[dogscoff]

Very glad to find someone from the same advice as me. It really seemed to me the film was more a charge versus US media system than versus the NRA.

Yes, it was, definitely. It's raises some very interesting questions about why gun crime is so high in the USA, when other countries with similar gun ownership laws and levels - Canada being the prime example - have figures so much lower.

Moore himself is a gun-owner who goes hunting and for a long time was a fully paid up member of the NRA. He only started attacking Heston because he objected to the policy of holding huge pro-gun rallies immediately after school-massacres in the towns where the killings had taken place. Some kid would shoot a bunch of students and teachers, and within a week Heston would be in that same town waving his gun around and making contraversial speeches. Of course he has every right to make those speeches, but the insensitivity of his timing is just mind-boggling.

It wasn't the guns that Moore objected to wrt heston, it was the fact that he showed such a blatant lack of compassion.

And just for the record, i get a good laugh every time I hear someone on this thread mention the president of the NRA and the word "defenceless" in the same sentence.