“We thought, ‘We cannot leave this to the Democrats this time to fuck it up and lose.’”
Oh man I love that quote.
It won’t be blocked here, yay!
He better hurry up and get it released.
The second that’s released, I’m downloading it and making a VCD out of it.
I really, really hope it gets distributed… And quickly.
The second that’s released I’m buying the DVD
Bowling for Columbine was shit, but I’m looking forward to seeing this.
The Other Flim to watch this summer is this.
(18 - OK there’s a First for everything.)
Hopefully, he’ll find a new distributor soon! Then I can add this to the movies I have to see
I’ll wait til it’s on Kazaa.
I’m really looking forward to this, even if only because controversy is one of the reasons I enjoy life.
Personally, I thought Bowling for Columbine was fantastic, and something that everyone should watch at least once.
<i>Yesterday he said: “That’s the reason for the blocking: so that Americans don’t see it before the election.” </i>
Yes, because the LAST thing they want the American public to see in election year is facts about their government. Heaven forbid.
At any rate, I’m a Canadian, so I’m going to see if I can get my hands on a legit copy of this movie, since I support Michael Moore, and think more film makers should be like him.
I didn’t like Bowling just because of its pro-gun control tones. That’s one thing I’m NOT a fan of.
But I don’t wanna start a debate or something, so yes, I’m looking forward seeing Fahrenheit 9/11.
What disturbs me more is all the other things that we would probably want to know but never will. The facts about this movie only hit the spotlight because Moore doesn’t take shit from people, which makes me wonder what other kinds of things have beaten away from the public eye.
Except Michael Moore is not only a card carrying member of the NRA, but he didn’t want to keep people from owning guns. Canada, where there is hardly any gun violence, is filled with guns- you’d know that if you watched the movie. =p
EDIT: And to say a movie is “shit” because you don’t agree with it, even if it is well done, is ridiculous.
I have seen it, I’m pretty sure (on cable) If I’m wrong, then just ignore what I said.
And to say a movie is shit is my right, since that’s my opinion.
Looks good, but i dont like the way michael moore is marketing this. He’s using (to steal the pentagon’s own catchphrase) ‘shock-and-awe’ tactics. It makes me feel like he has to get attention anyway he can, like, “Look at me! Im controversial!”.
I am referring to the ‘trailer’ he is releasing to the mainstream media. All it is, is a clip of prisoner abuse. (it was filmed before the news break about the abuse, and he was hoping it would catch everyone’s attention).
Just seems like he is trying to be as edgy as possible.
I see your point, but I’d be edgy as hell if I were him. Somehow, I doubt Disney is the only presence giving him a hard time over this.
The reason I really enjoyed Columbine, is because I sort of had the issues Moore was trying to address already beaten into my head from another source.
If anyone’s familiar with the name of ‘Elliot Leyton’, he’s a Professor at Memorial University of Newfoundland (and likely one of the most esteemed Profs on campus), and a world authority on violence and homicide. I have taken two courses by him, one of which was a seminar (which was fairly intimidating), both of which covered the general topic of public anxiety and how they can be exploited. When I was watching Columbia I was thinking ‘This is EXACTLY what Prof Leyton has been advocating’, I’m surprised Moore never went to him. Of course, I missed the first part of the movie, so perhaps he DID.
At any rate, that’s my story of why I really enjoyed Bowling for Columbine.
The whole point of the scenes in Canada was to show that gun ownership is just as widespread in Canada as in this country (and possibly more so), and yet gun violence is not. Therefore, Moore concluded right in the middle of the film that the availability of firearms is not the explanation for gun violence. He was critical of the NRA as an organization, but didn’t oppose the notion of gun ownership.